An oft-cited theory of security says that the more popular a security solution is, the more it will be targeted.
Let's try that in the real world. Suppose you live in a neighborhood prone to breakins. You have the option of installing a security system.
The theory would seem to suggest that if all of your neighbors have security systems, you're better off without one. After all, houses with security systems will be targeted more than houses without a security system.
Unfair? Fine, suppose your choice is between system X ($1000, monitors and alarms) and system Q ($100, stickers and a sign). If all of your neighbors have system X, are you better off with system Q?
Remember, any analysis that ignores the goodness of either option is fatally flawed.
Another oft-cited theory--backed up by anecdotal reports--is that when thieves see the security signs (or hear the clever recording of barking dogs), they'll move to the next house.
Re:Theory vs. counter-theory
Fletch on 2003-09-05T14:10:23
Right, there's a difference between the type of target your professional cat burgler (Robble robble . . . wait, that's the Hamburgler) is going to go after and the one the boored teenager ne'er-do-well is going to hit. The professional black hat's going to have more perserverence, or see the stronger system as a challenge. The scriptkitty will jiggle the handle and run off when he hears the purported doberman.
Kind of the don't-have-to-outrun-the-bear-just-you school of security.
