TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

[theprez98]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

As expected, bruce makes a post: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive...rline_sec.html
(some good links from that post too)

Bruce also wrote:

Given how little we know of the extent of the plot, these don't seem like rediculous short-term measures. I'm sure glad I'm not flying anywhere this week.

[Twigman]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

There is a lot on the BBC news website, including the Bomb making for dummies FAQ:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4780391.stm

Also a lot of scaremongering from the people in charge which really doesn't help at all.

UK police said the explosions could have caused "mass murder on an unimaginable scale".

I am meant to be flying next weekend and my parents are flying this weekend. I want to know what they are going to do with electronic equipment like laptops, phones etc. Potentially each person could have thousands of dollars of electrical equipment. Are they going to ensure their safe passage with the hold luggage? I know my insurance probably wouldnt pay out if my laptop gets smashed up with everyone elses checked in lugagge. I am not looking forward to it. You are not even allowed to take books onboard. There was a quote from one person flying 24 hours to Autralia, asking what he's meant to do as everything has to be checked in. Also I was quite looking forward to making the most of my duty free allowance and stocking up on alcohol :( Oh well.

One last thought:
http://www.xopl.com/blog/2006/08/10/crockofshit.html
A basic chemistry knowledge will show that mixing everyones liquids that they could be carrying together is one very stupid idea. If the terrorists were carrying the right equipment they have just managed to blow up an airport instead of a plane... I just cant believe the stupidity of some people in authoritative positions.

[renderman]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

I'm just waiting for the day when everyone has to check everything, strip down and get into airline issue jumpsuits and be properly "secured" ala Hannibal Lecter:

http://www.tumbaabierta.com/cripta/img/lecter_2.jpg

[dYn4mic]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

[snip]
You are not even allowed to take books onboard.
[snip]

Do you have anything to back this up? I can't believe they would ban books on flights. This would be over the edge.

[Abby_Normal]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

Do you have anything to back this up? I can't believe they would ban books on flights. This would be over the edge.

I have read this in a few articles, but as far as I know it's only in the UK.

[Twigman]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

Do you have anything to back this up? I can't believe they would ban books on flights. This would be over the edge.

Sorry yeah that is mostly the UK, but

U.S. Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Michigan, said the plot "eliminates the days of carry-on baggage," according to The Associated Press.

So the restrictions on no hand luggage except passport and tickets are from the UK to the US, but its ok, just check in your bomb making liquids, and on your return flight from the US back to UK you'll be fine :) I had incorrectly assumed it was the same for both ways across the atlantic.

EDIT: What do you think are reliable news sources in the US? I hear about Fox being so one sided etc, and people complain about certain websites, but I hear no praise for anyone particularly? Any generally unbiased national/international US based sites? From the point of view of the UK, I think it's generally accepted that the BBC do a resonable job.

[Abby_Normal]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

EDIT: What do you think are reliable news sources in the US? I hear about Fox being so one sided etc, and people complain about certain websites, but I hear no praise for anyone particularly? Any generally unbiased national/international US based sites? From the point of view of the UK, I think it's generally accepted that the BBC do a resonable job.

Well, I am in the US, but I like BBC for news. I find CNN is ok some of the time.

I don't know about everyone else, but all I want from the news is the news. Just a boring guy in a suit giving me the facts. No human interest crap, no editoral garbage, no sports, just cold hard facts.

So yeah, BBC. :-)

[renderman]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

Interesting link http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2300460&page=1
The possibility for use of a binary mix of liquid explosives was known for some time but put on a back burner. I am curious about the possible political movites of doing something about it now.

An overarching problem is that the bar has been set too high by politicians and civil aviation authorities in terms of airline safety. They are going off the deep end, not because of wanting to save lives, but to save thier own ass from the political reparcussions of anything bad happening.

They have been aiming and telling people that they are removing all terrorist risk and all risk in general. As we all know, this is impossible, but various authorities are not telling people that they can't do everything because they've backed themselves in a corner, they can't admit that they can't make things 100% safe.

