Hacker Unlocks “Secure” Smart Gun with $15 Magnets

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
The Armatix IP1 smart gun normally requires a special watch to open fire, but a hacker discovered that three magnets, a piece of wood, and a screw works just as well for unlocking the sidearm. The firing pin is locked by a metal plug controlled by an electromagnetic signal transmitted from the watch that can be duplicated using a $15 set of magnets held at a certain angle.

"I was almost a little surprised myself that it worked like it did. I pulled the trigger and it went 'bang,'" Plore said. At first, he almost didn't believe it. So he tested it again, only this time he got it on film. Plore said he spoke with Armatix about the hack in April and the company thanked him. Sadly, Plore said, this hack exposes a flaw in the hardware that likely can be fixed only with a recall. Armatix did not respond to requests for comment. Plore said the whole ordeal highlights how smart guns are still "immature." he also expects even more guns will be hacked at future Defcons.
 
Make a smart gun that fires in the holster shooting the officer in the leg if it detects him planting evidence on the body cam.
 
So if someone grabs my gun am I supposed to wait while he fabricates a mechanism to disable its security features?

Or should I be really glad he can't shoot me and get the hell out of Dodge? Or hit him with a shovel, something I could do because he can't shoot me.

Perhaps he has his magnets, PCBs, and transmitters all ready to go. Boy oh boy, would I feel silly for using a secured weapon instead of an unsecured one that he would have shot me with anyway.
 
The purpose of a smart gun is to prevent someone from shooting you (or whoever) with your gun in the heat of the moment.
 
hlfbkd420 said:
because we totally need a smart gun.....
Click to expand...

Yeah we do, given that it's a fairly straightforward way of preventing a lot (but not all) incidents caused by unauthorized use. Like someone's kid getting a hold of a parent's pistol and shooting himself or someone else. That's 1,300 preventable child deaths per year. It's not going to stop hackers, because there's no way to stop a hacker with physical access and unlimited time, so that's a stupid standard to hold this or any tech to.

Seems like one of those straightforward things (along with enforcing laws that confiscate weapons from known violent offenders and removing loopholes that allow shady gun stores to funnel weapons into the black market) that would reduce a lot of gun deaths/injuries while minimizing the effect on lawful owners. Americans (after all) have the right to own firearms and the vast, vast majority do so safely. There are ways to mitigate the edge cases without disrupting the majority of users.
 
How many toddlers drown in buckets each year? Seriously: look it up and then tell me how you advocate for buckets to only be sold with childproof lids.

edited because ipads suck at typing.
 
c3k said:
How many toddlers drown in buckets each year? Seriously: look it up and then tell me how you advocate for buckets to only be sold with childproof lids.
Click to expand...
The difference being a toddler can't drown you with a bucket.
As for the drowning number it appears to be less than toddler instigated shootings.
 
The smart gun is suppose to prevent anyone but authorized users from using it. Not just if your in a fight, but in all situations. consider if someone steals it from your house and uses it in a crime will the cops come after you since its suppose to be a smart gun and only you are suppose to be able to fire it? Also consider this your kids can easily bypass the safety now. This gun costs well over $1000 to pretend to give you a sense of safety. Smart guns just are not practical right now and might never be.
 
c3k said:
How many toddlers drown in buckets each year? Seriously: look it up and then tell me how you advocate for buckets to only be sold with childproof lids.

edited because ipads suck at typing.
Click to expand...

Your argument sucks too. If buckets are both useful and hazardous, and there are ways to make them vastly safer without significantly impacting use, then yeah we should do that.
 
Eickst said:
Does the 'smart' mechanism recognize me 100% of the time and allow me, the legitimate owner, to fire it 100% of the time I want to, without fail? If not then it's worthless.
Click to expand...

Right, because things should only exist if they're perfect and perfection is a thing that exists in the real world that is easy to achieve.

That was sarcasm. Your "standard" is asinine. Guns themselves don't work all the time. That doesn't mean we should get rid of them.
 
STR said:
Right, because things should only exist if they're perfect and perfection is a thing that exists in the real world that is easy to achieve.

That was sarcasm. Your "standard" is asinine. Guns themselves don't work all the time. That doesn't mean we should get rid of them.
Click to expand...

I think you totally missed the point of my post.
 
