Minecraft Forums

I bet this has probably already been said within the 87 pages of this thread, but wouldn't a simple fully-enclosed bedrock room suffice?

I mean, if we assume the player can place bedrock, then he or she can also break bedrock as an Op in creative mode.
Of course, that makes it so that an op needs to be there if a non-op needs to get in a vault.

</thread>
</troll>

There are some very interesting ideas here, though! Might have to make something after finals.

The obvious problem here is that pistons can't push bedrock. The only way I see for this to work, barring strategies that require you to die, is a mechanism that uses storage minecarts to push the contents OUT (as they only require a 1x1 space). Then, when you're satisfied with the changes to the contents, you just push it back in with some booster rails.

Of course, the two ways of breaking this are as follows:
1) brute force combo guessing, or, if this functionality has been removed by means of a fail-deadly mechanism (i.e. it becomes impossible to open if you enter the wrong combination),
2) threaten to enter the wrong combination over chat unless the guy opens it and gives you a share. He certainly doesn't want to lose that stuff.

The only solution I can see to this is making a way of killing the guy that enters the wrong combination and then not letting him back (but still letting in others, so it isn't broken for you), which I can't figure out how to do. There is one thing that might get fairly close, though:
Put an obsidian wall a few meters thick around it so they need a diamond pick, which they certainly won't want to lose, to get through it in less than, say, a year. Then, if they enter the wrong combination, cast them into lava.
Unfortunately, they could still just break THAT mechanism, unless you have some clever way of making them not be able to neutralize the lava.

TL;DR Storage minecarts, but you still have to deal with trolls or really really patient thieves.

Are we allowed to use plugins? :smile.gif:

Quote from itg

What tricks are those? I'm only aware of the seed glitch, and it was patched.

CREATIVE MODE

Quote from Mystify

This idea was considered a long time ago. I forget why it was rejected though.

Probably because you could phase up with boats and break the piston.

Quote from Svekkeh

Can't you use the fact chest won't open if their is a solid block above them? So with a redstone lock of lets say 16 levers you can use pistons to pull away the blocks and thus make it possible to open your chest.

You can simply destroy the chest then

Isn't boat phasing beatable by simply making the walls 2m thick? Or am I not thinking of the same phenomenon that you guys are?
I definitely like the idea of making the storage minecart come to you after going through a large enough passage that it'd suffocate anyone going through it. How long would that take, though? Does armor help against suffocation? If so, it might not be worth it, since it'd be so big.
Also, could one prevent griefing with lava/water to destroy at least some of the tracks? Is there anything that minecarts can pass through that liquids can't?

I was thinking of a 2-way piston engine that can push a storage minecart
when the combo is punched in. Since water and lava will not effect the pistons it will be safe from that.

TNT also won't break the pistons if they are moved far enough back.

Maybe something like this http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Tutorials/Mechanisms#Piston_Two-Way_Elevators

but horizontal and encased in bedrock.

This is litterally impossible. if ou can get in so can a theif if they try long enough. so either you cant get in or they can

Why does the code need to be a redstone push button one?

I mean, I'm sure it's possible to design an unbreakable vault without any door at all! Simply using a 'complex enough' maze that you wouldn't be able to use the Pledge or Trémaux algorithm on to solve.

An example might be a time altering maze that breaks 360 rotations in the time it would take one to traverse a loop, thus foiling both methods, as some junctions would become 'hidden' at those points, although it would be eventually vunrable to a theif with the time to check all junctions that are being blocked. However it would increase the lenght of time to solve the maze considerably to a user who doesn't know how to make the route. Indeed having specific TIMED gates to open routes would again add additional time to figure the solution out.

Yet like any combination lock the right/wrong turns in a maze just need to be on a simmilar level as the lock complexity for right/wrong selection.



One could have a logic, or one-way-only style topology depositing would be theifs out at the bottom by using pits chucking them back to ealier sections. Or simply kill them.

One might be able to use the nether in a limited capacity to create a 4D maze, it would also foil nether entrance attemps as you would be thrown into the maze without any knowledge.

Anyhow I ramble...

GenAndSparkles


EDIT: For a lock to be 'effective' in the sense it can't be brute forced within 40hrs of game play, it needs to be an 18bit sequence, giving 2¹⁸ permiatations, thus you'd need to enter one key every half second to be sure to brute force the combination lock in that time. This number should be large enough that given the seconds it would take to enter keys that the expectation time until the correct combination is reached (assuming that it lies somewhere half way in the number of permiatations (i.e. perfect obsuration)) is also exceeded.

That would give some theoretical base for how complex the combination lock would need to be to fufill the challenge.

Quote from TheKorot

I did, in the last post on the previous page: You can't use redstone mechanisms to deactivate portals, because you can't use a bucket of lava/water. You can still turn one on remotely, just not off.

Regards,
Korot

Actually if you place walls on both sides of a nether portal you can cause a player to get stuck in the system and be unable to move. They then suffocate. Using this you could make a portal that can only be entered after a code is completed.

Idea Idea Idea IDEA!

Using portals to the nether!

