Need to open a DIEBOLD SAFE

[Ro Grrr]

I'm getting a DIEBOLD FILE SAFE that is about 5 feet tall and 3 feet
wide, double doors. Its locked and there's no combination so I'm
probably giong to have to drill the door to get into the combination
lock.

I had thought about cutting the bottom panel out of it to gain entry
then welding it back in as I did with a Wendy's Restaurant money safe
but I don't know if there are any partitions in this box.

I have a TAYLOR safe which I successfully drilled, thanks to a
locksmith years ago but I have since lost track of him.

I'm looking for a locksmith or someone else who will tell me what the
correct drill point is.

[Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 12:13:41 -0400, Ro Grrr <rog...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Good luck on anyone just coming out and telling you how to break into
it - without asking for a cut of the loot inside... The whole idea of
a safe is to be resistant to forced entry, and especially on high end
items like Diebold there are elaborate safeguards inside to make it
slow and difficult on purpose.

Any ethical locksmith, the first thing he does is check you out to
make sure you're in lawful possession of that safe and should be let
inside. And this might involve a three-way discussion with Local Law
Enforcement. If he busts into a stolen safe for you, he becomes an
accessory to the original crime - and he doesn't want that.

Then once you pass that test, he takes your money, wanders off to a
secure area with the safe - or shoos you out of the room if he has to
do it in place - while he breaks into the safe. No pictures or video
allowed.

Then he installs a new lock (set to the combination you want) and
takes the remains of the old lock with him for disposal so you can't
see how it was done.

And the unethical Locksmiths are usually in prison, or working in
another profession. The licensing is too stringent, and you don't
work in the field without one.

If you want to see how the locking mechanism of your safe works,
you'll have to take the door apart yourself later on your own.

--<< Bruce >>--

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-07, Ro Grrr <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm getting a DIEBOLD FILE SAFE that is about 5 feet tall and 3 feet
> wide, double doors. Its locked and there's no combination so I'm
> probably giong to have to drill the door to get into the combination
> lock.

The first thing to do is try the "storage" combination, and the
reverse of that in case someone mis-remembered the order when setting it
for storage.

Starting to the left:

50 L (past three times and then stop on)
25 R (past two times and then stop on)
50 L (past once and then stop on)
0 R (and then either continue if there is not a turn bar
in the center of the knob, or Turn the bar and go back
left until it stops.

or perhaps (same pattern)

25
50
25
0

> I had thought about cutting the bottom panel out of it to gain entry
> then welding it back in as I did with a Wendy's Restaurant money safe
> but I don't know if there are any partitions in this box.

If it is the one which I dealt with at work, there are three
full-width shelves inside it. I never tried to change the height, so
I'm not sure whether they are movable or not, but I think that they are.
We had some interesting classified hardware stored in the bottom of one
of them.

And I believe that these were made to resist fire, so they have
a thick wall full of asbestos-concrete, which I believe also applies to
the floor of the cabinet.

> I have a TAYLOR safe which I successfully drilled, thanks to a
> locksmith years ago but I have since lost track of him.
>
> I'm looking for a locksmith or someone else who will tell me what the
> correct drill point is.

Typically, these things (Diebold, Mosler and similar) have a
layer of really nasty stuff to drill through. A mix of concrete, old
indexable tool inserts, broken file fragments, and anything else to make
the task much more difficult.

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

[Ignoramus25258]

I go to auctions and I often see safes without keys. They have next to
no scrap value, due to concrete between the walls.

Therefore, they usually are free or almost free to take.

I may just buy a couple and try to open them and perhaps shoot a
couple of videos on "how to open a safe with a torch".

i

[Ignoramus25258]

A few safes that I saw, would be easy to open from the bottom with a
torch.

i

[Stormin Mormon]

No honorable locksmith would ever divulge security information like that.
Shame on you for asking a locksmith to dishonor himself.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Ro Grrr" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ln9378dloir0o9tdl...@4ax.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

You, I like!

On a slightly related subject. I was approached a couple weeks ago. There is
a lock picking club in a city near me. They wanted me to attend their
meetings and possibly teach lock picking. I managed to remain far more
polite than he deserved, and declined. Which, writing here, is far more
polite than I wish to wrote.

I've been in the locksmith trade since 1985.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)"
<bruceNOSP...@gmail.INVALID> wrote

[Bob Engelhardt]

On 10/7/2012 8:14 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> No honorable locksmith would ever divulge security information like that.
> Shame on you for asking a locksmith to dishonor himself.

So, locksmiths have greater integrity than the rest of us? And does
becoming a locksmith require an FBI background check to insure
honorable-ity, or what? I seem to recall "Study at Home to be a
Locksmith" ads in Popular Mechanics - how did they screen students?

Please.

Bob

[Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable)]

Iggy, I strongly suggest you resist the urge. Unless you want a
creative prosecutor to find your training video on the would-be Safe
Cracker's computer and charge you as an Accessory...

Just because you CAN do something does not mean you SHOULD.

Commercial Burglary Resistant Safes are rated at how long it takes the
average crook without insider knowledge to get into them - and the
longer they fumble around with it, the greater chances they get caught
in the act.

You 'blow the curve' by teaching the crooks how to do it, and the FBI
isn't going to be happy with you.

--<< Bruce >>--

[Ignoramus30841]

On 2012-10-08, Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable) <bruceNOSP...@gmail.INVALID> wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 17:31:22 -0500, Ignoramus25258
><ignoram...@NOSPAM.25258.invalid> wrote:
>
>>I go to auctions and I often see safes without keys. They have next to
>>no scrap value, due to concrete between the walls.
>>
>>Therefore, they usually are free or almost free to take.
>>
>>I may just buy a couple and try to open them and perhaps shoot a
>>couple of videos on "how to open a safe with a torch".
>
> Iggy, I strongly suggest you resist the urge. Unless you want a
> creative prosecutor to find your training video on the would-be Safe
> Cracker's computer and charge you as an Accessory...

I call this bullshit. Seriously.

> Just because you CAN do something does not mean you SHOULD.
>
> Commercial Burglary Resistant Safes are rated at how long it takes the
> average crook without insider knowledge to get into them - and the
> longer they fumble around with it, the greater chances they get caught
> in the act.
>
> You 'blow the curve' by teaching the crooks how to do it, and the FBI
> isn't going to be happy with you.

I am sure that they will not care. There is no law that says I cannot
film how I break into a safe that I own.

i

[Cross-Slide]

Take a look here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRUwkT3W5Nk

There are a lot of articles about using a stepper or servo motor to try all the combinations.
In Richard Feynman's book, he mentioned that just Any number might also get the two adjacent numbers. So, about 15 stops on the dial might cover all possible numbers. Depending on the quality of the lock.

Is it unethical for locksmiths to allow anyone else to do things on their own?
And by the code of ethics, everyone MUST pay the locksmith's hourly rate, or else?
Is that similar to the code of ethics of magicians, not to reveal the secrets?

Just curious.

