23 ms·
Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights
- coldcode 10y agoI have no idea what the point of this is.
- sharkmerry 10y agoespecially if it only applies to non-stop flights...
- MichaelGG 10y agoIt wouldn't make any sense otherwise. Non-stop flight is another way of saying "flight to the US", right?
- itchyjunk 10y ago"flights to US could include" multi-stop flights. There is a non-stop flight from Singapore to USA i think, leaves airport there and lands here. Multi-stop flights have a stop in EU if they are coming from Asia to USA or they might stop at Japan or something. Eg: Nepal -> HongKong -> Japan -> USA
- ctphipps 10y agoIn which case the ban would apply to the final sector, but for all intents and purposes, passengers boarding at earlier airports would also be prohibited to bring electronics onboard as checking luggage during a flight connection is pretty much unheard of (unless of course it's an overnight stopover).
- itchyjunk 10y agoYour luggage is not with you from the beginning. And the carry on is definitely checked in connecting flights depending on the airport. HK and New Delhi used to have it up to two years ago. Unless they recently changed it.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ArtDev 10y agoand does not apply to cellphones. "cellphones and medical devices were excluded from the ban."
- hamami 10y agoit's just another distraction from the healthcare plan or the Russian ties investigation, no need to fry your brain looking for logic here.
- pcurve 10y agoThey'd better have a very good reason for this (e.g. very credible threat). Otherwise even moderates that voted for Trump are going to suffer from serious case of buyer's remorse.
- MichaelGG 10y agoDoes Trump have many voters flying from Saudi Arabia?
- pcurve 10y agoNo, but his policies are making the U.S. look pretty bad. His hardcore supporters won't care about that, but swing voters that swung his way would.
- prawn 10y agoThis sort of stuff spooks travellers from other countries also ("I saw a headline that said I wasn't allowed to take my laptop to America!"). End result is likely to be a drop in tourism and international students which will hit some industries harder than others.
- Cyph0n 10y agoMaybe not the KSA, but Dubai for example is a key connection for travelers from Asia.
- oxide 10y agoI doubt there is a credible threat prompting this ban. It's appeasement IMO.
- uptown 10y agoDistracts from today's testimony by Comey.
- BWStearns 10y agoAlmost no one outside the tech or business communities will really care about this (beyond individuals annoyed with not having iTunes on a 14 hour flight). I don't think it's attention fodder (nor do I think it's a valid means of protecting flights). Not sure what this is.
- uptown 10y ago"Almost no one outside the tech or business communities will really care about this" That's kind of a massive segment of the population.
- ctphipps 10y agoOr people traveling with kids (for whom iPads on board are a saving grace on long haul flights).
- uptown 10y agoSaving grace for those traveling adjacent to those traveling with kids too.
- mattnewton 10y agoEasier to root and search a machine checked in?
- komali2 10y agoTSA always fucks up my repack. I've had nicely-packed arts totally destroyed because of how they chuck shit back into my bag after they finish pawing through it.
- yongjik 10y agoI guess it's a shoutout to Trump's core supporters that he's still committed to doing "The Right Thing" by putting those brown people in their proper places. (Totally not picked because they're muslim, I swear, wink wink.)
- adventured 10y agoSo who was Obama appealing to among his core supporters, when he attacked "brown people" in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen?
- yongjik 10y ago...Those people who can understand the difference between a temporary stopping of visa processes and a blanket ban that extends to legal green card holders?
- LyndsySimon 10y agoObama bombed those places with drones.
- stefantalpalaru 10y agoYeah, but he looked cool doing it.
- wheelerwj 10y agoTrump supporters...
- BWStearns 10y agoPeople who don't like ISIS, ghaddafi, ISIS/AQ, the taliban, ibid, pirates, and AQAP respectively.
- int_19h 10y agoObama didn't do the wink part before he did that, though.
- zackbloom 10y agoIt could be a specific threat they are now aware of.
- harlanlewis 10y ago> the ban will apply to nonstop flights to the U.S. from 10 airports in eight countries in the Middle East and North Africa Personal electronics are near-indispensable. By restricting their carry from Muslim countries, freedom of movement to and from those countries is significantly curtailed. This is about getting around the illegality of the Muslim ban without banning any persons or groups. This is about "cultural protectionism" through isolationism, not terrorism, and it's not even trying particularly hard to pretend otherwise.
- adventured 10y agoThe premise you're going with doesn't make much sense. The devices aren't banned, you have to pack them in your luggage. It won't significantly curtail freedom of movement at all.
- harlanlewis 10y agoYou're not wrong. I suppose I'd call my own statement a bit weak if this wasn't the third highly targeted policy in the past 2 months - in fact one of the few types of policies this administration has pushed all the way to action. It's possible my lens is broken, but it seems to me none of the policies considering the general populace of the middle east should be considered in isolation.
- adventured 10y agoThere's zero question it's intentionally narrowly targeting Islamic terrorism at best, and at worst is a staging ground for how much power of restriction they now have (or can get away with) when it comes to those sorts of things. The same way phone searches are a trial balloon that will inevitably spread to not just the general population at airports but the local / state law enforcement as well. My point is specifically that I don't believe it'll impede freedom of movement meaningfully. People will simply pack their devices in luggage. Interestingly, it might result in fewer laptop searches at the airports (whereas they might have asked someone to open / turn on / provide a password), among that targeted population.
