4 ms·

I'm getting really sick of these articles about how stupid airline security is. This type of complaining is in the same vein as end-users bitching about how th

by akamaka 17y ago

I'm getting really sick of these articles about how stupid airline security is. This type of complaining is in the same vein as end-users bitching about how the IT department locks down their computers and forces them to change their passwords. We're not the experts here, and more importantly, we're not the one who have to clean up the mess after a terrorist attack. The fact is that we have had a history of ignoring early warning signs, and that when we have taken action, we have been succesful. Terrorists make mistakes, and when we ignore them (like the Bojinka plot), it has directly led to disaster (9/11). On the other hand, since lugagge scanning has improved, we rarely see bombings like Lockerby or Air India any longer. I think the end-user vs. IT department analogy is one anyone who agreed with this article should ponder on. When a low-level employee causes a security breach, he's not the one who has to deal with the effects. The experts have to come in and fix the problem, andm management has to bear the responsibility. Similarly, in the event of an airline catasrophe, it's the emergency services who have to pick through the wreckage andook for bodies; the airlines and their employees who suffer financially. Pilots and flight attendants who know they are at highest risk, due to the ime the spend in the air. And leaders of countries, who can have their entire presidency redefined in a single day. I'd rather hear their opinions than those of a professional troll lime Hitchens.

benmathes 17y ago
It's not just the societal commentators that are calling our airline security a load of bull. Notable experts are saying the same thing: http://www.schneier.com/essays-airline.html http://www.schneier.com/essays-airline.html
blhack 17y ago
Not so fast... Some of the people criticizing the TSA (like Bruce Schneier) are absolutely experts on security. You're also right, the analogy of IT vs the users is a valid one. In this case, the IT department has told the users that they are no longer allowed to browse the web between the hours of 3:30 and 3:38 because it was during this time that somebody downloaded and installed a virus. Instead of actually addressing the root of the problem (our users can download and install viruses), the IT department has put a band-aid over it so that they can say that it has been fixed.
- dugmartin 17y ago
  Not that I'm disagreeing with you but I wonder what the TSA could do to address the root of the problem?
  - ori_b 17y ago
    What can the TSA do? Nothing short of measures that would normally be considered draconian would be any sort of reasonable solution. Screen everyone carefully. Careful tests of everything brought aboard, if any is allowed at all. Require background checks upon passport application (or application for plane tickets). Also, have a security officer on board, with orders to shoot to kill if anyone tries any funny stuff. Of course, organizations like local police forces are in a far better position to make a difference. Better detective work, with the goal of breaking up terrorist rings and locating individuals, would certainly be an effective step to combat terrorism. As this article points out - these people are often already suspects. A reasonable solution would be to give up on complete security. Put in the obvious deterrents - a security officer on board the plane, and reinforced cabin doors that don't open for the duration of the flight. Other than that, don't worry about it. When you look at other threats like drunk driving or heart disease you should realize that our panic is misplaced.
  - roc 17y ago
    That's easy. Terrorists seize/destroy planes with weapons or explosives. So to the extent that the TSA can efficiently and effectively scan for weapons, explosives and known terrorists, they should. To the extent that they can't detect certain explosives (the theoretical binary liquid concern), it's reasonable to take measures to mitigate risk. (E.g. limit quantities when feasible) Beyond that? Nothing.
  - CWuestefeld 17y ago
    Why ought the TSA do anything? (or really, why ought we to have a TSA?) There are scads of targets that ought to be attractive to terrorists: sports arenas, various tunnels and bridges, power generation and transmission, etc. None of these get anything like the security attention, despite their potential to cause far greater harm than the WTC attacks did. I have the mental picture of a building with many doors. We're putting solid steel doors, deadbolts, triple padlocks, etc., on one door, while the other entries are nothing but screen doors. This is ridiculously ineffective in cost and freedom.