[David Billington]

Maybe have a look at episode 2 of the British channel 4 programme "Man
Made Home" where they make a home made thermal lance to cut open a safe
to convert to a wood stove. Shame it's not BBC as that doesn't have
commercials and I can't remember whether it was the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd
part of the programme that they cut the safe. When you see the result
though it didn't really look like a thermal lance was required just a OA
cutter or plasma might have done as the safe looked to be single skinned
and not that thick but the lance made for good viewing I expect.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/kevin-mcclouds-man-made-home/4od#3415632

[Ignoramus30841]

A lance is needed to cut through concrete.

i

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-08, Cross-Slide <3t...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> On Monday, October 8, 2012 12:29:03 PM UTC-5, Bob Engelhardt wrote:
>> On 10/7/2012 8:14 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
>>
>> > No honorable locksmith would ever divulge security information like that.

[ ... ]

> Take a look here:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRUwkT3W5Nk

Hmm ... I don't see anything actually trying the handle after
each set of combination numbers were dialed in, so I'm not sure how it
would know when it was done. (And I really hate those stop-motion
"videos" which really don't show you much of what is happening.

> There are a lot of articles about using a stepper or servo motor to
> try all the combinations. In Richard Feynman's book, he mentioned that
> just Any number might also get the two adjacent numbers. So, about 15
> stops on the dial might cover all possible numbers. Depending on the
> quality of the lock.

Hmm ... that would cover 45 numbers -- and the kind of locks on
the secure storage cabinet which started this have 100 digits on the
dial, so you would need 33 tries not fifteen to cover all the positions
with one rotation of the dial. And since the combination has three
numbers (dial positions), with multiple turns between most of them, that
adds up to nearly 36,000 tries so even at the relative speed of the
stepper operation, it would take quite a while.

And from experience with those locks, I think that they are a
bit tighter than three adjacent numbers possibly working -- it was so
easy to overshoot the target numbers and have to do it again. (This
also said that you have to turn *slowly*, or the notched disk can
overshoot the dial when you stop.) This, in the S&G ones. The Diebold
ones (or was it Mosler) at work had very light plastic discs, and rather
stiff to turn dials, so it was less likely to overshoot.

Hmm ... I never had one of my own of those to play with (unlike
the S&Gs which were fitted to a lot of a dozen of the security file
cabinets which a friend and I got at a surplus auction) so I don't know
whether the plastic (it was black) was Delrin, or a more easily melted
thermoplastic. If so -- (lots of) heat applied via the dial shank might
melt them and allow it to be opened without a combination.

And on at least some of the dials (e.g. S&G), it is possible to
install the dial on the shank, so you go through the whole set, with the
standard "stop on zero" for the forth number and still never get it.
(Though I doubt that many were ever set up with a different "stop on"
number.) I don't even remember whether the standard form for recording
the safe combination had room for a variable final number, or simply had
a "stop on zero" pre-printed. (These forms, BTW, were stored in another
safe, up the chain of command from the one for which the number was
being saved.)

> Is it unethical for locksmiths to allow anyone else to do things on their own?
> And by the code of ethics, everyone MUST pay the locksmith's hourly rate, or else?
> Is that similar to the code of ethics of magicians, not to reveal the secrets?

You can (these days) learn a lot about locksmithing from the
web. But at any previous period, if you have some locks to play with,
you can learn a lot without guidance, if you have mechanical skills and
intuition.

Enjoy,

[Jon Elson]

Ro Grrr wrote:

>
> I'm getting a DIEBOLD FILE SAFE that is about 5 feet tall and 3 feet
> wide, double doors. Its locked and there's no combination so I'm
> probably giong to have to drill the door to get into the combination
> lock.

Do you know if it is a 3-number combination or 5? If 3 numbers, I'd
just try them all, it is probably a lot faster than trying to drill
a good safe, even if you knew the exact spot.

Jon

[Stormin Mormon]

Most do.
Varies by state.
My locksmith eduction was decades ago, so I don't know how they do it now.

Of course, it's not a perfect world. I've heard of "baddies" slipping in
some how.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Bob Engelhardt" <bobeng...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:k4v2f...@news6.newsguy.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

In a somewhat slightly still free society, locksmiths don't "allow anyone
else" to do this or that. But, we can refrain from teaching lock defeating
skills to others.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Cross-Slide" <3t...@centurytel.net>
wrote in message
news:e5c666ee-6e2d-4432...@googlegroups.com...

[Tom Gardner]

Ask the police if there is a safe-cracker out of jail that does that
work. We paid 100$ and it took him 20 minutes and no damage.

[DoN. Nichols]

I've not seen a photo of his, nor much of a description other
than "DIEBOLD" and "two-door", but the safes which the Government uses
(at least at army R&D labs, where at least medium classification levels
are common) use combination locks with 100 numbers on the dial, and
three setable numbers, plus a final zero. And depending on which flavor
of locks were used, you either have to hold the dial at that final zero,
and turn a small central bar and then rotate it a bit more -- and
doing that disturbs the previously set discs, so you have to go through
the full dial operation again to try the next. And then you have to try
the handle to see whether it really withdrew the bolt -- though you can
probably tell by feel once familiar with the lock.

Assuming that all three numbers could be any of the 100, that
leaves 1,000,000 combinations to try. Normally, you are advised to
avoid number near zero (especially on the last one, but assuming that
you avoid 98 through 02, that still leaves 857,375 combinations to try.
(And also consecutive numbers should not be too close to each other,
which reduces the count a bit more, but not really enough. :-)

Let's assume that my 857,375 count is reasonable, and that it
takes about 30 seconds to dial a combination. If you have to try every
combination, that calculates to about 297 days of 24 hours a day trials.
Drop it back to 8 hours per day (so you can get other things done), and
that becomes 893 days -- or well on your way to three years. :-)

And this is not counting some way to keep records of what has
been tried. I would advise a computer with a toe-operated switch to
increment the numbers -- and with battery backup so you don't lose your
count.

Since the combination is likely to be anywhere in the range, you
might write a program to generate random numbers, and keep track of
which ones have already been tried. You might include statistics to
tell you what percentage of the way through the choices you are -- just
to keep you depressed until you are a couple of years into the project.

It is not quite as easy as holding a cheap combination padlock
in your hand and twiddling while applying strain to the hasp, which is
likely to open it without serious concentration in a few minutes. :-)

Oh yes -- this is mounted on something the size of a couple of
file cabinets side by side, with thick walls filled with concrete or
asbestos/concrete mix to maximize the insulation during a fire, so you
can't just bring it over to where you sit down -- you have to go to it,
and set up as comfortable a chair as possible which allows you to reach
the dial and manipulate it for hours at a time.

You *will* miss-dial some, so you need a way to tell the
computer to try that one again (perhaps just by not tapping your toe on
the switch) -- *if* you realize that you have misdialed it. Towards the
end of the seventh hour, you probably won't. :-)

[Jon Elson]

DoN. Nichols wrote:


> Assuming that all three numbers could be any of the 100, that
> leaves 1,000,000 combinations to try. Normally, you are advised to
> avoid number near zero (especially on the last one, but assuming that
> you avoid 98 through 02, that still leaves 857,375 combinations to try.
> (And also consecutive numbers should not be too close to each other,
> which reduces the count a bit more, but not really enough. :-)

Well, Richard Feynman was able to crack the safes at Los Alamos
in a couple hours, and I assume they were of similar specifications.
Not clear what tricks he used.