- jpalomaki 10y agoThese parts of the article provides plausible explanation: "Brian Jenkins, an aviation-security expert at the Rand Corp., said the nature of the security measure suggested that it was driven by intelligence of a possible attack." "The ban would begin just before Wednesday's meeting of the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State group in Washington. A number of top Arab officials were expected to attend the State Department gathering. It was unclear whether their travel plans were related to any increased worry about security threats."
- jacquesm 10y agoWhat kind of attack would this policy avert?
- tpolm 10y agohttps://xkcd.com/651/ https://xkcd.com/651/
- swatkat 10y agoMay be there's a loophole in x-ray machines that scan cabin bags, but not in the machines that scan checked-in bags? (just guessing, if at all "it was driven by intelligence of a possible attack")
- Cyph0n 10y agoWhy is the ban targeting only these specific airlines? Are they so confident that a potential perpetrator couldn't fly in on Delta through Paris?
- tmp123213 10y agoSounds like the threat is not about generic attack against airplanes, but more targeted towards specific people traveling from certain countries to US.
- tmp4343 10y ago
- jaxn 10y agoTo prevent passengers from having access to communication while going through customs. To limit pictures and social media posts in the time between when they get off the plane in the US until their retrieve their checked bags from baggage claim.
- maxerickson 10y agoIt seems not to apply to cell phones. Also, the one time I came into the US, I carried my checked bags through customs.
- koenigdavidmj 10y agoPhones are an exception to this policy, so neither of these is applicable.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- run4yourlives2 10y agoPiss off brown Muslim people. Seriously. He couldn't get his ban through (twice), so now he's just going to make it as inconvenient as hell for people from those eight countries to travel to the US. It's a big 'fuck you' to Muslims. The POTUS is a 3 year old in a man's body.
- diminoten 10y agoWithout doing any further research than what you did when you made this comment, how long do you believe this ban is for?
- snowwrestler 10y agoMaybe TSA was up late one night surfing back through the XKCD archive: https://xkcd.com/651/ https://xkcd.com/651/
- jaimex2 10y agoFirst thing that came to my mind :)
- dogecoinbase 10y agoThis is... crazy. I can't even recall the last time I travelled with checked luggage of any kind, and make a point of not letting my laptop/etc out of arm's reach while traveling. I guess this does make it easier to search/bug devices, though.
- peterwwillis 10y agoThis is actually one of the few credible attacks a hijacker could perform, and reducing the size of the batteries (assuming most cellphones don't have 72Whr 6-cell batteries) is a practical method to prevent such an attack in the cabin. However, it doesn't seem to rule out the exact same thing happening in the cargo hold with a timer. It's less stupid than water restrictions.
- stevenwoo 10y agoThe rationale for water restrictions seems OK to me on the face of it. It's a PIA for traveling. http://blog.tsa.gov/2008/02/more-on-liquid-rules-why-we-do-things.html http://blog.tsa.gov/2008/02/more-on-liquid-rules-why-we-do-t...
- peterwwillis 10y ago> Was this a real threat? Yes, there was a very serious plot to blow up planes using liquid explosives in bombs that would have worked to bring down aircraft. Yeah. With Nitroglycerin, the stuff that explodes when you move it too fast. You could still bring this on a plane undetected in 3.4oz containers. And you can check a bag with much larger amounts. But there was not just "a plot" to blow up a plane with liquid explosives. There was a successful attack on a South Korean plane that killed everyone on board with liquid explosives, used in 1989. Yet they don't even mention this, probably because the policy was put in place after 9/11, partly as a fear tactic to get US citizens to support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, partly to prevent fear from ruining the airline industry, and partly to support the new jobs program called the TSA (which was also created after 9/11). Without fear and extensive unnecessary security measures, the TSA would not be the size it is, nor would it get the investment it gets. If you don't believe TSA is primarily a jobs program, consider that according to NPR in 2006, a government report showed that Research & Development programs were delayed when TSA funds were redirected in order to pay for personnel costs for screeners. And the TSA receives 8 billion dollars a year. There are many ways to detect liquid explosives. By removing them from their container (or requiring specific kinds of transparent containers) and using laser scatter plotting or microwaves, or by detecting vapor emissions from an opened bottle, for example. But nobody cared about them when planes were bombed using them, and they're still not using any of these methods, 17 years after the policies were put in place. These policies are just tools used to control people.
- haudouken 10y agoProbably a really bad attempt to stop the stolen Trump Tower laptop from leaving the US. I almost didn't leave this comment because of how stupid this sounds, but then again...
- salesguy222 10y agoYou look at this and say to yourself, "this doesn't make any sense! i don't get how allowing cell phones and 'medical devices' (nebulous term) into carry ons, but demanding that laptops go into checked baggage is keeping us safe!" And you're right! It isn't. But then you realize that the special interests that came up with this policy were paid LARGE SUMS OF MONEY to impress Trump and all of his supporters and career politician allies. And then you once more realize how incredibly stupid this policy is in reality. But then it dawns on you that Trump and his allies are either criminally idiotic, or criminally wasteful in their policy pursuits. Or both!
- r00fus 10y agoSpare (laptop) batteries are not allowed as checked luggage [1] (presumably the danger of a shorted battery causing a hull fire or explosion). Why would a laptop go into checked when an equivalently sized battery not be allowed? Further discrepancies that show we don't have a rational executive branch. [1] https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ash/ash_programs/hazmat/passenger_info/media/Airline_passengers_and_batteries.pdf https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/as...
