Red or blue, why aren't directors smarting up?

Hey all. Just out of curiousity, how many times have you guys NOT seen in a movie that someone neutralizes a bomb by cutting a red or blue wire? I can list a few good movies with sophisticated detonating devices like Executive Decision(1996), but stuff like this are rarely seen.

Audiences are smart enough for something more difficult, and they do get bored with repeatedly seen things made out of a same template. It's hard to understand why someone stupid enough to offer 50-50 chance of survival by leaving two wires to be cut can make a living as a "bomber". It might have looked dramatic 20 years ago, but now this pattern is way out of date and bombs in movies need an innovation.

Okay, at least I can choose not to watch such poor pieces of work. Let's leave the idiot directors alone. And talk about something practical. (Given the fact that this's a ****-chat board, please feel free if anyone is interested in talking about movies.)

How does a real detonating device work? Putting aside the appearances, there's always a protective logic inside. A logic that keeps the device from interruptions. Sometimes we need such a logic in our products in order to protect our intellectual properties. For such needs, companies like Atmel have developed devices such as Secure AVR with security features. Of course we can choose such devices to protect our own rights, but not all our products are worth the extra money. So can we discuss ways of achieving as high level of security as we can with the most common components we can get? It doesn't have to be application specific, a practical concept is good enough to apply to a whole bunch of things. Have your say, please.

Personally I've always wondered why they don't just cut the wires to the detonator?, or pull the detonator out of the explosives?. For that matter why do bombs always have flashing LED's on them?.

Nigel Goodwin said:

Personally I've always wondered why they don't just cut the wires to the detonator?, or pull the detonator out of the explosives?. For that matter why do bombs always have flashing LED's on them?.

Click to expand...

Yup that's what I've always been trying to figure out. A thousand ways to design a smart bomb, and a thousand ways to mess with a stupid one. No matter how sophisticated the electronic parts are, the mechanical installation is always limited to a few patterns. There's always a detonator attached to the explosive. Those guys are always too stupid to separate them.

BTW, not only do they always put some LEDs on the bombs, they also make the number stop within 3 all the time.

I like the ones with super sophisticated led animation and elaborate display, or ones with all sorts of moving parts in the arming stage

IF I was that way inclined and IF I was going to make a bomb I wouldn't leave the wires exposed. IT would all be sealed in aryldite (completly... quite a few tubes) and only a couple of wires sticking out (to activate) which would then be ripped out...

sod the exposed stuff.
Anyway real bombs use tilt-switchs and potting as well, hence why very few bomb-disposal unit actually defuse a live bomb and rather detonate in place

haven't you seen the movie called Fifth element (or something like hat) with Leslie Nielsen? That bomb was mains powered...

also I think even I could make a smarter and more explosive bomb using stuff very legally obtainable... Even Schwartzerneger couldn't defuse that...

no blinking LED's or boinking buzzers. and definitely no 7segment/LCD timers...

If he wants them so much i can make an extra circuit for it and hide it on the second post near the very well hidden real bomb...

ok i'm off hiding under a table waiting for the FBI to arrive...

they have already traced down my IP and mac address as I type this (i have a blinking LED indicating that)

so this may be the very last post i ever make on this forum...


Fare well my friends!

justDIY said:

I like the ones with super sophisticated led animation and elaborate display, or ones with all sorts of moving parts in the arming stage

Click to expand...

Talking about Executive Decision dude. I remember the bomb with a disc spinning and all the mechanical linkages moving back and forth, which was yet a fake one. Looked pretty cool. And there was this movie Specialist by Stallone. Some interesting designes showed up in this neat movie.

And the worst example is Armageddon by Bruce Willis. They did a pretty good job putting those stuff together and the picture was perfect. But it was really hard to convince someone that you can neutralize a nuclear weapon still by cutting a wire.

Styx said:

IF I was that way inclined and IF I was going to make a bomb I wouldn't leave the wires exposed. IT would all be sealed in aryldite (completly... quite a few tubes) and only a couple of wires sticking out (to activate) which would then be ripped out...

sod the exposed stuff.
Anyway real bombs use tilt-switchs and potting as well, hence why very few bomb-disposal unit actually defuse a live bomb and rather detonate in place

Click to expand...