Some of these have all sorts of suicide devices in them, such as
tempered glass plates that shatter when you drill in the wrong place,
and totally jam the works. You then have to saw the entire door in
half to get it open.

Jon

[a friend]

according to Feynman's book, these were padlocks, presumably the early
Sargent and Greenleaf type - the later ones had some anti-tamper
features but the earlier ones could be felt out, at least for a few
numbers, limiting what you had to try. go to a surplus store and buy a
bag of these locks, they are deprecated now.

--
For a $5 dollar donation today you get credit for $10 with HIM

[Robert Nichols]

On 10/08/2012 12:27 PM, Bruce L. Bergman (munged human readable) wrote:
> Commercial Burglary Resistant Safes are rated at how long it takes the
> average crook without insider knowledge to get into them - and the
> longer they fumble around with it, the greater chances they get caught
> in the act.

No, they are rated on how long it takes an _expert_team_ with full
knowledge of the internal construction and an assortment of tools
(common hand tools for TL-15, add abrasive cutting wheels and power saws
for TL-30) to gain entry. And, the time is "net working time," i.e.,
when the tool comes off the safe, the clock stops.

You can view a video of the testing of a Meilink Gibraltar TL-30 safe
at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtbGUbeM860 .

--
Bob Nichols AT comcast.net I am "RNichols42"

[Ecnerwal]

Read Feynman's books - they are worth the time.

He noted the last number from inspecting open safes (actually "secure
file cabinets" IIRC). It was a flaw in the design.

He found (IIRC without re-reading the book right now) that the numbers
were not overly precise - so 100 numbers might really be 25-33 if
running trials. This is a pretty common flaw of 100 number safe dials,
at least on the lower end. If the spec says 100 numbers, they put on 100
numbers, but if the numbers are all off by one or two, the safe still
opens...

He pointed both of these flaws out to security, which rather than fixing
them, responded in typical idiotic fashion - at least until they needed
him.

He also used the same tricks that any password cracker uses now - common
numbers people might choose - anniversaries, children's birthdays,
numbers scribbled on the desk drawers, etc.

And if he cracked one in 20 minutes, he made sure to read something for
another couple of hours before opening the office door, so as to not
make it look too easy.

For a safe you actually own, the correct way to computerize the process
would be a robot dial-spinner - doesn't need to sleep and won't fudge up
the numbers if it's built right. But you do need to know the correct
directions to spin for that model of safe (no matter what you are
using.) Just the thing for a spare servo (or stepper) motor and
controller, plus a linear actuator or something for the handle part. Let
it grind away until it pops, and figure some way to note when it pops so
you save the right numbers. The you could re-run trials to see how wide
the band of numbers that work is to figure what the center numbers (ie,
the real combination) should be.

If making new combination locks now I suppose you might include some
means of noting too much dial twiddling, but I guess the serious safes
all went to time locks to deal with that problem anyway. Any safe you
can pick up (with a forklift, if needed) is ultimately not all that
serious, is it?

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by
Please don't feed the trolls. Killfile and ignore them so they will go away.

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-09, Jon Elson <el...@pico-systems.com> wrote:
> DoN. Nichols wrote:
>
>
>> Assuming that all three numbers could be any of the 100, that
>> leaves 1,000,000 combinations to try. Normally, you are advised to
>> avoid number near zero (especially on the last one, but assuming that
>> you avoid 98 through 02, that still leaves 857,375 combinations to try.
>> (And also consecutive numbers should not be too close to each other,
>> which reduces the count a bit more, but not really enough. :-)
>
> Well, Richard Feynman was able to crack the safes at Los Alamos
> in a couple hours, and I assume they were of similar specifications.
> Not clear what tricks he used.

Among other things -- he knew the mindset of the individual
people who set the combinations, so the number of tries was
significantly reduced.

Things like a physicist being likely to use physical constants
as combinations, mathemeticians likely to use "pi" and "e" as
combinations, auto license plate numbers, dates of birth or marriage,
names of spouses, kids, and pets and similar -- and they were not
required to change them as often as later.

I know that we had to change them about every six months, and
were in the habit of using words -- converted todigits by the telephone
dial (ignoring 'Q' and 'Z'). There was always a phone near the safes,
so this was a convenient way to do it.

Once, decades ago now, a sequence of three security file
cabinets in one room was set to "howcum nobody toldme" or 46-92-86-(0),
66-26-39-(0), and 83-63-63-(0). This was making fun of a common phrase
of one particular co-worker. :-)

> Some of these have all sorts of suicide devices in them, such as
> tempered glass plates that shatter when you drill in the wrong place,
> and totally jam the works. You then have to saw the entire door in
> half to get it open.

Since we had nothing above "Secret", certainly not "Top Secret"
or any of the crypto or nuclear secrets (at least in our area) and most
was just "Confidential" or "FOUO" (For Official Use Only), we did not
have anything this Draconian.

The closest to this is a couple of data encryption devices which
I got at a hamfest (with the Medco keys for the locks), which was set up
so you needed both keys to get to the bolts which kept in in the rather
thick metal housing (one key for normal use, and the other for loading
new encryption keys into it), and you had to spend a long time taking
out a long fine-threaded screw. The first thing that happens as you
start to back that screw out is a metal arm is lowered to short out the
power to the CMOS RAM chip which kept the keys, so even if you got
into it, you could not read the keys (and they would normally be changed
in a week anyway. :-)

BTW -- for setting the encryption keys on a Wi-Fi device, I will type a
fairly long paragraph, and then take a MD5 checksum of the
paragraph and use *that* as the key. It is a good match for the
maximum length of key the devices will accept. As an example,
let me take *this* paragraph up to the colon:

And it comes out with "eab0d091f3856c6253db169628dac12f" as the
key.

And for an example of how little a change makes how big a
change, my editor in the test above always adds a newline to the
end of the last line so I went into it to take off that with a
different editor, and got "fa9482e83bfad920695d9022a561cc2a"

And convert it to a MS-DOS format (CR & LF at the end of each
line) and it becomes: "76c2b9fccab610d5afa16ba685918b30".

Unix uses only a LF (line-feed) (which it calls a "newline"
character at the end of each line, and older MacOS (pre OS-X
which is really unix with a fancy GUI over it) used only a CR
(Carriage Return) at the end of each line.

However, the changes don't matter, since you generate it *once*,
and then type it into each system that needs it.

[George Plimpton]

On 10/7/2012 9:13 AM, Ro Grrr wrote:
>
> I'm getting a DIEBOLD FILE SAFE that is about 5 feet tall and 3 feet
> wide, double doors. Its locked and there's no combination so I'm
> probably giong to have to drill the door to get into the combination
> lock.

Here's a technique for opening a safe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dxFHc5e9ik

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-09, Ecnerwal <MyName...@ReplaceWithMyVices.Com.invalid> wrote:
>
> Read Feynman's books - they are worth the time.
>
> He noted the last number from inspecting open safes (actually "secure
> file cabinets" IIRC). It was a flaw in the design.

:-)

Yes -- you need to know the offset from the last digit dialed
to the extra rotation needed to withdraw the bolt, of course. Pretty
much a constant within a single brand of safe and lock.

