It's mostly just a circuit with a switch , battery and the coil acting as a solenoid . When the current passes through the coil it induces EMF causing the electromagnetic field to change
@@edewaal97 I didnt bother to google yet but I suspect this is probably a taser and a loop of wire to create an induction field. I doubt that much more would be required.
Sounds like you'd like the video about the teenager who made a nuclear reactor in his garage and shut down his entire suburb while the authorities cleaned up the radiation hazards he created.
anything that has an external controller inside the keypad will get wrecked by this attack. If the controller is internal and the keypad or fingerprint sensor is the only thing exposed, they will be fine
If they have a similar issue of storing mission critical information in volatile memory, or they go into failsafe open mode when reset, then potentially yes an EMP would bypass them
Do you have any idea who is replying to your comment right now? It's the FUNNIEST MAN ALIVE! Me funny (!!!) vids are so extremely funny, if you don't cry tears of laughter, you are allowed to thumb down me XTREMELY FUNNY vids! Do you think me funny (!!!) vids are funny, dear dam
@@Chokah Sort of. Here's a guide I made. I've posted it once or twice to people who are curious: Buy a project box Buy some enameled magnet wire Buy a boost converter from an online marketplace (one of the ones potted in resin with claims of 500KV or more) Buy a PTM (momentary) switch Buy a battery holder for 4AAs You also need a soldering iron and preferably a drill Wire the negative end of the battery holder to the negative end of the boost converter. Drill the project box (or melt with the soldering iron) and mount the momentary switch like LPL has done. Wire the positive end of the battery holder to the PTM switch then the PTM switch to the boost converter. Take one of the leads from the boost converter and attach to the coiled magnet wire (same arrangement as LPL has), remember to sand the magnet wire so you make an enectrical connection. Take the other end and attach the lead to a bolt running through a nut which is glued to the project box. Have another bolt and nut glued near to it. This allows you to create a spark gap so you get a pulse. Attach the other end of the magnet wire to the second bolt. Adjust the spacing between the nuts and bolts so that you get a regular arc between them when you press the PTM switch. Tidy the project box up, use zip ties to secure the coil of magnet wire. Glue everything down. You now have a portable EMP. Note the boost converter can give a nasty zap. Also you can forgo the nuts and bolts for a spark gap by encasing a broken wire in hot glue with an air channel, but you can't adjust the spark gap then.
@@MouseTai1 if the emp is strong enough then the battery can take damage or even explode, but that would take a way stronger emp than he is using. and a phone is never really off because basic systems like the clock and waiting for the button press are still running and they could get corrupted and or damage the system itelf if the emp is strong and long enough.
That EMP Generator sounded like it has a spark-gap inside it. At the price you mentioned I am guessing that the circuit is a simple step-up into a small capacitor bank which then discharges through the spark-gap into the coil. Basically a old-school sparkgap transmitter
@@jonathanday4553 above certain power level and frequencies, seeing that the camera didn't react at all i think the mechanism works more like a "malicious" transformer that make brownouts on the low voltage circuitry inside with very limited range, the EM would be just similar to spinning Nd magnet really fast.
@@lightdark00 And how do you suppose they can detect that error condition? Not only is it not as easy as you make it sound, but what you say simply doesn't make any sense. It's like you've just learnt what hex and binary means and you threw it at a sentence hoping it would be coherent.
@@poipoi300 I would use the limited non-nand memory for one bit saying if a timer was going or not. If a timer was going '00' hex would not be reached because it'll get skipped. So if no 'timer going' bit is present, and we see a '00' it becomes 'FE' or whatever.
I seriously love your channel! You’ve taught me so much about how insecure our everyday security devices actually are, and for some reason that makes me feel more secure. It’s probably because I’m able to be more aware of my surroundings and be more prepared for things. Anyway, the company I work for has put me in charge of choosing & installing the locks on the new office buildings we’re moving into. I can’t help but laugh to myself at the thought of a door lock doing much more than slightly slowing down the process of breaking & entering. LOL
Think about these items... 1. Almost any smartphone has nonvolatile memory. 2. If one manually shuts off a number of iPhones, without the original user - they are next to impossible to open. They are actually the most secure device that one will ever own. Just how secure? There have already been cases where Apple is unwilling to unlock devices for any reason - and actually protected known criminals, even terrorists.