I suck at making diagrams, but the basic idea is that the combination lock would, when finished would disable a nether portal (pistons, water). A portal in the nether would normally connect to that portal, but would no longer be able to. It would then choose the portal to the safe room.

To stop someone from making another nether portal that would normally connect witht the safe room, create 1 by 1 by 2 rooms of bedrock with portal inside. this portal should be impossible to destroy (can't place water/destroy the bedrock. These rooms would absolutley be possible with mc edit.

The trap portal (when you go through the portal you want to take you to the safe, it will not work unless this portal is disabled portal) would also be surrounded by bedrock on all sides except one square on the top. it wouldn't have to be normal portal size, but it would have to be at least the height (3). I am no good with MCedit, but I see no flaw in this plan.

If you see anything wrong, please comment in a non-sarcastic fashion, just so you don't look like an idiot if i prove you wrong.

Hmm...

Having a think on permiations gave me a thought to work out an 'improbability vault' i.e. let's assume there are N 'cells' in the vault, how many cells would one need to search until one would find the diamonds if there are k 'cells' occupied with diamonds? Of course in a physical system there will be additional ways to circumnavigate the probabilities by using searching algothrithms on the topology of the space you create your cells in.

However let us consider a 10x10x10 cube of cells, 1000 in total. Let's assume 10 of the vaults cells are full. Using binomial probability function, you are 27% likely to find at least one of the diamond cells in the first 98 cells searched. Not that sercure really, but what about 2 of the cells, or even 5? Well those are 21% within 200 cells and 18% withing 300 cells respectfully.

These represent the 'peak likihood' of finding the diamonds. All bar the first search are fairly labour intensive.


The 144,000s our theif has to search in would imply that in a 10x10x10 cude, he would need to spend about 576s in each cell to find between 2 and 5 of the diamond cells, and even then only at about a 20% chance of success.

Phrased that way, the vault design looks a bit more sercure. Since to find multiple diamond rooms is much more difficult and time consuming than one cell.

Using the time argument in reverse, let's say our theif has 15s to search each room. Therefore he has a chance to search 9600 rooms in his allotted time. This number is near 10,000 so we'll use 10,000 as a round figure. Using the geometry from above, 10, 10x10x10 vaults gives us 10,000 cells.

Therefore if 10 diamond cells exsisted in 10,000 possible cells, then the search time is reaching our maximal.



This interestingly enought is the 1 cell in 1,000 search case. This only ever reaches a 'maximal' 19.6% chance of you finding the diamond cell, given you didn't find it in the preceeding cells, and that no supprise comes up only after you have searched about 600 - 1000 cells anyway.

Indeed if a robber wants a 20% chance of finding the diamond he need search only ~364 cells, a 50% chance, ~600 cells, an 80% chance ~850 cells. Expected search times of 1.5hrs, 2.5hrs and 3.5hrs respectfully. This approches about 5% of our desired mark.

Therefore if you wanted an 5% Unbreakable Vault as defined by this thread (probally), a 10x10x10 cube of cells with 1 diamond room should surfice.


But what about the 1 diamond cell in 10,000 cells? Well this really is our maximal, since although after about 6000 cells you are 25% likely to stummble across the diamond cell without knowing the key, at the 9,600 searches done, your only gurranteed about a 94% chance of total success. While the odds are stacked in the favour of the theif, that's 40hrs of searching for a 5% chance of not being successful! 1 in 20...

The otherway you could look at this is having searched 400 cells (which at 15s each takes ~1:40hrs) your 94% unlikely to have found the diamond cell.


All of this assumes that you've been ticking off the cells as you go. Therefore leaving a dirt block or something to say 'searched' or your doing it row by row, column by column. In otherwords a methodological search. So that too must be taken into consideration on the theifs behalf. Jumping in and searching at random will enevitably lead to searching rooms over and over again. Thus would make it far less likely you would find the diamond cell.

We also must think of the ease of use. While a 10x10x10 vault is 'small' your only have a mean distance of 5 cells to travel to the vault cell, in a 314x10x10 vault, your average travel is about 157 cells, which could be 1570 blocks!! Not very efficent.



Hence I make a conclusion that from a mathamatical point of view, an improbability vault would need to be 'too big' to be practically fessible to insure that within 40hrs it could not be methologically searched.

---

And your gates/moving wales will be made out of bedrock? Anything that you can move by pistons can be destroyed by TNT, so the griever could just walk straight through them. Also, the griever/thief is presumed to know the layout of the vault, and by consequence, of the maze.

No not bedrock, can't push that with pistons! Was thinking more lava curtains at junctions. But the point is these state altering devices would never be 'unbreakable', but disabling each one in turn to open up the maze would take time, and well be a bit of a pain in the **** to do really. The point about a maze is the combination is is layout. Unfortunatly its not 'easy' to design a maze which does route permiatations to order by algorithm, I'd need to design a computer program to draw one out, and then have to convert that into minecraft. I'd guess it would be big as well.