> He found (IIRC without re-reading the book right now) that the numbers
> were not overly precise - so 100 numbers might really be 25-33 if
> running trials. This is a pretty common flaw of 100 number safe dials,
> at least on the lower end. If the spec says 100 numbers, they put on 100
> numbers, but if the numbers are all off by one or two, the safe still
> opens...

At least the setting dials (hub rotates within the disc when
unlocked by a special key from the inside in the S&G locks) do have 100
different points on the knurling, so you can set them that precisely.
It is all down to how tight a fit the projection on the withdrawal lever
is to the notches -- and it has to be at least a certain degree of
loose, because the lever swings instead of moving in linearly, so there
has to be a certain amount of slop.

> He pointed both of these flaws out to security, which rather than fixing
> them, responded in typical idiotic fashion - at least until they needed
> him.

Of course. "You are not a security expert! We don't have to
listen to you." :-)

> He also used the same tricks that any password cracker uses now - common
> numbers people might choose - anniversaries, children's birthdays,
> numbers scribbled on the desk drawers, etc.

Indeed so.

> And if he cracked one in 20 minutes, he made sure to read something for
> another couple of hours before opening the office door, so as to not
> make it look too easy.

:-)

> For a safe you actually own, the correct way to computerize the process
> would be a robot dial-spinner - doesn't need to sleep and won't fudge up
> the numbers if it's built right. But you do need to know the correct
> directions to spin for that model of safe (no matter what you are
> using.) Just the thing for a spare servo (or stepper) motor and
> controller, plus a linear actuator or something for the handle part. Let
> it grind away until it pops, and figure some way to note when it pops so
> you save the right numbers. The you could re-run trials to see how wide
> the band of numbers that work is to figure what the center numbers (ie,
> the real combination) should be.

Once you have it open -- you can (if necessary) disassemble the
lock and set the combination to what you want. If you have the S&G style
of lock, you re-dial the combination which worked to a different index
line (about 10 or 15 degrees to the left of the working one), put a
special key (extruded square stock with one flange sticking out, a notch
to clear the backplate of the lock, and a pilot bearing on the inner
end), which goes through square holes in cams on the dials -- now lined
up under the hole by the re-dialing on the alternate index line) and
turn it CCW to unlock the discs from the hubs. You then dial the *new*
combination using the offset index line, turn and remove the key, test
several times that the new combination works *before* ever closing the
safe drawer or door. And make sure that you can *remember* that
combination, or expect to have to go through this again.

If you have an S&G lock apart and no known combination, turn
each of the locking cams to loose, stack them back on the spindle, and
rotate them by hand to line up with the socket for the end of the
setting key, keep something round in there while you put the backplate
back on, and then replace the round shaft with the key, dial the new
combination, and lock it in as above.

The Mosler security file cabinets had a lock which *had* to be
disassembled to change the combination. You pull four screws and remove
the works with the backplate. Then remove a C-clip and slide the discs
off the spindle. Each one is two part. The hub is splined and snaps
into a matching spline in the disc, and molded into the disc is the dial
of numbers from 0 to 99. So, you rotate the hub and snap it into the
disc to set the combination. Three times -- one for each disk. And
make sure that you assemble them in the proper order.

The above about testing that the combination *works* several
times before you ever risk closing the drawer applies as above.

> If making new combination locks now I suppose you might include some
> means of noting too much dial twiddling,

That requires memory, which requires a reliable power source,
especially to energize the solenoid to lock it against other rotation.
(You might as well make it a numeric keypad to enter the combination,
but again the need for a reliable power source comes into the game. And
what do you make it do if the power fails? Does it lock forever? Does
to fail unlocked? Do you have provisions for connecting an external
power source if the battery dies? What if someone applies too much
power to those connections, frying the circuit? All questions which
apply to a lock with memory. :-)

> but I guess the serious safes
> all went to time locks to deal with that problem anyway. Any safe you
> can pick up (with a forklift, if needed) is ultimately not all that
> serious, is it?

:-)

Actually -- you are now talking about vaults, and usually the
wall or the floor or ceiling are typically the weak points in there.
Certainly that is how I would have tried to get into the vault at the
head office of our division if necessary. (E.g. if they changed the
combination and it did not work after the door closed. :-)

[Ecnerwal]

In article <slrnk78rpu.9d...@Katana.d-and-d.com>,

"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> wrote:

> > If making new combination locks now I suppose you might include some
> > means of noting too much dial twiddling,
>
> That requires memory, which requires a reliable power source,
> especially to energize the solenoid to lock it against other rotation.
> (You might as well make it a numeric keypad to enter the combination,
> but again the need for a reliable power source comes into the game. And
> what do you make it do if the power fails? Does it lock forever? Does
> to fail unlocked? Do you have provisions for connecting an external
> power source if the battery dies? What if someone applies too much
> power to those connections, frying the circuit? All questions which
> apply to a lock with memory. :-)

Well, obviously the folks that will use electronic locks do go there,
but I was thinking (somewhat vaguely) more of something mechanical like
a "wax or grease clutch" that would heat up with excessive repeated dial
spinning and disengage the dial and the rotors, as I was contemplating a
servo motor spinning the dials for hours on end. But it's really not
needed or particularly useful, since there have been other solutions for
decades that work fine for the purpose.

The typical small-firesafe (not much of a safe) type electronic lock
seems to be battery powered, locked forever if not powered, remembers
combination in non-volatile memory if the batteries die or are removed,
and the batteries can be replaced from outside. Presumably they fry and
stay locked if overvolted. If it's got power to take a combination, it
has power to note that it's had 3 wrong attempts in the past 5 minutes,
or whatever time limit you pick.

As with any, if they can pick it up and take it with them, it doesn't
matter how it's locked, it will be opened. If they can't pick it up and
want what's in it badly enough, they'll have means to cut it open or
they'll make you open it for them... And if it's yours and it fails
locked, you'll cut it open or get it cut open. I think the last time
safes came up in the group there was a shaggy dog story of someone who
whimsically built a vault door (surplus, perhaps) into the basement,
which became known, which lead to him unlocking it (rather shakily) at
gunpoint one night (nothing to speak of in it per the shaggy dog) which
lead to the door being removed from the hinges for the remainder of his
tenancy in the house.

I do think that the dial-spinner would be a good robot project - buy the
cheap safes with lost combinations, park them in the corner until the
robot non-destructively unlocks them, remove goodies if any (possible
but unlikely, since goodies in lost combination safes tend to lead to
the owner of said goodies having the door cut off) and sell the
unlocked, undamaged safe for a better price. But it would require at
least enough information to know that "this lock has to be spun 4 times
to the right before the first number", etc.

[Jon Elson]

a friend wrote:


> according to Feynman's book, these were padlocks, presumably the early
> Sargent and Greenleaf type - the later ones had some anti-tamper
> features but the earlier ones could be felt out, at least for a few
> numbers, limiting what you had to try. go to a surplus store and buy a
> bag of these locks, they are deprecated now.

Master padlocks are easy. But, I am SURE he was referring to
secure file cabinets and safes at Los Alamos during the Manhattan project.

Jon

[Jon Elson]

Ecnerwal wrote:

>
> Read Feynman's books - they are worth the time.
>
> He noted the last number from inspecting open safes (actually "secure
> file cabinets" IIRC). It was a flaw in the design.
>

My only experience is with the 5-number safe in our lab. It twirls the
dial when the unlocking handle is pulled up.