A simple fix for this would be to store the target time in non-volatile memory and then store the time since close in volatile. Worst case, you wait several hours to open the case on start, best case, EMP generator resets the timer to full duration.
The low security of this device can actually be a blessing in disguise. Imagine if you locked your phone away and then had to call 911... but can't because it's locked away. Sure, these sound great, but sometimes what you gain isn't worth the risk. I would argue that even the phone of a teenager or child shouldn't be locked up like this, just in case THEY have to be the one to call for help, unless they know where the parent's phone is and know how to dial 911 without unlocking it.
The situation where there's an emergency and you need to use a phone was my thought as well, it seems rather dangerous to lock your phone in a device like this. But I wouldn't say low security is a blessing here - cause you would still struggle to open even a low security device like this in case of an emergency, even if it only required just a shim (rather than EMP like on the video) to open...
Its not low security to go without your phone. Its just, how life was 10 years ago, you gotta realise you dont NEED a phone to call for help, you have a voice that can shout, but even then, the chances of anything bad happening for those 5 minutes you dont have your phone inside your own house is so incredibly slim, the worlds just not that dangerous. and- depending on your defintion of security. Going without your phone is the most secure you can be, considering its an always on device with full locational tracking data and if governments need to investigate where you've been they can triangulate your phones pings to nearby cell-towers and GPS lookups to see where youve been going and what youve been doing (if they have a reason too, this isnt 1984, still weird tho). so for some, phones are the least secure thing you can carry with you
Phones have parental controls to render this device meaningless anyway. I have my daughter's iPhone locked down at certain times of the day where it is nothing more than a horrible flashlight. But even then it still allows emergency calls and calls to/from us.
It would be sufficient to store the programmed time only at the *start* of the timer; this would ensure you don't wear out the nonvolatile memory (a real concern if you were updating it every second), and in the case of a disruption the timer would start over counting from the initial programmed time again, resulting in an even longer delay; punishment for attempting to tamper with it!
@@threestans9096 Probably thinking of CCFL inverters (basically the same thing a taser uses), I'm not sure modern cameras use those, but then again I haven't seen disposable cameras since smart phones became a thing either so they probably had that.
Wife: Honey, ready to go to the party? LPL: Almost. Have you seen my Pocket EMP? Wife: It's in your sock drawer next to your Garfield and Odie socks. LPL: Thanks honey... Got it! I'm ready for the party.
@@GamesFromSpace Also, depending on the kind of locking mechanism it's not entirely unfeasible to use a sufficiently strong electromagnet in order to physically move a locking shackle or something and open a lock. Not gonna work on just any lock though.
Is there any risk of the EMP damaging the smartphone in the lockbox? (Obviously this is less relevant in the case that the same electronics are used for e.g. time-locking narcotics/cash.)
Your homemade EMP device, looks exactly like a case I keep my nail clippers (toe/finger) along with a file and collapsible scissors. It's always a little surprising that your videos are about 3x longer than an actual pick, lol.
You kind of have to keep the countdown in memory since overwriting non-volatile memory every few seconds would wear it out pretty quickly. Just have one micro-controller handling the UI and another in a shielded location with adequate EM isolation from the UI handling the timer and lock.
This. A small RTC chip surrounded by a mu-metal (the stuff used to protect hard drives from their own magnets) would add little to the cost and you wouldn't even have to have two microcontrollers. On startup, the microcontroller would check the time in the RTC and set the display to that instead of zero.
@@thorlancaster5641 You will still need some sort of isolation between UI elements like display, LEDs and buttons if you don't want the wiring between those and the micro-controller to serve as an antenna for EMP and potentially cause a reset. Also, even if you store the RTC end time instead of counting, the RTC itself is still a 16-32bits CMOS counter that can be corrupted by power and IO glitches, as does the rest of the processor's register file and RAM. The processor may not necessarily be in a state where it can tell which state it was in before being forced into a reset state by the watchdog timer (firmware crash) or something else getting tripped.