You may even use remote control to activate it. Then it will be completely sealed. I think the advantage for a bomb to be more invincible than our products is that its purpose is to explode before the power runs out. If someone tries to crack a product, it can't blow itself up. Maybe it will wipe its own code, but a smart guy can short circuit the supply to prevent this from happening.

Never had a chance to see what the real stuff looks like. Yeah, evacuating the scene and setting off the bomb will be a simple and safe idea. Yet I still hear of some expert who defuses bombs in real life. The other day, I saw this cop on show, interviewed by CCTV. He was talking about how he defused a bomb set up in a car to avoid a catastrophe. The car was parked quite close to a civilian house and even if they evacuate the area, an explosion will still wipe out a few houses, leaving the gov a dozen homeless people to deal with. It's in their mind that cops are expendable, coz they signed up for this kinda job. The cop said something about cutting a few wires in various colors and yes he made it. I convinced myself those who built home-made bombs in China are amateurs in electronics.

yo orc, I bet the feds won't bother travelling such a long way to Estonia hunting for someone talking about "sensitive issues". I'm quite sure they're reading and laughing tho.

If I get interested in building something like a bomb, I would probably start with something without hazardous features. And I will never touch explosive materials, even gun-powder. Those thing are too interesting to get someone like me addicted. lol! I'll keep creating new ways of protecting intellectual properties. Micro controllers with IAP capability are good pieces to start with.

Perhaps those lame bombs in movies have a purpose, even if somebody got the bright idea to duplicate it in real life, it wouldn't work. Movies are for entertainment, not education. I seldom watch anymore, the stories are weak and special effects excessive. Movies are more about making money then any artistic expression these days.

HarveyH42 said:

Perhaps those lame bombs in movies have a purpose, even if somebody got the bright idea to duplicate it in real life, it wouldn't work. Movies are for entertainment, not education. I seldom watch anymore, the stories are weak and special effects excessive. Movies are more about making money then any artistic expression these days.

Click to expand...

Well it's a fact. Like I said, something dramatic 20 years ago remains on screen today. Maybe the directors figured it's not the element that deserves evolution. I seldom watch such craps too.

Why ain't anybody talking about the property protection issue?

Alex_rcpilot said:

Well it's a fact. Like I said, something dramatic 20 years ago remains on screen today. Maybe the directors figured it's not the element that deserves evolution. I seldom watch such craps too.

Why ain't anybody talking about the property protection issue?

Click to expand...

The great piracy debate...

Well, for media... I believe once purchased, the owner should be able to make copies for personal use and archives. You shouldn't have to buy several copies of the same CD, movie, or software. I think the greedy marketers created their own problem, they create the demand for the product (commercial hype), and charge an outrages price. The product seldom is seldom as good as in the advertisements, consumer got burned. Consumers still have the want's, but a little wary of wasting money. Pirates see huge profits from small investment, just like the marketing companies.

The internet has killed the profit picture, why pay anyone, when you can download it free? A lot of the problem is the price, which companies keep raising, because of lost profits, so more consumers steal the product... Endless greedy circle. It's unlikely any scheme will be developed, that can't be broken.

Hardware: When I buy something, I own it. I should be able to take it apart, modify it, improve it, or use parts for other reasons then the intend purpose of the product. If after normal use, it wears out or is damaged, I still like to get some use out the remains, if not semi-repairable. The idea that I have to use the product as intended, and just throw something in the trash after it breaks, is unreasonable. If firmware can't be updated or modified after a product is shipped, and the chip is soldered or covered in epoxy, wouldn't that make the who unit garbage if there is a bug in the program?

HarveyH42 said:

The great piracy debate...

Well, for media... I believe once purchased, the owner should be able to make copies for personal use and archives. You shouldn't have to buy several copies of the same CD, movie, or software. I think the greedy marketers created their own problem, they create the demand for the product (commercial hype), and charge an outrages price. The product seldom is seldom as good as in the advertisements, consumer got burned. Consumers still have the want's, but a little wary of wasting money. Pirates see huge profits from small investment, just like the marketing companies........

Click to expand...

Well this issue's getting broad. As for pirating industry, I think the war between originals and pirates is much more intense in here. I guess it could be difficult to find a store in F.L where pirates are sold aboveboard, while near here in Harbin, it's difficult to find originals. I agree that it's a shame to live within such an environment, but when confronted with a 50 cent pirate of MAYA 8.0, one may probably choose not to spend 2000 bucks for the original.