Jon

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-09, Ecnerwal <MyName...@ReplaceWithMyVices.Com.invalid> wrote:

> In article <slrnk78rpu.9d...@Katana.d-and-d.com>,
> "DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> wrote:

[ ... ]

>> That requires memory, which requires a reliable power source,
>> especially to energize the solenoid to lock it against other rotation.
>> (You might as well make it a numeric keypad to enter the combination,
>> but again the need for a reliable power source comes into the game. And
>> what do you make it do if the power fails? Does it lock forever? Does
>> to fail unlocked? Do you have provisions for connecting an external
>> power source if the battery dies? What if someone applies too much
>> power to those connections, frying the circuit? All questions which
>> apply to a lock with memory. :-)
>
> Well, obviously the folks that will use electronic locks do go there,
> but I was thinking (somewhat vaguely) more of something mechanical like
> a "wax or grease clutch" that would heat up with excessive repeated dial
> spinning and disengage the dial and the rotors, as I was contemplating a
> servo motor spinning the dials for hours on end. But it's really not
> needed or particularly useful, since there have been other solutions for
> decades that work fine for the purpose.

O.K. You were thinking of powered attempts, not hand attempts,
that does make a difference.

> The typical small-firesafe (not much of a safe) type electronic lock
> seems to be battery powered, locked forever if not powered, remembers
> combination in non-volatile memory if the batteries die or are removed,
> and the batteries can be replaced from outside.

O.K. That works. I've avoided those because I was not sure
that the batteries could be replaced from outside -- or that the safe
could be opened after the internal batteries died. :-)

> Presumably they fry and
> stay locked if overvolted. If it's got power to take a combination, it
> has power to note that it's had 3 wrong attempts in the past 5 minutes,
> or whatever time limit you pick.

And then start ignoring any more input until the required
quiescent period had elapsed.

> As with any, if they can pick it up and take it with them, it doesn't
> matter how it's locked, it will be opened. If they can't pick it up and
> want what's in it badly enough, they'll have means to cut it open or
> they'll make you open it for them... And if it's yours and it fails
> locked, you'll cut it open or get it cut open. I think the last time
> safes came up in the group there was a shaggy dog story of someone who
> whimsically built a vault door (surplus, perhaps) into the basement,
> which became known, which lead to him unlocking it (rather shakily) at
> gunpoint one night (nothing to speak of in it per the shaggy dog) which
> lead to the door being removed from the hinges for the remainder of his
> tenancy in the house.

:-)

I had an opportunity to bid on a used government surplus vault
door, but just getting it home would be difficult enough. :-)

> I do think that the dial-spinner would be a good robot project - buy the
> cheap safes with lost combinations, park them in the corner until the
> robot non-destructively unlocks them, remove goodies if any (possible
> but unlikely, since goodies in lost combination safes tend to lead to
> the owner of said goodies having the door cut off) and sell the
> unlocked, undamaged safe for a better price. But it would require at
> least enough information to know that "this lock has to be spun 4 times
> to the right before the first number", etc.

And typically, the government security file cabinet locks (three
setable numbers) jstart off to the left, not to the right (required, if
the final motion to withdraw the bolt is to be in the proper direction.

[DoN. Nichols]

Well ... I have seen file cabinets made into sorta security ones
(assuming that you don't cut the sheet metal to get in) by a vertical
bar through the drawer handles and into a welded ring at the bottom, and
bent, flattened, slotted for a hasp, and secured with the S&G
combination padlocks -- those had numbers up to 50 on the dials, and
were setable like the built-in safe combination locks from the same
company. Of course, a lot fewer combinations possible. 125,000
assuming that all possible numbers could be used. A mere 4,629 if any
number within +/- 1 from the nominal number would work.

These were normally used for FOUO (For Official Use Only), not
really classified stuff. :-)

[Doug Miller]

Jon Elson <jme...@wustl.edu> wrote in
news:seGdnWQttPMmuO7N...@giganews.com:

I don't know much at all about safes... but I do know a little bit about math.

If there are (as has been suggested up-thread) 100 numbers on the dial, "try them all" is not
practical, as there will be either 100*99*98 = 970200 possible combinations (if a number
cannot be repeated) or 100^3 = 1 million (if it can). Assuming five seconds per try, with a
standard 40-hour work week, the OP could expect to finish trying them all by the end of June.

If there are only 45 numbers on the dial instead of 100, he might finish by the end of this
month.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 15:44:27 -0500, G. Morgan
<seal...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:

>Bob Engelhardt wrote:
>
>>And does
>>becoming a locksmith require an FBI background check to insure
>>honorable-ity, or what?
>

>In TX they do.

Ditto CA. My prints went on file when I took the Belsaw course.

--
Energy and persistence alter all things.
--Benjamin Franklin

[DoN. Nichols]

Five seconds per try is not practical. Four full turns (or
more) to the left, stop on first number. Go past the second number to
the right twice and stop on it the third time. Left again, past the
third number once and stop on it the second time, then go right to zero
(assuming normal dial position), turn the little turnbar in the center
of the knob, rotate right to hook and withdraw the bolt, and then
operate the lever to unlock the door/drawer.

You can't go very fast on these or the inner discs will
overshoot the numbers (and thus the proper stopping place) by inertia.
(This on the S&G locks, the Mosler are both somewhat more tolerant of
that, and have a low inertia dial, so you can't spin it freely -- it
takes effort.)

On either lock, you want a thumb ready to press on the OD of the
dial to slow it to the target and then hold it there while you shift
your grip.

My own feeling is that it would be more like a minimum of 30
seconds, and likely 45 per try, which makes the time required grow
rather rapidly. :-)

> If there are only 45 numbers on the dial instead of 100, he might finish by the end of this
> month.

Multiply by at least six for the longer time to work the
combination, so you are up to a half working year with the smaller
number of combinations.

BTW -- the same number can be used for the first and last entry,
but should not be used for two immediately adjacent entries. And
really, you want something like a separation of two or three. And the
last entry should not be zero, because there is a permanent zero
following that.

[Doug Miller]

"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> wrote in
news:slrnk79q1p.ep...@Katana.d-and-d.com:

> On 2012-10-10, Doug Miller <doug_at_mil...@example.com>
> wrote:
>> Jon Elson <jme...@wustl.edu> wrote in
>> news:seGdnWQttPMmuO7N...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> Ro Grrr wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm getting a DIEBOLD FILE SAFE that is about 5 feet tall and
>>>> 3 feet wide, double doors. Its locked and there's no
>>>> combination so I'm probably giong to have to drill the door
>>>> to get into the combination lock.
>>> Do you know if it is a 3-number combination or 5? If 3
>>> numbers, I'd just try them all, it is probably a lot faster
>>> than trying to drill a good safe, even if you knew the exact
>>> spot.
>>
>> I don't know much at all about safes... but I do know a little
>> bit about math.
>>
>> If there are (as has been suggested up-thread) 100 numbers on
>> the dial, "try them all" is not practical, as there will be
>> either 100*99*98 = 970200 possible combinations (if a number
>> cannot be repeated) or 100^3 = 1 million (if it can). Assuming
>> five seconds per try, with a standard 40-hour work week, the OP
>> could expect to finish trying them all by the end of June.
>
> Five seconds per try is not practical.