@@teardowndan5364 Good decoupling + A RC circuit on each pin + external diodes would prevent electrical spikes from the wires from messing up the chip's internal state. The protocol could be hardened too. For example, an I2C chip won't even respond unless you get its address correct and a SPI chip could have enough RC added to the CS pin to block high-frequency transients. Sure it would slow the circuit down but an extra 100ms when powering on wouldn't be noticeable. Only thing left after that would be the MCU getting confused enough to either reset the timer or unlock the latch. Control flow perturbations could be defended with defensive programming, and unlocking the latch could require several IO pins on the chip to take on correct values through logic gates. Even if it was impossible to block this attack 100% of the time you could probably make this attack as hard as raking a good lock with security pins. Unfortunately all of this is meaningless when the company is aiming to make their product as cheap as possible and just secure enough to stop the average consumer's inner monkey from getting to their phone.
@@thorlancaster5641 If you put RC filters on 7seg multiplex LED display, those RC networks are going to sap a fair bit of power. As for an MCU-to-MCU protocol, you could simply use RS232 with an opto-isolator in each direction. Even if you used I2C to use the address decode as pre-screening for junk packets, you'd still have to validate (and decrypt if you want to be paranoid) the payload protocol anyway.
You can update non-volatile memory in greater intervals to make a snapshot of the countdown. In case of an unexpected reset you just load the snapshot.
I’d like to think that the timer resetting to zero is a safety measure in case something went wrong and you don’t want your phone to be stuck inside but it probably wasn’t.
not really.. as what LPL said, if there is something wrong and you want to get your phone, just break it because it is plastic.. now if you want to reuse the case, it really breaks the purpose of having this lock case aint it? like, you are supposed to lock your phone so you do not get addicted to using it, what is its use if it has a reset safety measure which you can use all the time?
@@nael2770 As LPL said, it shouldn’t really be used a tool for security but just for helping yourself from your phone. If the user has enough determination to make a pocket EMP or break it in order to open it then i doubt the whole thing would help anyway. Unless it was a third party who forced them to not use their phone like a parent.
It kind of is. Microcontrollers have a WDT (watchdog timer) built in. If the code stops executing properly, the WDT times out and resets the micro. It's not meant to help you get your phone out, but is usually enabled as good practice.
@@misterhat5823 BigClive actually had what I think was one of those head torch with various brightness settings where the microcontroller in it crashed, and this watchdog timer apparently wasn't enabled. This means that the lamp did not work at all and appeared completely dead until he desoldered the battery and soldered it back in.
Its probably pretty low power Also It takes alot Of power to affect stuff For example THE SUN'S EMPS that's about as much power you need for most electronics
Given how it's constructed and how he uses it, the induction effect is most likely only within the inside of the loop of wire. Due to how far the phone was from that top part, this probably wouldn't do significant damage (but still might which is why he uses an old phone, and explicitly states it's an old phone). However, as he stated near the start, this is less about immediately retrieving a phone, and more about how easy such a lock would be defeated if the exact thing is used in another scenario. You'd feel less apprehension using such a device on say... a cabinet with a timed lock that only stores drugs and other non-sensitive equipment in order to break it open.
The induced voltages here are probably roughly equivalent to what is normally present. A large EMP field can most certainly permanently destroy electronics.
It will harm the phone if you are emp-ing for extended periods of time, for short times it will only make the screen flicker and it will think you are touching the screen.
It could however to meet fcc requirements for emi/rfi emissions a phone will have shielding and other measures to reduce emissions. Those measures will work the other way round for reception. Maybe a focused poke at the phones antenna could couple enough energy into the phone. Note, since the device only glitched the lock, it probably wouldn't damage the phone.
I worry that the EMP could permanently damage the lockbox's electronics so that it stops functioning altogether and leaves the phone locked in forever. Or that the phone could be damaged.
Question: would it damage the phone inside to open the lock like this? I was thinking that the whole way through. Was hoping you'd turn on/unlock the phone afterwards to show that it still functions as normal. Not that anyone with a remote EMP device is going to put their phone in such a box, but still worth asking
A device such as this has very low power and the current surge it produces is not high. Phones are protected against minor interferences such as this. I think EMP is a bit of a buzzword here. This device is strictly speaking emitting a pulsating magnetic field, but when people commonly say EMP they refer to the EMP caused by a nuclear detonation in high atmosphere. Which can fry pretty much every electronic device via the massive current surge.
I love the videos that move away from traditional lockpicking and into other kinds of security bypasses. Any chance at seeing some videos on RFID cloning?
