Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

[AgentDarkApple]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582373,00.html - JFK Airport Detectors Miss Reporter's Titanium

Hmmm another question about the checkpoints - if someone has a titanium item in their carry-on (not hidden in their clothes like the reporter in the story), are the scanners/xray machines supposed to detect it? I have flown several times with my titanium spork in my backpack, and nobody has ever said a word about it.

[streaker69]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...0107-lvyq.html

Authorities say scanned images will not be stored.

"In fact, all machines are delivered to airports with [save] functions disabled," says the US Transport Security Administration, which has rolled out the machines to 19 airports.

But this might not be enough.

This is what they say, but you know that it'll get changed. My issue with this is, there's no damn reason to have these things connected to any network. The best kind of security for this would be an airgap. If there's an issue, then a security team physically visits the device, downloads the images (since we know they'll be stored) and then investigates on another system that is not connected to a network. There's no reason to have every single computer on the planet connected to a network.

[theprez98]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

That's precisely the problem. Privacy advocates have wanted a blurring of the face and genitals. However, since the Christmas Day wannabe bomber had the PETN in his underpants, blurring the genital areas doesn't seem to be a good idea; at least if you are going to rely on these scanners.

Sounds like we're back to strip, shrink rap and Ambien.

[Thorn]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

...
It probably wouldn't be too hard to make a script to blur the genitals a little, but then maybe people could get through who decided to make a dildo out of plastic explosives.

...

That's precisely the problem. Privacy advocates have wanted a blurring of the face and genitals. However, since the Christmas Day wannabe bomber had the PETN in his underpants, blurring the genital areas doesn't seem to be a good idea; at least if you are going to rely on these scanners.

[heisenbug]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

Might want to check again. UK has the problem law.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582027,00.html

Ouch. Child porn vs. maybe not dying. Not any easy decision if the not dying isn't really certain.

It probably wouldn't be too hard to make a script to blur the genitals a little, but then maybe people could get through who decided to make a dildo out of plastic explosives.

I am glad I am not in charge of making that decision at the airport.

[streaker69]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

I've heard that one for a while, if you make a law wide enough, it's likely to overlap something. Though I don't think that is distinctive beween Europe/ROW and the USA. It may even be a bigger issue in the USA than elsewhere.

Might want to check again. UK has the problem law.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582027,00.html

Ian Dowty, legal adviser to Action on Rights for Children, said he believes it would be a criminal offense to operate the scanners or to direct anyone to operate them if they are used to produce images of children under the age of 18.

[charliex]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

I've heard that one for a while, if you make a law wide enough, it's likely to overlap something. Though I don't think that is distinctive beween Europe/ROW and the USA. It may even be a bigger issue in the USA than elsewhere.

[DaKahuna]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

Amsterdam airport had the full body scanners in test /secondary screen before the USA did, and that the USA house voted against their usage as primary scanners.

Not so fast -- read today where there is now an issue with the use of the full body scanners on minors is being seen as child pornography!

[charliex]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

Amsterdam airport had the full body scanners in test /secondary screen before the USA did, and that the USA house voted against their usage as primary scanners. Amsterdam has something like 15 machines, and they've supposedly ordered another 60 more.

Granted some people say these machines aren't effective, but now they are being deployed in the USA too.

You're fooling yourself if you don't think the USA has some very serious political whack with other countries, they've interferred with other countries on a lot less than this.

[streaker69]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

The testing for *carry-on* luggage I've seen includes an employee bringing up a bag with known "bad items" for scanning. They act like a traveler, and wait for security to be called. This contains the test to the location being tested, and only involves people that are part of test test, no civilians. Why can't this be applied to internal testing of checked luggage? The luggage could be luggage not associated with any real passenger, only luggage owned by the people testing the system at the site. (The test I observed for carry-on luggage was at a New York or New Jersey airport.)

Plus, why did they need to use 90Grams of RDX in the test they did with this guy? Couldn't they have used something with the same consistency and density as RDX with a little bit of the real stuff sprinkled over it for the smell? To plant 90grams on someone and then lose track of it is insane. What if they had planted in a child's bag that was traveling with their parents, or even a lone for that matter?

What if they planted it in a soldier's bag that happened to set off the detectors at the main gate because of explosive residue on his clothes from being in an active war zone and then they find RDX in his checked luggage? You'd hope they'd have it sorted out, but what if it wasn't found until he had already left the airport where it was planted.

This method of testing seems to be terribly flawed.

[TheCotMan]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

The testing for *carry-on* luggage I've seen includes an employee bringing up a bag with known "bad items" for scanning. They act like a traveler, and wait for security to be called. This contains the test to the location being tested, and only involves people that are part of test test, no civilians. Why can't this be applied to internal testing of checked luggage? The luggage could be luggage not associated with any real passenger, only luggage owned by the people testing the system at the site. (The test I observed for carry-on luggage was at a New York or New Jersey airport.)

[streaker69]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

Common practice actually. A random bag is picked and contraband is inserted to test the system. Unfortunately, when the system fails, as it has many times in the past, the innocent victim is in for a big surprise. But in this case that's f*cked up!

I think it's fucked up to begin with of picking innocent citizens to do that, especially since they were using a real explosive. What if the guy got it home and it somehow detonated?

It's total bullshit to be subjecting innocent people to that kind of thing.

[beakmyn]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

This is most curious:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01...n_electrician/



So authorities basically framed an innocent man in an attempt to test security. WTF!?!

Common practice actually. A random bag is picked and contraband is inserted to test the system. Unfortunately, when the system fails, as it has many times in the past, the innocent victim is in for a big surprise. But in this case that's f*cked up!

[streaker69]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

This is most curious:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01...n_electrician/

The unnamed sparks was returning to Ireland, where's he's lived for four years, unaware that his baggage contained enough RDX "to blow up the plane mid-air". The plastic was one of "eight pieces of contraband... planted by the authorities in the baggage of innocent passengers to test the airport’s security procedures".

So authorities basically framed an innocent man in an attempt to test security. WTF!?!

[Lowie]

Re: Recent Events - Airplane Bathroom Cameras

Ah yes, I missed that one! But yeah, the point remains. They don't give a shit about our rules.

This is true.

But is that not inevitable when, as pointed out many times in this thread and others, those rules that these countries don't give a shit about have become incredibly convoluted and mostly pointless?