I was just guessing. I believe I said that I don't know much about safes. :-) So I'll take
your word for it.

[...]

>
> My own feeling is that it would be more like a minimum of 30
> seconds, and likely 45 per try, which makes the time required
> grow rather rapidly. :-)

Let's take the lower number. That means instead of finishing
around the end of June, he'll finish in mid-April -- of 2018.

But even using my guess of 5 seconds, it's hardly practical.

>
>> If there are only 45 numbers on the dial instead of 100, he
>> might finish by the end of this month.
>
> Multiply by at least six for the longer time to work the
> combination, so you are up to a half working year with the
> smaller number of combinations.
>
> BTW -- the same number can be used for the first and last
> entry,
> but should not be used for two immediately adjacent entries.
> And really, you want something like a separation of two or
> three. And the last entry should not be zero, because there is
> a permanent zero following that.

Thanks, DoN -- I learned a bit today. I hope the guy that suggested "try them all" did too.

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2012-10-10, Doug Miller <doug_at_mil...@example.com> wrote:
> "DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> wrote in
> news:slrnk79q1p.ep...@Katana.d-and-d.com:
>
>> On 2012-10-10, Doug Miller <doug_at_mil...@example.com>
>> wrote:

[ ... ]

>>> I don't know much at all about safes... but I do know a little
>>> bit about math.

[ ... ]

>>> cannot be repeated) or 100^3 = 1 million (if it can). Assuming
>>> five seconds per try, with a standard 40-hour work week, the OP
>>> could expect to finish trying them all by the end of June.
>>
>> Five seconds per try is not practical.

> I was just guessing. I believe I said that I don't know much about
> safes. :-) So I'll take your word for it.

I saw that -- so I decided to put in a bit of my own experience
-- living with having to check (and sign off on) each safe at the end of
each day, even if it was not opened. Since my flex-time hours tended
towards the late end of the day, this was usually my task. (The
"checking" involves trying to open it without dialing the combination,
and when that fails, noting "Not Opened" across the "Opened" and
"Closed" columns and noting the time the check was performed. (Of
course, if the safe opens with the handle alone, and is not signed open
and closed, you call the security people. :-)

> [...]
>>
>> My own feeling is that it would be more like a minimum of 30
>> seconds, and likely 45 per try, which makes the time required
>> grow rather rapidly. :-)
>
> Let's take the lower number. That means instead of finishing
> around the end of June, he'll finish in mid-April -- of 2018.

:-)

> But even using my guess of 5 seconds, it's hardly practical.

Agreed. And those times are even assuming that no mistake is
made in the dialing -- and I can say from experience that mistakes are
easy, and you only know that you mis-dialed when the safe does not open
while it did earlier in the day with the same combination. :-) Since the
odds are great that you would never notice a mis-dialed try, you could
have just skipped over the one combination which works. :-)

> Thanks, DoN -- I learned a bit today.

Something which you hopefully will never need to use. :-)

> I hope the guy that suggested
> "try them all" did too.

If not -- let *him* try them all. :-)

[Cracka Jack]

replying to DoN. Nichols, Cracka Jack wrote:
Safe combinations are permutations not combinations, order matters :-)

--
posted from
http://www.polytechforum.com/metalworking/need-to-open-a-diebold-safe-556070-.htm

[Cracka Jack]

replying to Ro Grrr, Cracka Jack wrote:
Use a homemade thermic lance bro cost ;less than 30 bucks to make and will cut
through freaking granite. You will get into that safe in less than 10 mins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA-VCaBUsCA

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2016-07-21, Cracka Jack <0f8503901d844703ee...@example.com> wrote:
> replying to DoN. Nichols, Cracka Jack wrote:
> Safe combinations are permutations not combinations, order matters :-)

Of course it does. You did not quote anything of the original
article, and it has been a long time, so I forget what I said back then.

Just how old an article did you followup to in this and the
previous one. I strongly doubt that the original poster of the question
is still on the newsgroup.

And using a thermic lance doesn't do much for preserving the
contents -- which *might* be important papers.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail

Email: <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> | (KV4PH) Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564

[Gunner Asch]

On 25 Jul 2016 02:34:37 GMT, "DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com>
wrote:

>On 2016-07-21, Cracka Jack <0f8503901d844703ee...@example.com> wrote:
>> replying to DoN. Nichols, Cracka Jack wrote:
>> Safe combinations are permutations not combinations, order matters :-)
>
> Of course it does. You did not quote anything of the original
>article, and it has been a long time, so I forget what I said back then.
>
> Just how old an article did you followup to in this and the
>previous one. I strongly doubt that the original poster of the question
>is still on the newsgroup.
>
> And using a thermic lance doesn't do much for preserving the
>contents -- which *might* be important papers.
>
> Enjoy,
> DoN.

While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc

A lance is something you use when you know the safe is empty..or the
contents need to be destroyed.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Jeffrey VanRensselaer]

On 7/25/2016 7:32 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On 25 Jul 2016 02:34:37 GMT, "DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-07-21, Cracka Jack <0f8503901d844703ee...@example.com> wrote:
>>> replying to DoN. Nichols, Cracka Jack wrote:
>>> Safe combinations are permutations not combinations, order matters :-)
>>
>> Of course it does. You did not quote anything of the original
>> article, and it has been a long time, so I forget what I said back then.
>>
>> Just how old an article did you followup to in this and the
>> previous one. I strongly doubt that the original poster of the question
>> is still on the newsgroup.
>>
>> And using a thermic lance doesn't do much for preserving the
>> contents -- which *might* be important papers.
>>
>> Enjoy,
>> DoN.
>
> While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
> everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc
>
> A lance is something

...you've never used or seen.

[pyotr filipivich]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:32:07 -0700
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>On 25 Jul 2016 02:34:37 GMT, "DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On 2016-07-21, Cracka Jack <0f8503901d844703ee...@example.com> wrote:
>>> replying to DoN. Nichols, Cracka Jack wrote:
>>> Safe combinations are permutations not combinations, order matters :-)
>>
>> Of course it does. You did not quote anything of the original
>>article, and it has been a long time, so I forget what I said back then.
>>
>> Just how old an article did you followup to in this and the
>>previous one. I strongly doubt that the original poster of the question
>>is still on the newsgroup.
>>
>> And using a thermic lance doesn't do much for preserving the
>>contents -- which *might* be important papers.
>>
>> Enjoy,
>> DoN.
>
>While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
>everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc
>
>A lance is something you use when you know the safe is empty..or the
>contents need to be destroyed.

It seems to me that one could put the safe on a mill (if
possible), and "mill off" the hinges. Or round and round the door
till it is no longer held in place.

Or look into a portable mill setup.

I have a strong box which I thought I lost the keys to. If I
couldn't get it opened by a locksmith - that was the sort of route I
was figuring I would be taking.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

[John B.]