- belorn 10y ago
- dawnerd 10y agoThis is just asking for trouble... Between theft and potential battery fires, it almost feels like they want something bad to happen so they can say people coming from these countries are dangerous (using a hull fire as proof).
- brajesh 10y agoThis is probably a "travel ban" by inconvenience, since the earlier bans were stayed in courts
- jacquesm 10y agoSo, assuming this is because of some credible threat: does that mean DHS thinks that terrorists can't afford a couple of weeks lay-over in Amsterdam or Paris before traveling to the United States?
- Const-me 10y agoThey might think airport security personnel at Amsterdam or Paris do their job better than their colleagues from those 8 Middle Eastern and North African countries. And/or they might think Netherlands and France is just as attractive for the terrorists as the US, i.e. the terrorists won’t bother taking that second flight. BTW, I think Russia should be the 9-th country on that list, as they have long history of sponsoring terrorism.
- linkregister 10y agoI'm ignorant of Russia's historical role in sponsoring terrorism; I'm only getting recent Ukraine / Syria links. Can you share some resources to learn more about it?
- venomsnake 10y agoBoth in Ukraine and Syria the Russians are supporting the legitimate government. Don't forget there was coup in Ukraine. Not very good governments but still.
- Const-me 10y agoThey are doing that at least since foundation of USSR. Russians ordered bombings in Warsaw, Poland in 1920-s. Shipped weaponry to Irish Republican Army and Palestine in 70-s. Speaking about Palestine, some say Russians have invented plane hijacking as a terrorist tactic: http://web.archive.org/web/20130102051626/http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/218533/russian-footprints/ion-mihai-pacepa http://web.archive.org/web/20130102051626/http://www.nationa... Killed many political opponents abroad, Alexander Litvinenko in UK, Sulim Yamadaev in UAE, Stepan Bandera in Germany. If you want more, read books and articles by Stanislav Lunev, Ion Mihai Pacepa, Viktor Suvorov. Those are high-ranking KGB officers who surrendered and were cooperative. Alexander Litvinenko also published stuff about state-sponsored terrorism in modern Russia, but he concentrated on domestic not international.
- maxxxxx 10y agoWhen I came to the US in 2000 it was a fairly optimistic and happy place. Now when I read stuff like this I always get reminded how this country went from pretty open to being scared, irrational and mean in the last 15 or so years.
- ergothus 10y agoMy personal pet peeve is when people say things like "we live in a dangerous world now". No, we don't. At least, not more dangerous than before (which is the implication). We might be breathlessly focused on some dangers, but those dangers are LESS than before, not more. I don't want anyone to suffer, and definitely don't want anyone to die. I'm not calling for turning our backs on every idea to improve safety. Just don't apply this safety under the false premise that things are more dangerous than they were.
- charlieegan3 10y agoI always liked to point "we live in a dangerous world now" folks here: http://www.vrc.crim.cam.ac.uk/vrcresearch/paperdownload/manuel-eisner-historical-trends-in-violence.pdf http://www.vrc.crim.cam.ac.uk/vrcresearch/paperdownload/manu... - in particular the graph on the third page.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- zer0t3ch 10y agoHow the hell would they get accurate crime stats from 1200? A year so long ago that I feel the need to suffix it with "AD".
- vacri 10y agoHomicides are easy to document, and those are the stats used in the graphs. It's other crimes that are difficult to compare. Find an old source saying "Blimey, we hath hadd 200 of thee black cryme of murder thys annus!" and cross-reference it against recorded population at the time, and there's your homicide rate.
- praneshp 10y agoWhich countries? From the article, I can glean Saudi and Jordan. Pretty poor journalism (or reading ability on my part)
- adrienne 10y agoLiterally nobody knows. The info hasn't been released, none of the airlines know who the other airlines notified are, and it seems very clear that Jordanian Air violated the "terms" of the bulletin by even making their announcement.
- BWStearns 10y agoSeems the source couldn't/wouldn't disclose the list. Given it's 8 countries in Middle East/North Africa,my bet is old travel ban countries plus one.
- ars 10y ago> Given it's 8 countries in Middle East/North Africa,my bet is old travel ban countries plus one. That's impossible since neither Saudi nor Jordan were on the old list.
- BWStearns 10y agoFair point. I didn't take away that both were part of the electronics ban from my original reading but that is a reasonable conclusion.
- komali2 10y agoI believe the UK tried this once and I remember reading that thefts were skyrocketing as a result. I'm struggling to find a source though, so this is just my poor memory and hearsay right now.
- jaimex2 10y agoWonder how long before you have to check in everything, including clothing where you have to fly in jumpsuites given to you.
- Svexark 10y agoThank you for your reasonable comment. You're going to get down voted into oblivion for it though. The right to privacy, drone strikes, budgets, Russia, etc. aren't issues until the D after someone's name turns into an R. Get with the program or lose all your internet points, man.
- JamilD 10y agoI'd argue that criticizing a new President for taking bad policies even further isn't misguided.
- salesguy222 10y agoRight? I would highlight the negative aspects of any policy from any administration, no matter who or what is involved. I would then make rational suggestions on how to fix it. When an administration routinely refuses to follow logic, compromise, betterment of humanity- this law doesn't even help Americans!- then that administration earns my cynicism and disrespect.
