| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<brlesjl0btk4vq6em4gb3rmip8vr0e69p4@4ax.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design Subject: Re: Security fasteners Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2025 11:53:15 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 47 Message-ID: <brlesjl0btk4vq6em4gb3rmip8vr0e69p4@4ax.com> References: <vq68c3$1p096$1@dont-email.me> <1r8nwrf.1f4hcwebwz608N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <vq6fgj$1pt47$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2025 20:48:00 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="67917be61bded4d9efc3fe7ce8db8b43"; logging-data="2130111"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1++6VBCtJNgOAujnJ+R73ot" User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 Cancel-Lock: sha1:EMGIbj7psqkrNG005deUyoebB3w= Bytes: 2775 On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 02:01:05 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: >On 3/4/2025 1:27 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote: >> Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: >> >>> What value "security fasteners"? One can purchase "drivers" >>> for damn near any of them, cheap. >>> >>> Is the intent to discourage *casual* disassembly (given that >>> anyone determined to do so can purchase same)? Perhaps to >>> be able to argue (in a court of law) that the other party >>> took "extraordinary measures" to gain access to the internals >>> of your product (so, if he was injured in the process, it >>> shouldn't fall on your shoulders) >>> >>> Or, the hope of *actually* preventing disassembly? >>> >>> I.e., wouldn't a tamper-proof "seal" be cheaper and more >>> conclusive? >> >> In the UK, the seals are now designated "Tamper Evident" - which is more >> accurate. > >Yes, that is likely the designation, here, as well. > >Note that even they (at least adhesive ones) aren't >"tamper proof" *or* "evident" as one can remove all traces >of the seal and REPLACE it with another, identical, mass >produced seal. > >(This is why holographic seals have been used) > I rented a competitor's instrument to test it and see what it looked like inside. It was generously plastered with stickers that said WARANTY VOID IF SEAL BROKEN. Fortunately, Amazon sells reels of that exact same sticker. It was pretty ugly inside. And the boards were signed (some people do that) by a former employee of mine. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/lq3m0xpc704us2hn59nfd/DSC06740.JPG?rlkey=9kofe5tnjblh2t06jqvyswicf&raw=1 Looks like the front-panel BNCs soldered to the bottom of the board and the joints broke, so wires were added.