I once read that a certain group in one of the Western State's police
had discovered a method of opening safe's. They used a 8" angle
grinder with cut-off wheels. This was presented in evidence at their
trial :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[DoN. Nichols]

On 2016-07-25, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:32:07 -0700
> typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>On 25 Jul 2016 02:34:37 GMT, "DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 2016-07-21, Cracka Jack <0f8503901d844703ee...@example.com> wrote:
>>>> replying to DoN. Nichols, Cracka Jack wrote:
>>>> Safe combinations are permutations not combinations, order matters :-)

[ ... ]

>>> Just how old an article did you followup to in this and the
>>>previous one. I strongly doubt that the original poster of the question
>>>is still on the newsgroup.
>>>
>>> And using a thermic lance doesn't do much for preserving the
>>>contents -- which *might* be important papers.

[ ... ]

>>While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
>>everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc
>>
>>A lance is something you use when you know the safe is empty..or the
>>contents need to be destroyed.
>
> It seems to me that one could put the safe on a mill (if
> possible), and "mill off" the hinges. Or round and round the door
> till it is no longer held in place.

Hmm ... in a real safe, the hinges are to support the door when
it is open -- to keep it from falling and crushing your toes. :-)

There are a number of fat hardened steel bolts around the door
-- deep into the thickness of it -- which go into sockets in the frame.
Mill off the hinges and the door is still not going to go anywhere. :-)

And the Mosler and Diebold security file cabinets have at a
minimum a pair of big fat bolts going into the frame on either side of
the drawer front where the combination lock is mounted. There are
linkages which lock the other drawers to a lesser extent when the master
drawer is closed.

And -- one which I had decades ago had a big thick door which
had the multi-bolts on all sides arrangement with hinges designed to
roll back into the side of the safe on the right. The rest of the safe
contained a normal file cabinet. It was locked by both a combination
lock and a key lock. And those combination locks are designed so if you
try to drill them out, or break off the dial and then drive it through
the back of the lock, a secondary mechanism double-locks the bolt, so
you are back to milling off the border of the door -- which goes in
steps as you get deeper. Oh yes -- the lock is also protected by cement
filled with old carbide inserts, to make drilling a bit of a task, too. :-)

"Round and round the door" would work eventually -- but that
would be several inches thickness of hardened steel before you get
there. :-)

> Or look into a portable mill setup.
>
> I have a strong box which I thought I lost the keys to. If I
> couldn't get it opened by a locksmith - that was the sort of route I
> was figuring I would be taking.

If you still have it -- check whether there are fat bolts which
are operated by the locking mechanism. That might make full destruction
the main choice. :-)

And the security file cabinets come with labels specifying how
long they protect against various things, including "manipulation of the
lock" and "fire". But the fun one was "0 man-minutes against forceable
entry". (Explosives, I presume. :-)

[pyotr filipivich]

"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> on 26 Jul 2016 04:43:37 GMT

typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>

>> Or look into a portable mill setup.
>>
>> I have a strong box which I thought I lost the keys to. If I
>> couldn't get it opened by a locksmith - that was the sort of route I
>> was figuring I would be taking.
>
> If you still have it -- check whether there are fat bolts which
>are operated by the locking mechanism. That might make full destruction
>the main choice. :-)

A simple fireproof box, all it had was a strong latch.

>
> And the security file cabinets come with labels specifying how
>long they protect against various things, including "manipulation of the
>lock" and "fire". But the fun one was "0 man-minutes against forceable
>entry". (Explosives, I presume. :-)
>
> Enjoy,
> DoN.
--

[pyotr filipivich]

"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> on 26 Jul 2016 04:43:37 GMT

typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>

>>>While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
>>>everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc
>>>
>>>A lance is something you use when you know the safe is empty..or the
>>>contents need to be destroyed.
>>
>> It seems to me that one could put the safe on a mill (if
>> possible), and "mill off" the hinges. Or round and round the door
>> till it is no longer held in place.
>
> Hmm ... in a real safe, the hinges are to support the door when
>it is open -- to keep it from falling and crushing your toes. :-)
>
> There are a number of fat hardened steel bolts around the door
>-- deep into the thickness of it -- which go into sockets in the frame.
>Mill off the hinges and the door is still not going to go anywhere. :-)

Yeah, there is that.

Maybe just milling a circle in a face until it falls out.
"Patience, grasshopper"

[Gunner Asch]

Best way to open one of those multi bolt safes...measure back from the
front of the door about 1/3rd of the distance to the back...then fire
up the abrasive saw and cut the entire face of the safe off.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:51:37 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> on 26 Jul 2016 04:43:37 GMT
>typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>
>>>>While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
>>>>everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc
>>>>
>>>>A lance is something you use when you know the safe is empty..or the
>>>>contents need to be destroyed.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that one could put the safe on a mill (if
>>> possible), and "mill off" the hinges. Or round and round the door
>>> till it is no longer held in place.
>>
>> Hmm ... in a real safe, the hinges are to support the door when
>>it is open -- to keep it from falling and crushing your toes. :-)
>>
>> There are a number of fat hardened steel bolts around the door
>>-- deep into the thickness of it -- which go into sockets in the frame.
>>Mill off the hinges and the door is still not going to go anywhere. :-)
>
> Yeah, there is that.
>
> Maybe just milling a circle in a face until it falls out.

Right, mill the steel cover off the door so you can get at the guts.


>"Patience, grasshopper"

"Patience, grasshopper. This may take a while. Hardened steel is
truly a bitch." http://tinyurl.com/hgj6rge

--
It is easier to fool people than it is to
convince people that they have been fooled.
--Mark Twain

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 13:06:12 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Vroom, vroom! http://tinyurl.com/jkb2zev

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:18:34 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:51:37 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>"DoN. Nichols" <BPdnic...@d-and-d.com> on 26 Jul 2016 04:43:37 GMT
>>typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>
>>>>>While a lance will not "destroy" gold...it will...will destroy
>>>>>everything else inside the safe, paper money, jewelry etc etc
>>>>>
>>>>>A lance is something you use when you know the safe is empty..or the
>>>>>contents need to be destroyed.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that one could put the safe on a mill (if
>>>> possible), and "mill off" the hinges. Or round and round the door
>>>> till it is no longer held in place.
>>>
>>> Hmm ... in a real safe, the hinges are to support the door when
>>>it is open -- to keep it from falling and crushing your toes. :-)
>>>
>>> There are a number of fat hardened steel bolts around the door
>>>-- deep into the thickness of it -- which go into sockets in the frame.
>>>Mill off the hinges and the door is still not going to go anywhere. :-)
>>
>> Yeah, there is that.
>>
>> Maybe just milling a circle in a face until it falls out.
>
>Right, mill the steel cover off the door so you can get at the guts.

Actually...in most of those safes...the cover is on the inside...not
the outside. Lots and lots of metal in the front. Shrug
Most of them are hardened in the front as well..which is why they are
so fucking hard to get into.

http://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-photo-open-bank-vault-door-137488052.jpg

http://thesafehouse.info/articles/Unlocking_a_Gary_TL-15_Round-door_Safe/Figure4.jpg

http://0.tqn.com/w/experts/Locksmithing-3110/2011/03/safe_60.jpg

You can open them from the inside with a impact driver and a crescent
wrench...or even a square sided big screw driver and a crescent
wrench.