I mean, no redstone lock is any different, you have a picture of its state/design then you know the combination. The only way to change either is to have the combination changing over time as well, ok easier to do with a set of push buttons than physical structure, but I wasn't suggesting a maze would be the best suggestion. Just that it could be another way of looking at creating a lock. Like above, I take a look at just hideing the diamonds within a suitably large enough structure which would be time consuming to brute-force hence it wouldn't be suggested to try.

Just exploring concepts, not really proposing a design here.

Anyway, using large enough redstone locks isn't the problem, my full design (portals) will have a couple of trillion combinations, if I remember right. Should take long enough to solve.

Oooh care to linky?


GenAndSparkles

ok to be fair i use the inventory hacker does that count if u use it to get the bedrock and some food and redstone just because i still cant find the redstone and it seems bedrock isnt mineable so could i ( and it saves time if i get unlimited food )?

Quote from Mystify

Is that some sort of fundamental physical law of the universe? It should be possible to create a system that cannot be accessed other than properly inputing the code.

take this hypothetical situation:
You have a bedrock vault, completely sealed. When the proper redstone code is inputted, two blocks of bedrock dissapear, allowing access. When you leave, they reappear. Without knowing the code, the cube is impenatrable. Any means of entry that exist without the code must exist whether or not the door exists.

Same thing can be said for a cypher with the same length as the message. Without the code, you have 0 information about the data except for its length, and even that can be disguised. By applying any possible cypher, you can get any possible message of length <=n, and you have no way of determining which is correct. The cypher contains no information either. I might as well tell you "This is a book with at most 1,000,000 letters in it. Decide which one of those is the book I mean".

Now the entire scheme rests on keeping the key secure. If someone accesses they key, then they can read the message, but without it, it is literally impossible. You can't even brute force it, not even in theory.

Your statement is a general observation, not a hard, cold, physical fact. Say you have a vault. there are n ways to access it. We have the following cases
n=0
it is impossible to access this vault
n=1
there is exactly one way to enter this vault. This is the goal.
n >1, but finite
there are a finite number of ways to enter this vault, but more than one.
n is infinte
there are no bounds on the number of ways to enter this vault

the first case is useless, the last a physical impossiblity (withing timespan t, where t is the lifespan of the server, there are a finite number of "instances" of the state of the server. since each of these states has a finite number of possibilities, then the total number of possible events the server could experience is a finite number times a finite number, which is still finite, though admittely extremely large. Even if all of these resutled in teh vault being breached, n is still finite). If we accept your premise that n cannot be 1, then there mustbe a minimum value of n, that no matter what, we cannot get below. What would this magic value be? What would make it fundamental that you must have at least 2 ways to get into a place if 1 exists? Nothing.

The practicality of achiving n=1 may be a different story. In real-world security systems, the bounds on possible actions are so large, that it is a complete impracticality to hope to block all of them. But people still try. You can clearly state that this security system is "more secure" than another one, even if both can be breached. The goal is still to make it more secure. You analyze how previous systems have been breached, and redesign your system to thwart that. And by doing so, you get ever increasingly more secure systems. The goal in unbreachability, and while it may be infeasible to reach it, you still try. Don't you think the people designing those security systems have the goal to make it perfectly unbreachable? Does the theory that "Its impossible!" stop them from trying? No, and it shouldn't stop us.

In minecraft, we have a very well-defined set of what is possible. There are a finite number of bugs and glitches to exploit, there are a fintite number of block combinations and tools to utilize. While still formidable, it is drastically smaller than the real world, and hence the goal is more easily acheived. In fact, the rules of minecraft give us an advantage that the real world cannot: absolutes. As a virtual world, it is possible to say "There is absolutely no way to destroy bedrock", and we have a wall that cannot be destroyed. We have rules like "TNT takes up a 1x1x1 meter cube", and nothing is going to make it smaller. The existence of such absolute limits is key to making this a potentially acheiveable goal.

And even if perfect, 100% security is not acheivable, that does not mean the attempt should not be made. If that was the case, we would jsut put our boxes on pedastles with sings pointing to them saying "take my diamonds!". That is not the case, more secure is still better. by striving for perfect, we generate a lot of "not quite, but still very good" deisgns that can be practically used. And like all research, it has side benefits. Such as my extra-fast cobble generator design. While it probably would have been created elsewhere(and I would not be surprised if someone had come up with it before me), it was still created here in response to this specific problem. Now the people on this thread know of that design, and could utilize it elsewhere, whereas they might not have come across that design otherwise. I know I have learned a lot about what is posible in minecraft from this.

So take your "its impossible" attitude elsewhere. It is by no means certain it is correct, and even if it is, what we are doing is worth doing despite that fact.

Replace the word "Minecraft" in this post with the word "Science". Even though many of these things don't apply to the real world, anything that does will make this effort worthwhile.

I'm assuming some people here know about the whole 'force-field made by minecarts' thing. I've been playing around and experimenting with it, and now, there is a radius of about 10 blocks around the minecart circle, in which, the player cannot move towards it. You are pushed back continuously, sprinting and jumping doesn't help at all. This could be integrated into a room made from bedrock making it impossible for a thief to get to eg: a door on the other side of the room, if said minecart track is on the other side of the door.
Need to think of a way for the owner to be able to actually get in though..