- yongjik 10y ago> The right to privacy OK, I'll give you that. > drone strikes What? Republicans never had any problem with Obama's drone campaigns, and if you compile a list of Trump's policies Democrats have an issue with now, I doubt drones will be in the top #10. It would be nice if people kept talking about drone strikes and their victims, but we don't. Either under Obama or under Trump. > Russia You can't be seriously saying Obama had a Russian connection? Remember, "Hillary will start a war with Russia" was literally a major talking point by Trump supporters.
- Svexark 10y agoThese senators filibustered for 12 hours in 2013 to protest Obama's drone strikes. It was kind of a big deal at the time. #StandWithRand ring a bell? Perhaps you're not old enough to remember. Rand Paul (R) Ted Cruz (R) Marco Rubio (R) Mike Lee (R) Pat Toomey (R) John Thune (R) John Barrasso (R) Tim Scott (R) John Cornyn (R) Jerry Moran (R) Ron Johnson (R) Jeff Flake (R) Mitch McConnell (R) Saxby Chambliss (R) Mark Kirk (R) Sen. Ron Wyden (D)
- mnm1 10y agoNote that some airlines, like Delta, do not allow computers or lithium batteries in checked luggage (for example: https://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/baggage/before-your-trip/special-items.html https://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/ba... && https://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/baggage/before-your-trip/restricted-items.html https://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/ba...) so this essentially means that other than phones, these things are completely banned and will have to be shipped separately or not shipped at all. EDIT: Also, no airline that I know of will insure these items when checked in for more than $100 on international flights (please correct if I'm wrong). So if you can get them in at all, like the article says, they will be stolen.
- vmarsy 10y ago> Note that some airlines, like Delta, do not allow computers or lithium batteries in checked luggage [...] so this essentially means that other than phones, these things are completely banned and will have to be shipped separately or not shipped at all. This is incorrect, only spare batteries aren't allowed in checked baggage, computers are fine. From your second link [1]: > Lithium ion batteries installed in a personal electronic device can be transported as checked or carry on baggage. Lithium ion batteries not installed in a device (spares) must be in carry-on baggage and no more than two (2) spares between 100 and 160 watt hours are allowed. [1] https://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/baggage/before-your-trip/restricted-items.html https://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/ba...
- mnm1 10y agoThe first link says: "Computers or computer-related equipment are not allowed as checked baggage. You can, of course, bring your laptop computers as carry-on." It's unclear between the two links which one applies. Anyway, I'd check with the airline before trying to check in such equipment.
- JamilD 10y agoI'm convinced this ban is motivated by a protectionist desire from the US-based airlines, to dissuade business travelers from flying on Middle Eastern airlines like Emirates and Qatar, which necessarily transit through countries like the UAE. If you're someone who flies for work, there's no way you're going to take a flight where you can't use your laptop.
- pavel_lishin 10y agoAre the listed airlines the only ones that have direct flights to the US?
- itchyjunk 10y agoWhen I was passing through Singapore once, two Americans in front of me started taking their shoes off right before the security check. The security officer gave them a weird look and said they can put it back on because he uses a scanner and doesn't need to look inside everyones shoe. Fast forward 3 years and i'm reading comments on HN about double security check not being bad heh. Checked in bag is not free. Checked in bags also get manhandled unless you pay hefty to get the fragile tag and insurance. For someone cheap like me who carries a backpack which is free so far, the extra cost is my biggest concern. Hope something like this doesn't happen in domestic flights. Edit: typos
- jacquesm 10y ago> Checked in bag is not free. Checked in bags also get manhandled unless you pay hefty to get the fragile tag and insurance. Assuming it arrives at all... it could be a very expensive bag. And laptops in checked luggage is just asking for them to walk off. There is absolutely no way I'd check my laptop, then again, I'm not planning on going to the United States before the madness stops and if I would I probably would not fly through any country that this is all about. Even so, it does not strike me as a policy that has been thought about for a very long time. Having laptops in the passenger area means that if something bad does happen something could be done about it. Having them in the cargo compartment means that if a fire should start it could get quite bad before it gets noticed and the extinguisher gets used. If they're scared of bombs then they should not be on board at all, cargo hold or passenger compartment doesn't matter. So I really don't understand the point of this, maybe time will bring me to see the reasoning but right now I can't.
- diminoten 10y ago...I feel like no one here read the article. Based on these comments, one might think that A) this had never happened before (it has), or B) it was permanent (it's a 96 hour ban).
- boomboomsubban 10y agoThe article says indefinite, though it's been updated since you posted.
- andrioni 10y agoThe linked article (at least right now, AP via Bloomberg) actually says the ban is indefinite. >The ban was indefinite, said the official. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-20/some-electronics-to-be-banned-on-some-us-bound-flights https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-20/some-elec...
- gibbitz 10y agoI'm curious what threat an iPad poses that a cellphone doesn't and what a terrorist can't do with a chron job that they would otherwise do with a laptop. It's not like they use a teleporter when they check your bags. It's clear that if our regulations and bureaucrats are all we have to protect us from "evildoers" we're all doomed by their ignorance of the simplicity of working around this...
- ars 10y agoA cellphone is small, and doesn't have much room, that's all. It's not the electronics per say, it's the difficulty of checking inside them. That's why only certain airports are included, those that check things properly are not.
- astrodust 10y agoThis makes almost zero sense, and it's likely that there will be zero explanation as to why any of this is necessary. If there's a threat this only introduces a minor inconvenience to those looking to carry out an attack. Is getting a connecting flight in some country like Germany going to be hard?
- zeroer 10y agoThis is probably a first step towards a ban on all flights for that exact reason.