Shrug

Gunner

>
>
>>"Patience, grasshopper"
>
>"Patience, grasshopper. This may take a while. Hardened steel is
>truly a bitch." http://tinyurl.com/hgj6rge

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:18:34 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:

>

>> Maybe just milling a circle in a face until it falls out.
>
>Right, mill the steel cover off the door so you can get at the guts.

https://www.the-minuteman.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/20140418_121743-e1397862794234.jpg

[pyotr filipivich]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 13:06:12 -0700

Well, that is one way.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 15:37:04 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:18:34 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Maybe just milling a circle in a face until it falls out.
>>
>>Right, mill the steel cover off the door so you can get at the guts.
>
>https://www.the-minuteman.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/20140418_121743-e1397862794234.jpg

Ooh, -nice- safe! Beats what we have all to hell.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 15:32:07 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>

Yeah, I've been watching too many low-budget bank robbery films.

>http://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-photo-open-bank-vault-door-137488052.jpg
>
>http://thesafehouse.info/articles/Unlocking_a_Gary_TL-15_Round-door_Safe/Figure4.jpg
>
>http://0.tqn.com/w/experts/Locksmithing-3110/2011/03/safe_60.jpg

Holy Shit, Batman! That's a layer cake, innit?

>You can open them from the inside with a impact driver and a crescent
>wrench...or even a square sided big screw driver and a crescent
>wrench.

Umm, how often have you locked yourself inside your bank vault, that
you would know this, hmm?

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 19:04:23 -0700, Larry Jaques

I worked around safes with a family member who worked for Debolt as a
safe repair guy for a few years as a kid. The mechanics of them
fascinated me and I learned a bit about them. Same with slot machines
when I was working for Western Geo out in Nevada. Something
interesting and I tended to pick it up pretty quickly. Shrug

[alvin...@geemail.org]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:36:03 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>

Unfortunately you don't seem to "pick it up pretty quickly" how to get
a job and pay your bills.

But I imagine that is pretty big problem for a Dole Blunders like you.
"Get A Job?" "Pay the bills?" "Hey man, I'm a 'merican, what language
are you speaking anyhow?"

--

Alvin D.

[Larry Jaques]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:36:03 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>

Cool!

[whit3rd]

On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 11:03:06 AM UTC-7, pyotr filipivich wrote:

> It seems to me that one could put the safe on a mill (if
> possible), and "mill off" the hinges. Or round and round the door
> till it is no longer held in place.

The hinges aren't what secures a safe door, they just keep it from
falling on your toes when you open it. Unlike a front door
(hinges on the right, bolt on the left) a safe door is typically
secured by bolts on top, right, left, bottom. The big lever
retracts LOTS of bolts when the safe is opened.

[joshuar...@gmail.com]

Any chance of corporate having a code breaker for it?

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 20:24:15 -0800 (PST), joshuar...@gmail.com
wrote:

>Any chance of corporate having a code breaker for it?

If they did, it would only be given to an authorized locksmith to use.

--
There is s no such thing as a hyphenated American who is
a good American.  The only man who is a good American is
the man who is an American and nothing else.  We are a
nation, not a hodge-podge of foreign nationalities.  We
are a people, and not a polyglot boarding house.
--Theodore Roosevelt

[Ignoramus32696]

On 2017-01-15, joshuar...@gmail.com <joshuar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any chance of corporate having a code breaker for it?

Most of those safes are EASY to open. They are mostly made for
protection from fire and accidentally curious people.

Please peruse two posts I made about opening safes.

https://www.machinerymoverschicago.com/blog/How-to-Open-a-Meilink-Safe/

https://www.machinerymoverschicago.com/blog/Opening-Diebold-Safe-without-Combination/

1 hour will get you most of them opened. If you are careful, you can
weld back the sides and keep using the safe.

i

[erik...@gmail.com]

I have a large Diebold safe but I'm trying to sell… Anybody have an interest I've attached a couple pictures of it. If you don't have interest but know somebody that I could talk to you to find out the true value on the safe I would appreciate it. I do have a combination and it does work. I am more than happy to email pictures as well. My monitoring email account is MEZ...@YAHOO.COM

[dca...@krl.org]

On Wednesday, July 26, 2017 at 4:05:57 PM UTC-4, erik...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have a large Diebold safe but I'm trying to sell…

You might mention where you are. Those in Norway and Australia may not be interested.

Dan

[Jon Elson]

If it is a 3 number combination, according to Richard Feynman, it can't take
over 30 minutes to open it.

Jon

[Tom Gardner]

On 7/26/2017 4:05 PM, erik...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have a large Diebold safe but I'm trying to sell… Anybody have an interest I've attached a couple pictures of it. If you don't have interest but know somebody that I could talk to you to find out the true value on the safe I would appreciate it. I do have a combination and it does work. I am more than happy to email pictures as well. My monitoring email account is MEZ...@YAHOO.COM
>

> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>

I sold a Diebold 5'x4'x4' for $250

[Larry Jaques]

On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 17:17:41 -0500, Jon Elson <jme...@wustl.edu>
wrote:

Yabbut, little Dicky was kinda gifted.

-
If ever the Time should come, when vain and aspiring

Men shall possess the highest Seats in Government,

our Country will stand in Need of its experienced

Patriots to prevent its Ruin.
-- Samuel Adams

[David Lesher]

Only with that generation of locks, AND with predictable behaviour by the
combination-setter.

Won't work with an X07, etc...


--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[pyotr filipivich]

Tom Gardner <ma...@tacks.com> on Wed, 26 Jul 2017 21:40:27 -0400 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

>On 7/26/2017 4:05 PM, erik...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I have a large Diebold safe but I'm trying to sell… Anybody have an interest I've attached a couple pictures of it. If you don't have interest but know somebody that I could talk to you to find out the true value on the safe I would appreciate it. I do have a combination and it does work. I am more than happy to email pictures as well. My monitoring email account is MEZ...@YAHOO.COM
>>
>

>I sold a Diebold 5'x4'x4' for $250

My sister was run over by a Diebold.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although far too often, Age travels alone."

[Tom Gardner]

On 7/27/2017 12:01 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Tom Gardner <ma...@tacks.com> on Wed, 26 Jul 2017 21:40:27 -0400 typed
> in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>> On 7/26/2017 4:05 PM, erik...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I have a large Diebold safe but I'm trying to sell… Anybody have an interest I've attached a couple pictures of it. If you don't have interest but know somebody that I could talk to you to find out the true value on the safe I would appreciate it. I do have a combination and it does work. I am more than happy to email pictures as well. My monitoring email account is MEZ...@YAHOO.COM
>>>
>>
>> I sold a Diebold 5'x4'x4' for $250
>
> My sister was run over by a Diebold.
>

Is that the one that put out like a broken candy machine?

[David Lesher]

pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> writes:


> My sister was run over by a Diebold.

Are you sure you don't mean a Zamboni?

[Larry Jaques]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 22:39:53 +0000 (UTC), David Lesher
<wb8...@panix.com> wrote:

>pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> writes:
>
>
>> My sister was run over by a Diebold.
>
>Are you sure you don't mean a Zamboni?

Right. Diebolds are much safer.

--
In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless,
but planning is indispensable. --Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower

[customc...@yahoo.com]

Send me a pic...I've opened one a friend bought at flea market had a 4 number combination