Limp Gawd let me just say yes I agree it should work 100% of the times. This is a tool you are trusting your life too. Wouldn't you want your car to work 100% of the time if you took care of it properly? What happens when your car does not work right, its a danger to you, your family, and everyone else. In the case of the smart gun if it doesn't work for the user 100% of the time, there is going to be the inevitable moment when it wont recognize the user in a bad situation. Now whats the user going to do call time out to try and fix the gun in a fire fight?? LOL good luck with that.
 
STR said:
Right, because things should only exist if they're perfect and perfection is a thing that exists in the real world that is easy to achieve.

That was sarcasm. Your "standard" is asinine. Guns themselves don't work all the time. That doesn't mean we should get rid of them.
Click to expand...

If your gun has a failure to fire for some unknown reason, then it's time to get rid of that gun. Unless it's some collectors piece that you bought just to look at, guns are expected to fire when properly operated.
 
For anyone who has a gun for self defense, heck even if you do not own one and hate them., try and take a class that simulates such stressful situations you will quickly fine any and all problems with any gun you have or any problems you would have in such situations. Its one of the things I cannot stress enough training is key to learning how to use a gun properly and respect the danger it can present.
 
The War on Guns will just result in Black Market for regular untraceable guns as well as guns in general and you'll create a financial bonanza for would be gun runners.
 
jpm100 said:
The War on Guns will just result in Black Market for regular untraceable guns as well as guns in general and you'll create a financial bonanza for would be gun runners.
Click to expand...

Criminals are going to get guns if they are motivated enough to do it, however, increasing the difficulty of procuring a gun is going to reduce gun ownership and directly reduce deaths by guns either by intentional homicide or accidents. There is no way to argue your way out of that fact.

I am not a proponent of making guns illegal, but they should be sufficiently time consuming to procure. I am a big proponent of common sense laws that screen out people with diagnosed potentially hazardous mental illness or violent felons from being able to purchase guns legally.

They don't let airline pilots fly without a psych evaluation, why not guns? They have a similar potential for lethality in the wrong hands.
 
cmalcolm48 said:
Limp Gawd let me just say yes I agree it should work 100% of the times. This is a tool you are trusting your life too. Wouldn't you want your car to work 100% of the time if you took care of it properly? What happens when your car does not work right, its a danger to you, your family, and everyone else. In the case of the smart gun if it doesn't work for the user 100% of the time, there is going to be the inevitable moment when it wont recognize the user in a bad situation. Now whats the user going to do call time out to try and fix the gun in a fire fight?? LOL good luck with that.
Click to expand...
Malfunctions are fairly common in the middle of a firefight, ask anyone in the military who's actually been in a few. You take cover, clear your weapon, and move on. No firearm works 100% of the time. NONE.
 
This "smart gun" is a solution to a problem that doesn't or shouldn't exist. (If you are a responsible gun owner) Your firearm should be either under your immediate control or secured. These "features" add unnecessary points of failure to a possibly life-saving tool. If you are a responsible gun owner unauthorized use should be a non-issue.
 
If you asked them and also ask them if it should of happened, they will tell you hell no. Ask them if they were not scared when it does and they will most likely say hell yes. In any type of fight you do not want the weapon your depending on to fail. Yes if your calm and cool about it it might not be that critical of a failure but the difference between the military and civilians is they have backup and people to cover them while fixing the failure. As a civilian you probably wont!
 
Federal Law
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

Chaos its already illegal for both the mentally ill and criminals to buy or get guns. For mentally ill people sadly it comes down to the states voluntarily submitting those records to the federal NIC's database. As for criminals they do not purchase guns legally or from legal means of any kind most of the guns they get are through theft or black market. Both those methods are already illegal.
 
I love gun stuff, it lets me read some of the dumbest shit the human mind can produce.

Cars are dangerous! Making a gun safer is a waste of time!

Hey! You could hit yourself in the head with a hammer! Making a gun a little safer is a waste of time when you could just brain yourself with a hammer any second!
 
Twisted Kidney said:
I love gun stuff, it lets me read some of the dumbest shit the human mind can produce.

Cars are dangerous! Making a gun safer is a waste of time!

Hey! You could hit yourself in the head with a hammer! Making a gun a little safer is a waste of time when you could just brain yourself with a hammer any second!
Click to expand...

I agree, the world was such a peaceful place before the invention of gunpowder.
 
A smart gun is a great idea. The problem is current technology doesn't make it feasible enough to be reliable.