- greglindahl 10y ago... which would increase risk, because battery fires are worse in checked bags than in the main cabin/overheads.
- astrodust 10y agoConsidering zero fires in carry-on have caused plane crashes, but a non-zero number in cargo have, yeah, basically this makes it way worse.
- notliketherest 10y agolikely Homeland Security wants to be able to search the contents of the laptops - easier to do this when they're checked.
- ryukafalz 10y agoOn the plus side, it's harder to compel you to decrypt your disk if you're nowhere near it at the time.
- jamoes 10y agoOn the minus side, they can install malware on your machine without your knowledge (even if your disk is encrypted).
- walrus01 10y agoOr a hardware based keystroke logger.
- ploggingdev 10y agoSource? How is it possible to install malware when the disk is encrypted?
- bdg 10y agoDrive firmware exploits have been around for long enough you can do it at home.
- jhlgkhkhil 10y agoIn one of the flash chips? Or a hardware module?
- photon-torpedo 10y agoThere have been some reports about UEFI-based malware, which can hook into the OS boot process. I guess this could also work even if the disk is encrypted. First Google hit for "UEFI malware": http://www.pcworld.com/article/2948092/security/hacking-teams-malware-uses-uefi-rootkit-to-survive-os-reinstalls.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/2948092/security/hacking-team...
- beedogs 10y agoWhat brave people Americans are lately. Afraid of an iPad being used on a plane.
- castis 10y agoOnly naivety would lead someone to lump all Americans together and claim they are collectively responsible for this. Also, America is a big place [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas
- anigbrowl 10y agoOddly, that's exactly how I feel about profiling of people from the Middle East.
- cyberferret 10y agoYes, lumping everyone from the same geographic area or ethnic group into one generic stereotype basket can be somewhat irksome. Note: Not a snarky comeback at your post per se, just that a lot of people tend to be oblivious to generic stereotyping unless they are the subject of it, and I am hoping that others reading this thread may have an "Aha" moment. Addendum: As big as the US is, if you pooled all land masses that have a majority Muslim population, I believe it would dwarf the USA.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- kartickv 10y agoThis affects people from many countries, not just the seven or eight targeted initially. For example, I stay in India, and if I visit the US, I may fly via Dubai. Which means, in turn, that I'm less likely to visit. Why take a 20-hour flight and subject myself to "extreme vetting"?
- whyenot 10y agoIf it is going to place burdensome carry on restrictions on people the US government could at least explain why the measures are necessary. At the rate we are going, it's not going to be long before you will not be allowed to bring any carry on luggage at all when flying from certain airports. Maybe everyone should fly naked. Who knows, someone might have plastic explosives sewn into their clothes. Wait, what if someone swallows the explosives? Maybe everyone should be forced to take an emetic and get a colonoscopy before flying.
- marcoperaza 10y agoThey did explain why they're necessary. You wouldn't know that from the cynical comments on HackerNews though. From the CNN article about this: >The official said the move is partly based on intelligence that they believe indicates Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is close to being able to hide explosives with little or no metal content in electronic devices in order to target commercial aircraft. It's a particular concern at these airports because of screening issues and the possibility of terrorists infiltrating authorized airport personnel, the official said. Flight and cabin crews are not covered by these new restrictions. In February 2016, a bomb hidden inside a laptop detonated aboard a Daallo Airlines flight out of Mogadishu, Somalia. The bomber was killed and a hole was blown in the side of the fuselage. The aircraft landed safely.
- ocschwar 10y agoWhat utter bullshit. If they allow phones at all, then the threat cannot be an issue of a passenger sending a command out of one of these. The threat has to be the device itself. Now, a standard issue iPad is no threat, so we're talking about a customized device made to look like on. Except, if terrorists are going to the trouble to do this, they can just as easily put whatever bad thing they want to put into the case of an insulin pump, and bypass the ban. This. Is. Bullshit.
- wapz 10y agoI agree with you completely. Banning the devices is really not going to do anything but piss off customers (maybe make a few feel safer).
- kobeya 10y agoIt's going to put laptops in the baggage where they can be pulled out and their data dumped for dragnet surveillance.
- jerf 10y agoAs much as I enjoy a good conspiracy theory, there's just not enough time for that, with the timing as tight as it is. A particular target with a focused scan, sure. Mass surveillance dragnet? No way. Not unless the NSACIAFBI have a way of dumping a hard drive without turning on the machine at speeds faster than a disk can even dump itself. (Try pouring out your biggest spinning rust drive out over any port that can keep up with the drive. It takes hours nowadays. SSDs can bottleneck at the port instead of the drive, but you can't count on your target having one yet, nor can you count on the fastest ports being available. And we're certainly not going to mass-disassemble laptops to dump their drives.)
- Terr_ 10y agoOn the other hand, installing simple "retro-reflector" bugs for future use is a possibility. [0] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/06/building_retro_.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/06/building_retr...
- jpatokal 10y agoThe Big 4 Middle East/Gulf airlines (Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, Turkish) have been giving legacy US carriers a lot of grief lately, since they're both cheaper and better on essentially all counts, so I can't help but wonder if they have their finger in the pie here. Few businessmen will opt to fly long-haul if they can't use their laptops, and they're specifically targeting 9 airlines here, not just airports or countries. It's also beyond bizarre that the US trusts Abu Dhabi's security enough to locate its only Middle Eastern Customs/Immigration preclearance facility, but not enough to let passengers who have gone through security bring tablets...