EMP generator is probably a low current high voltage power supply, a high voltage resistor charging a capacitor, and then a spark gap in series with the coil, with that combination in parallel with the capacitor. Cap will charge up to high voltage until the spark gap breaks down. Then the cap gets dumped through the coil very rapidly. When the current decays to zero, the spark gap resets to a high impedance and the cap charges again from the HV through the resistor.
TL;DR: "Don't store mission critical information in volatile memory" - It's not as easy as that. The statement "Don't store mission critical information in volatile memory", from a software engineering standpoint, really falls short of reality. There are lots of kinds of data, and the way they interact with the program (and on that level, even the hardware) often dictates how they must be stored. To give you an example, a counter about to be incremented or decremented (and what else is a timer) literally HAS to be stored in a register, which is about as volatile a memory as it gets. Taking a first step back from the details, a datum like "time remaining" is what experts call a volatile state, i.e. a datum which literally has to be modified on (almost) every clock cycle. It's literally impossible to store such a thing in non-volatile memory, because by the time you would have spent the multiple clock cycles necessary to store and/or update it, it would be outdated. Literally the best you could do with COTS hardware would be to regularly back up the state in non-volatile memory, which however could also be corrupted by your electronic attack. The same goes for more expensive solutions like using a processor with non-volatile ram and some special clever programming which ensures the firmware can resume with the old data if its internal watchdog triggers a reset, but that too could trigger a reset Last but not least, there's the question of proper faillure modes. The thing you definitely DON'T want on a thing like this is to suddenly have the timer show 99 years after such an attack. In a real security critical implementation, you might want to fail on the safe side and accept the possibility that the rightful owner might have to destroy the securiy devide to open it, but on a toy like that, you want to fail lenient.
You're right that the failure state may have been intentionally selected this way, but when that's not the case, a safer yet nearly as simple approach could surely be to count *up* towards a target time stored in non-volatile memory (potentially with a volatile copy for comparison speed's sake, but checking against the non-volatile source of truth before opening)?
@@sarajohnsson4979 There is a lot to what you say. You could indeed store the target in non-volatile memory with a checksum, then count up to that value. That would not make it completely safe, because in case the non-volatile memory were corrupted, you would still want to default to open up, but it would potentially make that attack a lot less reliable. Goes to show that usually there _is_ a solution if you just put your mind to it.
You just have the best toys! Out of curiosity, what does running that small EMP device do to other electronics, like Cell Phones or Computers or Smart Watches? Does it scramble Credit cards? And thanks for a creative VLOG today!
Hardy Boys Casefiles No. 9: The Genius Thieves was the first time I learned about EMPs. A character invented a gadget called Electrojam which people used to shut down annoying music blaring on steroes but someone used one to rob an electronic safe. I didn't know it was real back then in the late 90s.
I understand that the reset of the microcontroller means it forgets the latest time value but storing it in non-voltale memory can be expensive. Flash memory has a short write lifetime so something else would be needed but it's usually more expensive.
The idea behind the smartphone lock is great but watch an emergency happen and a guy goes: "sorry cant call 911, my phone is locked for another 52 minutes"
There are issues with storing often-changed data in non-volatile memory due to the "endurance" limit of the memory. Typically for a small EEPROM it might be 1,000,000 writes. That sounds a lot but it's only 11.5 days when used once a second. Some possible workarounds are: 1. Use a large SD card and leverage its wear levelling to give an acceptably long endurance. Adds cost. 2. Use network time. This requires WiFi or GSM. Adds significant cost. 3. Use FRAM. These are EEPROMs with infinite endurance. Adds cost. 4. Only store to the nearest minute. That gives you 60,000,000 seconds or nearly two years endurance.
It might be worth trying some electronic locks in close proximity to something like a GMRS radio, another attack strategy may also be extremely low temperatures where the internal batteries cease to function. Worth mentioning that playing with EMP may destroy the phone inside this enclosure, irrespective of whether it is on or off.
You can make it with magnetic wire and an electric starter from a gas grill. Basically make a coil with a magnetic wire (found on Amazon) attach one end of the grill starter to one end of the coil and the other wire to the other end. Make sure to leave a small gap between the wire and the part the generates the spark (because you need the spark to occur).
![[1440] Pocket EMP vs. Smartphone Timer Lockbox](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