CWuestefeld 17y ago
Except: A. I don't think anyone has seen a reason to believe that the TSA really are experts. For example, everyone I know has some experience in accidentally carrying contraband onto an airplane, and has seen countless ways to do so intentionally based on gaping holes in the processes. B. We don't live in a Platonic republic, governed by experts. Our government is of, by, and for the people. Even in instances when we the people have decided to delegate some authority to an expert, it's still inherently the responsibility of that expert to prove to us that they're doing the right thing. TSA has failed dismally at that.
- barmstrong 17y ago
  You're right about accidentally bringing on contraband. I actually do it intentionally in the sense that if I know my sunblock is more than 3oz and I don't want to throw it out, I just hope they don't find it. I get it on the plane about 50% of the time.
  - kelnos 17y ago
    I have a 4oz gel deodorant container that I put in the freaking plastic bag, and it's never been confiscated. When I flew out of SJC on the 24th, they weren't even reminding people to take their liquids out; I left mine in my luggage with no issues. When I flew back from BWI on the 29th, there was a guy a little bit in front of me who walked through the metal detector with his coat on. The machine went off, and they had him go back and take his belt off and empty his pockets... but said nothing about the coat, despite the facts that the signs along the line specifically say to take off your coat and put it in a bin. If the TSA doesn't even enforce their own policies, what's the point?
    - CWuestefeld 17y ago
      I just flew back to the USA from Cancun on 12/26. They had a sign that said, quite explicitly, that we should not take off shoes. How can they deny that this is security theater, when they're only reacting to the most recent threats, while older attack vectors just scroll off the regulations?
jsm386 17y ago
I don't think the analogy holds. As Bruce Schneier has pointed out in recent days, it is not that we're complaining about locking down systems in ways that make sense. I've started to call the bizarre new TSA rules "magical thinking": if we somehow protect against the specific tactic of the previous terrorist, we make ourselves safe from the next terrorist. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/me_and_the_chri.html http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/me_and_the_chr... Only two things have made flying safer [since 9/11]: the reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the fact that passengers know now to resist hijackers. As to the current 'articles about how stupid airline security is' I'll quote again: And what sort of magical thinking is behind the rumored TSA rule about keeping passengers seated during the last hour of flight? Do we really think the terrorist won't think of blowing up their improvised explosive devices during the first hour of flight? Only one carry on? No electronics for the first hour of flight? I wish that, just once, some terrorist would try something that you can only foil by upgrading the passengers to first class and giving them free drinks. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/separating_expl.html http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/separating_exp... Joel Johnson at Gizmodo has a good argument about all of this: http://gizmodo.com/5435675/president-obama-its-time-to-fire-the-tsa http://gizmodo.com/5435675/president-obama-its-time-to-fire-...
gaius 17y ago
Well hang on a second, we absolutely are the people who have to deal with the aftermath as we are the flying public. I'd say I personally am more highly motivated on real airline security than some dude at a desk in Washington or throwing bags in the airport who might not even have a passport. I am the target. If you're with me on the plane, you are too. Question for you, what's the airline with best security record in the world? El Al, who have been under constant terrorist threat for 40 years. Yet no-one mocks them for their boneheaded ideas (e.g. let's confiscate everyone's liquids based on volume alone and toss them all into a big bin right near the checkpoint) because they really do know what they're doing. No bullshit, no security theatre, just a track record. TSA and Homeland Security are amateurs. Both the shoebomber and now the pantsbomber (both of whom were utterly incompetent themselves) breezed through all their security measures. Ordinary passengers dealt with it, the old fashioned way. There's a lesson there.