- waqf 10y agoThat's incredibly evil, but I'm sad to say that after some thought I believe you. It's hard to think of another reason why the ban would be given as a list of specific airports — and it just so happens that American carriers don't fly direct to any of the specified cities. (AA sells flights to a few but they are all codeshares, thanks JamilD for correcting my previous statement.) (Plus, can confirm that the ME airlines are highly competitive. They're subsidized by their governments: http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2015/03/airline-subsidies-gulf http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2015/03/airline-subs... (thanks hueving)).
- JamilD 10y agoJetBlue codeshares with Emirates, who flies to Dubai. JetBlue is a relatively small, mostly domestic airline without any widebody planes. American doesn't fly to any Middle Eastern cities but they partner with both Etihad and Qatar, who do.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- chimeracoder 10y ago> Plus, can confirm that the ME airlines are highly competitive. They're subsidized by their governments That's not true, at least not for Emirates and Etihad, which were the main airlines accused. Delta and other US airlines did accuse them of violating the Open Skies agreement, yes. Which is quite hypocritical since Delta (like other US airlines) has also taken direct subsidies from the US government. But, as Emirates showed in their subsequent lawsuit, their financial records prove that they have never taken government subsidies, despite Delta's accusations. Etihad did, but long before Open Skies was signed (1999). This behavior isn't unusual; the Big Four are just using this as an easy way to smear their biggest competitors, while ignoring other airlines that have similar financial history (China Southern, etc.). But China Southern isn't (currently) drawing passengers away from the Big Four, whereas Emirates/Etihad/Qatar are. The Gulf aiflines are more efficient than the US airlines because they exclusively serve one city - Emirates, for example, flies only flights to or from Dubai (with a couple of tiny exceptions). That makes it a lot easier to provide excellent service and cheap flights.
- jpatokal 10y agoThe Big 4 Middle East/Gulf airlines (Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, Turkish) have been giving legacy US carriers a lot of grief lately, since they're both cheaper and better on essentially all counts, so I can't help but wonder if they have their finger in the pie here. Few businessmen will opt to fly long-haul if they can't use their laptops, and they're specifically targeting 9 airlines here, not just airports or countries. It's also beyond bizarre that the US trusts Abu Dhabi's security enough to locate its only Middle Eastern Customs/Immigration preclearance facility, but not enough to let passengers who have gone through security bring tablets...
- waqf 10y ago[duplicate comment, admins merged two stories]
- hueving 10y ago>Plus, can confirm that the ME airlines are highly competitive Very, they are subsidized by their governments. http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2015/03/airline-subsidies-gulf http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2015/03/airline-subs...
- goodplay 10y agoGuess the US government should do the same. You either play by the rules of the game, or don't play altogether.
- ZeroGravitas 10y agoThey could work together to rewrite the rules of the game to be better for everyone. But since the G20 just had to take out wording about the dangers of protectionism to keep the US happy, I'd guess we're going for the tragedy of the commons version.
- Gargoyle 10y agoCan anyone think of an attack this would prevent? Anything a pad (or even a laptop) could do could be done by a phone, at least hackingwise or whatever. So something with the physical aspect. A jammer of some sort? A way to intentionally explode batteries in a harmful way?
- KirinDave 10y agoIt's not about preventing attacks. But our new fun game should be putting usb nuke sticks in a small, conspicuous envelope in our luggage, maybe with a few crips hundred dollar bills.
- hoodoof 10y agoI've seen it quite a few times. Someone answers their cell phone mid-flight - BOOM! Down goes the plane, steep descent, passengers screaming, masks drop from the ceiling, until that phone call ends and the plane straightens up. Blanket ban on electronics is the only way to stop this happening. One time I was flying and someone had forgotten to turn off their phone until the plane was in the air and it interfered with the navigation systems and we landed in London instead of Paris. Very ocnfuisng.
- Cyph0n 10y agoI'm not sure if you're joking or not... Regardless, the ban does not affect cell phones.
- rangibaby 10y agoJoking for sure. When I flew domestic in China people were using their phones the whole time.
- Cyph0n 10y agoI'm aware that using a phone on a plane does no harm, but I just wanted to make sure you didn't actually mean it.
- lb1lf 10y agoSure it does. To the cellphone networks. (Unless the aircraft carries its own picocell). The big problem with cellphones on planes is that they overwhelm the signalling networks on the ground - when the carrier tries to determine which cell is best suited to handle your call, it basically polls the neighbouring cells for the received signal strength from that particular phone. When you're on a plane, your phone is seen from an awful lot of cells. Also, some systems (GSM, for instance) relies on your velocity compared to the base station not being too large to allocate you a slot in the time-multiplexed channels. Depending on the geometry of the cell network, you may not be able to connect at all when on a plane - but your phone may create all sorts of grief for the network operator. Or, put another way - if there really was a non-zero probability that a working cellphone on a plane would cause trouble, the TSA would simply collect the phones during boarding and being caught with one would give you the full terrorist treatment. Given the abundance of cellphones and the sloppiness of people, I think it is probably safe to say that no commercial flight has taken off without at least one active cell-phone aboard for the past twenty years or so.
- tempestn 10y agoI have no evidence to support this, but one possibility is that they'd like the opportunity to study those devices without the owners' awareness. It sounds a little tinfoil hat, but in the absence of a better explanation (aside from really poor security theater) it starts to look plausible.
- denom 10y agoThis wouldn't have anything to do with a certain congressional hearing going on today?