Actually what I meant to talk about in the beginning was firmware protection. And I would say firmware don't always need updating, and that keeping the chip in epoxy don't always raise problems. Most products with micro controllers are not as sophisticated for the need of updates. Especially those with OTP devices. Yet I would like to focus on self-distructing designs, which should involve self-programmable devices. I bring it up only because I'm kinda interested in the concept of self-destruction. Obviously such designs will increase the cost, we're just ganna make sure it will be worthy where it is implemented. What would you do if you are to protect your firmware?

How many firmware based products are expected to stay in production more than a year or two anyway, before being replace by a newer 'improved' product?
The best protection would be price and a strong name brand. A quality product sells itself, a cheap knock off is a gamble. If the price difference isn't more then a few bucks, who would take the chance?

Self destructive firmware? How would you control the trigger? Remove a case screw, and completely ruin the device? Not everything is used as the designer intended, and self destruction will limit the customer base. I would want to buy something I could fix or fiddle with, and intentionally putting those limits into a product would never be in my designs. But I'm not advanced enough to understand what it would take to reverse engineer a multi-layer PCB and copy the firmware. Just seems like a lot of time and trouble.

speaking of firmware, I hate it when manuf. advertise "upgradable" or "reprogrammable" for future expansion as a selling feature, but instead of improving the firmware for an existing device, the just obsolete it and sell a whole new unit with only minor changes, aside from the firmware.

I guess we've got disposable society to thank for that.

HarveyH42 said:

How many firmware based products are expected to stay in production more than a year or two anyway, before being replace by a newer 'improved' product?
The best protection would be price and a strong name brand. A quality product sells itself, a cheap knock off is a gamble. If the price difference isn't more then a few bucks, who would take the chance?

Self destructive firmware? How would you control the trigger? Remove a case screw, and completely ruin the device? Not everything is used as the designer intended, and self destruction will limit the customer base. I would want to buy something I could fix or fiddle with, and intentionally putting those limits into a product would never be in my designs. But I'm not advanced enough to understand what it would take to reverse engineer a multi-layer PCB and copy the firmware. Just seems like a lot of time and trouble.

Click to expand...

Ok I get it. Firmware protection doesn't appear quite necessary to general products. And yeah, if I was the customer, I would be feeling much better if the stuff being purchased is easier to fix for me. Most products don't deserve advanced code protection mechanism. But I think Atmel developed their Secure AVR's for a reason. Have you checked their description? Something like screw removal detection is literaly implemented on such chips. I'm just curious where will these chips be used. Maybe something very dedicated and expensive, which is not updated as frequently as other sorts of products. On a domestic BBS back here, I keep hearing new of someone's product being copied just 2 weeks after release. It's horrific. By then the seller hasn't even earned back the investment yet.

It'd be nice if voting machines had better firmware protection systems in place. all the work MIT has done to expose the gross negligence in diebolds crap is amazing and scary. a chip that self destructs when you tamper with it would be a good fit for such an important application.

justDIY said:

speaking of firmware, I hate it when manuf. advertise "upgradable" or "reprogrammable" for future expansion as a selling feature, but instead of improving the firmware for an existing device, the just obsolete it and sell a whole new unit with only minor changes, aside from the firmware.

I guess we've got disposable society to thank for that.

Click to expand...

Well I can tolerate those with free online update capabilities. Want me to pay extra bucks? I won't bother buying it in the first place.

BTW, will it be a great loss if someone copies your design and starts selling it after his own name? How well can the patent law protect your rights in the U.S? I know such laws are pretty powerless in China, and we defend ourselves most of the time.

justDIY said:

It'd be nice if voting machines had better firmware protection systems in place. all the work MIT has done to expose the gross negligence in diebolds crap is amazing and scary. a chip that self destructs when you tamper with it would be a good fit for such an important application.

Click to expand...

I bet MIT has got some better choices than Secure AVR's. And I think such a mechanism itself doesn't just come outta nowhere. There may be a systematic theory behind it that nominally predicts the possibility of circumstances when such mechanism is cracked. Something like Probability Theory? Sounds deep to me.

**broken link removed**


Personally, I'd love one.