by akamaka 17y ago

benmathes 17y ago

It's not just the societal commentators that are calling our airline security a load of bull. Notable experts are saying the same thing: http://www.schneier.com/essays-airline.html http://www.schneier.com/essays-airline.html

blhack 17y ago

Not so fast... Some of the people criticizing the TSA (like Bruce Schneier) are absolutely experts on security. You're also right, the analogy of IT vs the users is a valid one. In this case, the IT department has told the users that they are no longer allowed to browse the web between the hours of 3:30 and 3:38 because it was during this time that somebody downloaded and installed a virus. Instead of actually addressing the root of the problem (our users can download and install viruses), the IT department has put a band-aid over it so that they can say that it has been fixed.

dugmartin 17y ago
Not that I'm disagreeing with you but I wonder what the TSA could do to address the root of the problem?
- ori_b 17y ago
  What can the TSA do? Nothing short of measures that would normally be considered draconian would be any sort of reasonable solution. Screen everyone carefully. Careful tests of everything brought aboard, if any is allowed at all. Require background checks upon passport application (or application for plane tickets). Also, have a security officer on board, with orders to shoot to kill if anyone tries any funny stuff. Of course, organizations like local police forces are in a far better position to make a difference. Better detective work, with the goal of breaking up terrorist rings and locating individuals, would certainly be an effective step to combat terrorism. As this article points out - these people are often already suspects. A reasonable solution would be to give up on complete security. Put in the obvious deterrents - a security officer on board the plane, and reinforced cabin doors that don't open for the duration of the flight. Other than that, don't worry about it. When you look at other threats like drunk driving or heart disease you should realize that our panic is misplaced.
- roc 17y ago
  That's easy. Terrorists seize/destroy planes with weapons or explosives. So to the extent that the TSA can efficiently and effectively scan for weapons, explosives and known terrorists, they should. To the extent that they can't detect certain explosives (the theoretical binary liquid concern), it's reasonable to take measures to mitigate risk. (E.g. limit quantities when feasible) Beyond that? Nothing.
- CWuestefeld 17y ago
  Why ought the TSA do anything? (or really, why ought we to have a TSA?) There are scads of targets that ought to be attractive to terrorists: sports arenas, various tunnels and bridges, power generation and transmission, etc. None of these get anything like the security attention, despite their potential to cause far greater harm than the WTC attacks did. I have the mental picture of a building with many doors. We're putting solid steel doors, deadbolts, triple padlocks, etc., on one door, while the other entries are nothing but screen doors. This is ridiculously ineffective in cost and freedom.

CWuestefeld 17y ago

Except: A. I don't think anyone has seen a reason to believe that the TSA really are experts. For example, everyone I know has some experience in accidentally carrying contraband onto an airplane, and has seen countless ways to do so intentionally based on gaping holes in the processes. B. We don't live in a Platonic republic, governed by experts. Our government is of, by, and for the people. Even in instances when we the people have decided to delegate some authority to an expert, it's still inherently the responsibility of that expert to prove to us that they're doing the right thing. TSA has failed dismally at that.

barmstrong 17y ago
You're right about accidentally bringing on contraband. I actually do it intentionally in the sense that if I know my sunblock is more than 3oz and I don't want to throw it out, I just hope they don't find it. I get it on the plane about 50% of the time.
- kelnos 17y ago
  I have a 4oz gel deodorant container that I put in the freaking plastic bag, and it's never been confiscated. When I flew out of SJC on the 24th, they weren't even reminding people to take their liquids out; I left mine in my luggage with no issues. When I flew back from BWI on the 29th, there was a guy a little bit in front of me who walked through the metal detector with his coat on. The machine went off, and they had him go back and take his belt off and empty his pockets... but said nothing about the coat, despite the facts that the signs along the line specifically say to take off your coat and put it in a bin. If the TSA doesn't even enforce their own policies, what's the point?
  - CWuestefeld 17y ago
    I just flew back to the USA from Cancun on 12/26. They had a sign that said, quite explicitly, that we should not take off shoes. How can they deny that this is security theater, when they're only reacting to the most recent threats, while older attack vectors just scroll off the regulations?

jsm386 17y ago

I don't think the analogy holds. As Bruce Schneier has pointed out in recent days, it is not that we're complaining about locking down systems in ways that make sense. I've started to call the bizarre new TSA rules "magical thinking": if we somehow protect against the specific tactic of the previous terrorist, we make ourselves safe from the next terrorist. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/me_and_the_chri.html http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/me_and_the_chr... Only two things have made flying safer [since 9/11]: the reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the fact that passengers know now to resist hijackers. As to the current 'articles about how stupid airline security is' I'll quote again: And what sort of magical thinking is behind the rumored TSA rule about keeping passengers seated during the last hour of flight? Do we really think the terrorist won't think of blowing up their improvised explosive devices during the first hour of flight? Only one carry on? No electronics for the first hour of flight? I wish that, just once, some terrorist would try something that you can only foil by upgrading the passengers to first class and giving them free drinks. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/separating_expl.html http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/separating_exp... Joel Johnson at Gizmodo has a good argument about all of this: http://gizmodo.com/5435675/president-obama-its-time-to-fire-the-tsa http://gizmodo.com/5435675/president-obama-its-time-to-fire-...

gaius 17y ago

Well hang on a second, we absolutely are the people who have to deal with the aftermath as we are the flying public. I'd say I personally am more highly motivated on real airline security than some dude at a desk in Washington or throwing bags in the airport who might not even have a passport. I am the target. If you're with me on the plane, you are too. Question for you, what's the airline with best security record in the world? El Al, who have been under constant terrorist threat for 40 years. Yet no-one mocks them for their boneheaded ideas (e.g. let's confiscate everyone's liquids based on volume alone and toss them all into a big bin right near the checkpoint) because they really do know what they're doing. No bullshit, no security theatre, just a track record. TSA and Homeland Security are amateurs. Both the shoebomber and now the pantsbomber (both of whom were utterly incompetent themselves) breezed through all their security measures. Ordinary passengers dealt with it, the old fashioned way. There's a lesson there.