- sbuttgereit 10y agoThe article makes passing reference at the end, but isn't forcing these devices to be in checked bags actually more dangerous than some vague terrorist threat? While still relatively rare, it seems that Li-ion batteries catching fire in the cargo hold is still a bit more risky than the likelihood of what they're trying to address happening. (I suspect they are acting on some more credible intelligence in this matter, but clearly not so specific that they can target their actions and have to come up with something that itself poses a risk.)
- untog 10y agoThis is how they implement the Muslim ban. Piece by piece, bit by bit, they make it utterly infuriating for any Muslim person to travel to the US. Next they'll ban absolutely all liquids, or something.
- hn_lurker45 10y agoLiquids are already banned to a large extent. You have to buy it inside the terminal after you get security clearance.
- molmalo 10y agoIn most of the airports (if not all) that I have been lately, there are water refilling stations, usually close to the restrooms or after you pass through the security checkpoint. I usually pass security with my plastic bottle empty, and then refill it with those machines.
- chrismcb 10y agoThis is fine for domestic travel, but not nessesarily for travel to the US. Many of these flights have additional security at the gate just prior to boarding. US is way too paranoid
- venomsnake 10y agoi would suggest trying El Al then ... they have missile defense systems on their civilian planes. And it is recommended to arrive at least 4 hours early on Ben Gurion ...
- bootload 10y ago" there are water refilling stations, usually close to the restrooms or after you pass through the security checkpoint. " Done that, security check on one flight I was on at boarding forced all liquids to be emptied.
- 10y ago
- draw_down 10y agoWe are real idiots.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- somethingsimple 10y agoSometimes I think this is going to get to a point where they'll have people remove their clothes prior to boarding and dress a special suit so they're allowed to fly without being considered a threat.
- s5fs 10y agoThat's why in old scifi movies everyone wears jumpsuits on spaceships, makes getting through security much faster.
- KirinDave 10y agoI see many people here trying to puzzle out why electronics are under a partial ban from cabins but not from checked baggage. It's a good question, since if there is a fire or explosion hazard on a plane the last place you want it is wrapped in a wad of flammable cloth and synthetics, even if it is oxygen starved. The only motivation I can imagine is: They want these devices in checked luggage because checked luggage can be inspected without recourse by customs, and without an on-site confrontation. With care, it can be done without even notifying the people who are being checked. And given the pushback on social media credential disclosure and the reveal that the CIA (and presumably FBI and other agencies) have physical access exploits (probably via USB or DisplayPort) for most of these devices, this seems like a move who's only logical motivation could be easier digital inspection. Remember, it's the position of the TSA and CBP that non-citizens don't have rights of any kind until they're allowed through customs, and by simply inspecting devices they're interested in quickly and without publicity or confrontation they will certainly be more effective at it. I'm going to start putting a USB nuke stick in my luggage in an envelope. Just for fun. Maybe I'll label the envelope something nonsensical like "12-16" just to make sure people know it's useless. And in case I (or someone investigating my luggage) needs to plug something into a USB slot.
- GuiA 10y agoThis. And also people not having devices on their person means they can't quickly text friends/family if they get detained/mistreated/etc. It seems like we're getting closer and closer to being in a situation where people who can should avoid going to the US at all, and make their reasoning known. Ie, refuse to give talks, attend conferences, etc. in the US.
- rebootthesystem 10y agoReminds me of something from about fifteen years ago. I was training getting into R/C helicopters. No, not the toys they sell at the mall but the more sophisticated models flown by R/C pilots. Needless to say, they are not easy to fly. Even with twenty years experience flying R/C airplanes of all kinds I had to start from scratch. R/C heli's can be very expensive to crash. A set of carbon fiber rotors and related mechanics will easily set you back well of $200. I was intent on learning without crashing. How? Use an R/C flight simulator and log hundreds of hours before flying the real thing. I was flying back and forth to Europe a bunch during that time. It was only logical to take my flight simulator with me and practice during the long flight. That meant my laptop along with a special full size R/C controller with a USB cord instead of the antenna. This rig always called attention to itself and was a pretty good conversation starter. I always had to explain what it was while going through security. On two flight the pilot came over to my seat to check out what I was doing. In both cases they asked to see if they could fly the simulated heli. And, sorry to say, in both cases they failed miserably. It was a great way to get 16+ hours of practice. Not sure I could do that today.
- ohazi 10y agoRealFlight? I had a similar control box that used a game port (D-sub) before USB was common.
- rebootthesystem 10y agoI have both RealFlight and PhoenixRC. For heli training Phoenix feels better to me. Also, you can use your real RC transmitter to run the simulator, in my case I run JR transmitters. The down side is that you can't (shouldn't) run a real transmitter while flying in an airliner. Yes, when plugged into Phoenix the TX circuitry turns off, but I wouldn't want to answer those questions so I use RealFlight and their dummy transmitter for that purpose. There's something uniquely geeky about flying in a flight simulator while flying on a real plane. Like I said, good conversation starter.
- TuringNYC 10y agoPersonally speaking, laptops I can do without, but Kindles are like oxygen on long-haul flights. This is incredibly disappointing.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- youjelly 10y agoPermanently infect the EFI on the laptop, while its enroute without your permission. Removing the hard drive is not a remedy, maybe remove the battery as well?
- fpoling 10y agoWhat is remarkable is that the order bans electronics on flights from Saudi Arabia. I thought Saudi Arabia was still untouchable especially after the travel buns that excluded the country where terrorists harmed US most originated or got financial support. So however weak, it does add a credibility that the ban is based on some intelligence.