Think Judge Dredd where the gun is tied to your DNA and only fires if your DNA connected to the device is detected (psycho twin stuff not withstanding ;) ) . That type of smart gun would be welcome in my opinion. The problem is we aren't remotely close to that type of technology right now.
 
This thread is swinging towards a gun control debate awfully fast. Bet it'll get locked.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
I love gun stuff, it lets me read some of the dumbest shit the human mind can produce.
Cars are dangerous! Making a gun safer is a waste of time!
Hey! You could hit yourself in the head with a hammer! Making a gun a little safer is a waste of time when you could just brain yourself with a hammer any second!
Click to expand...
Bravo, you just proved your own point.
 
Chaos Machine said:
Criminals are going to get guns if they are motivated enough to do it, however, increasing the difficulty of procuring a gun is going to reduce gun ownership and directly reduce deaths by guns either by intentional homicide or accidents. There is no way to argue your way out of that fact.

I am not a proponent of making guns illegal, but they should be sufficiently time consuming to procure. I am a big proponent of common sense laws that screen out people with diagnosed potentially hazardous mental illness or violent felons from being able to purchase guns legally.

They don't let airline pilots fly without a psych evaluation, why not guns? They have a similar potential for lethality in the wrong hands.
Click to expand...

Ah, the good ole "common sense" argument lol. As for pilots, having a job is not a right. The second amendment is a right. I am one if a convict had singe their time they should have their rights reinstated. If you think a felon that wants a gun to commit a crime can't get one, well I don't know what to tell you.
 
STR said:
Your argument sucks too. If buckets are both useful and hazardous, and there are ways to make them vastly safer without significantly impacting use, then yeah we should do that.
Click to expand...

Cars kill many more children than buckets and guns. Yes, buckets kill more children than guns. No, I do not use the obama definition of a child as veing anyone 26 or under. (Look it up.) So, if we limit cars to 12 mph, that keeps them useful and is easy to do, we can save more children.

Let me know...now that it affects you...why you don't agree with that simple, easy to implement, change?
 
Or you could use facts.
Using the definition of toddler as a 1- , 2- or 3-year-old.
By May of 2016 toddlers shot at least 23 people.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-shot-at-least-23-people-this-year/?tid=a_inl
In 2015 there were 58 toddler shootings, more than one a week.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dlers-have-shot-at-least-50-people-this-year/

It's estimated that buckets are responsible for between 10 to 40 deaths per year and when you take a bucket away from a 3 year old there is very little chance you will drown in the process. The same can't be said for a firearm.
"A 24-year-old woman was shot in Pima County, Ariz., as she attempted to take a handgun away from her 2-year-old child."
 
The only way to stop a bad guy with a magnet, piece of wood, and a screw is a good guy with a magnet, piece of wood, and a screw.
 
Jim Kim said:
Or you could use facts.
Using the definition of toddler as a 1- , 2- or 3-year-old.
By May of 2016 toddlers shot at least 23 people.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-shot-at-least-23-people-this-year/?tid=a_inl
In 2015 there were 58 toddler shootings, more than one a week.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dlers-have-shot-at-least-50-people-this-year/

It's estimated that buckets are responsible for between 10 to 40 deaths per year and when you take a bucket away from a 3 year old there is very little chance you will drown in the process. The same can't be said for a firearm.
"A 24-year-old woman was shot in Pima County, Ariz., as she attempted to take a handgun away from her 2-year-old child."
Click to expand...
Simple solution: buy/carry bigger guns that makes it more difficult for kids to fire. I'd love to see a 2 year old try to pick up a M107A1.
 
jpm100 said:
The War on Guns will just result in Black Market for regular untraceable guns as well as guns in general and you'll create a financial bonanza for would be gun runners.
Click to expand...
Same can be said about anything. Drugs, alcohol, cigarettes (how much revenue have Native American reservations made from this alone?).

Doesn't mean we ignore problems when they occur.

Note: I'm not advocating that we need smart guns, but I hate arguments that don't see beyond the trees.
 
w1retap said:
Simple solution: buy/carry bigger guns that makes it more difficult for kids to fire. I'd love to see a 2 year old try to pick up a M107A1.
Click to expand...
What a coincidence, that my wifes concealed carry weapon of choice. With a LIGHTWEIGHT QUICK-DETACH TITANIUM BIPOD it's quite lady-like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top