- pmontra 10y ago> Royal Jordanian said the electronics ban affects its flights to New York, Chicago, Detroit and Montreal. Montreal, USA?
- cperciva 10y agoApparently some flights to Canada are affected due to passing through US airspace.
- int_19h 10y agoTo clarify, US - unique among all countries, so far as I know - asserts that its rules apply in full to any aircraft (and their passengers, luggage etc) traversing its airspace, even if neither the origin nor the destination is actually in US.
- madcaptenor 10y agoNothing so complicated. Royal Jordanian flights from Amman to Detroit stop in Montreal. http://flightaware.com/live/flight/RJA267 http://flightaware.com/live/flight/RJA267 http://flightaware.com/live/flight/RJA268 http://flightaware.com/live/flight/RJA268
- BrailleHunting 10y agoHassling visitors arbitrarily, haphazardly and somewhat discriminatorily makes a country less cool and more autocratic. And talent, capital and tax revenue finds other places to which to flock.
- marcoperaza 10y agoThere's lots of snarky and unjustified cynicism here, given that concealing explosives in laptops is not a theoretical risk; it was recently done. Here's an excerpt from the CNN article: >The official said the move is partly based on intelligence that they believe indicates Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is close to being able to hide explosives with little or no metal content in electronic devices in order to target commercial aircraft. It's a particular concern at these airports because of screening issues and the possibility of terrorists infiltrating authorized airport personnel, the official said. Flight and cabin crews are not covered by these new restrictions. In February 2016, a bomb hidden inside a laptop detonated aboard a Daallo Airlines flight out of Mogadishu, Somalia. The bomber was killed and a hole was blown in the side of the fuselage. The aircraft landed safely.
- TillE 10y ago1) We already have screening processes for that. 2) So the bomb is now in the hold. That's not really much of an improvement.
- marcoperaza 10y agoRemote or timed detonation is trickier than manual detonation. I'm not familiar with how checked luggage is screened, but it's possible that it is potentially controlled by the US for flights heading to the US, or otherwise more reliable. Again: >It's a particular concern at these airports because of screening issues and the possibility of terrorists infiltrating authorized airport personnel, the official said.
- stuaxo 10y agoThose guys were doing it non-manually when nokias were the phone of choice, and back in the day the IRA probably used plain clocks, it's not going to be much extra hassle for them.
- addicted 10y agoDo the physical properties of explosives change when they happen to travel outside these specific airports?
- ccrush 10y agoIs it really that hard to see that laptops and tablets could be disassembled, sharpened, and re-assembled pre-flight, and then come apart to make a set of very dangerous knives? How is this not expected to be a problem? Maybe, if ass holes didnt hijack airplanes, we wouldn't have these ridiculous restrictions. In the meantime, "I'm gonna need to look inside yo' ass hole, sir."
- kylehotchkiss 10y agoThe reason people are most upset is because of how widespread theft from baggage is. In many of the destinations you need a gulf carrier to connect you do, you don't want to put a $1000+ device in a checked bag. I guess you could do the crazy plastic bag warp thing. But that doesn't answer the question of your things being stolen in the USA, which seems even more likely due to the people on the line knowing the value of the things in your pack. Maybe it's time for a kickstarter for an accelerometer/wifi network logger/audio recorder/camera that all activate when the bag is open so you can receive audio and video of the person stealing your things.
- JBerlinsky 10y agoI have a feeling that sales of glitter nail polish are going to go up a bit[1]. This is a good time to make sure that you have full-disk encryption enabled, and to brush up on what few rights remain yours at a US border. 1: http://lifehacker.com/use-glitter-nail-polish-to-make-your-laptop-tamper-proo-1493599646 http://lifehacker.com/use-glitter-nail-polish-to-make-your-l...
- giarc 10y agoI've used destructible labels before, not for my computer, but for barcoding equipment. They work quite well, only issue might be wear and tear over time will start to naturally destroy the label. http://images.tamperevidentlabels.com/companies/tamperevidentlabels/slide-01.jpg http://images.tamperevidentlabels.com/companies/tampereviden...
- qordoba 10y agoIf the new law does not apply to flights operated by American companies it only shows that this is the beginning of trade war and sanctions against Muslim nations. It is nothing to do with safety of people. Period.
- exabrial 10y agoI'm waiting for media to spin this as "anti Muslim" yet again. I wonder if the true reason is because USA does not trust overseas security (which doesn't make a lot of sense, you have to recheck your carry-ons/luggage after customs), or if it's a means to get a closer look at your electronics when you're not there, or just because there's been an incident (the TSA actually managed to catch a threat) that we're not privvy to. From what I understand, laptops are a bit harder to xray which is why they're screen separate from other items.
- ge96 10y agoPossible business, rentable laptops.
- nikdaheratik 10y agoThis is so frustrating because, even if there is a credible case for putting these limits on these specific airports, the Administration has done so much to trash the reputation of both its own appointees and CBP. You can't help but wonder if there's an ulterior motive to this and they're still understaffed and so poor at getting the message out that we may never be sure.
- nthcolumn 10y agoI'm surprised there still are US-Bound flights.
- bzbarsky 10y agoWhat I find interesting is that neither the article nor any of the comments mentions that the UK is doing the same thing. See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-airlines-electronics-idUSKBN16S11Q http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-airlines-electronics-i...