I for one would like the ability to get on a flight and waive my right to absolute safety in exchange for not having to be stripped and anally probed to get on board.

Strip everyone down, lock em in seperate cages and you still have external threats. Anyone who remembers how low the planes were flying on approach to the Vegas airport knows that they were well within range of a stinger missle from anywhere on the south end of the strip.

Life carries risk, deal with it. Flying at 500 Mph @ 36,000 feet is not a natural state for a human. Gravity is a hash misteress and will continue to be so as long as we fly. There will also be a certain percentage of nuts in the world wanting to others harm. Hell, even unintentionally. Every week you seem to hear a story of a senior citizen accidentially plowing through a group of people in a car. Life carries risk, you can minimize but not eliminate it. Your chances of dying in a plane crash are miniscule at best, even more miniscule is the chance that it will be caused by a terrorist act.

I am in agreement that train seems to make more and more sense. Unfortunatly I'm in the middle of nowhere and taking the train to NY or Vegas is a long and expensive thing.

[alklloyd]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

I went to Dallas straight from Defcon, so unfortunately had a Thursday flight back to Atlanta. No fun. TSA pulled me, searched/swabbed my pack and let me go. When I asked what was wrong, apparently they had never seen a Nostromo N52...
After I explained what it was, the 50-ish TSA lady then asked if it would be good for Everquest or WoW which she loves to play...I was her buddy then.
So the flight sucked, but at least I have a funny TSA story now.

Al

[astcell]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

Oh, so drinking your liquid is fine, because you won't drink it if it may make you sick, and you plan to DIE in an hour anyway, sheesh.

Now they have to train all the dogs to sniff out "liquids."

[shannon]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

Is there a good solution? Is the TSA doing all it can? Everyone here is UBER Smart.. I'm wondering if there are any things that ya'll can come up with to help thwart these guys from comming through. Example: a detector for liquids in a plastic bladder on a persons' body (like a metal detector)?? I mean, someone Idea-ed out a hack to turn our badges into Lie-Detectors.....

Please don't flame, I ~am~ new to this and this is NOT sarcastic.. I really am curious as to what the DefCon Community can come up with. Consider it a challenge? :D

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

I really am curious as to what the DefCon Community can come up with. Consider it a challenge? :D

it is an interesting challenge... and one that many of us enjoy putting our brains toward. however, it's also a dissapointing and frustrating mental venture, since we tire of reiterating the same ideas over and over to the point that they seem commonplace and therefore "not all that viable"... there's also the fact that virtually none of the really good ideas have any chance of being put into practice, since the system is so hopelessly broken at this point.

we don't need to reiterate all the same ideas we've had over and over... nowadays i just tend to direct people to Bruce Schneier's words on the subject for a decent overview of "sensible security" and how it differs from "security theater". i would also seriously recommend that people read (or at least gloss over the abstract of) Peter Swire's paper "Privacy and Information Sharing in the War on Terrorism" in which he makes the case that any security program should be run past a 10-point due diligence checklist before it is considered or deployed.

the thing is, our leaders and the individuals in charge of security measures are, for the most part, not very interested in real security... they are interested more in the appearance of security... if actual security happens to occurr, that's wonderful... they don't mind the notion of us being safer... but it's a distant afterthough to looking good in the press and keeping their budget allotments while doing the least amount of work possible.

real security takes effort, takes cooperation from the public, take research, and most of all it takes change... dramatic change in our values, policies, and practices. people (the public, administrators, businesses, etc) are very resistant to change. ask anyone who's ever been brought in to a site where they run WinNT 4.0 on totally unpatched servers. you could make the case for upgrading to a different O/S and implementing proper policies, but many times you'll be facing a chorus of voices saying how that's not feasable or they don't want it and asking why you can't just "fix" the servers they have (and keep coming back every week to do cleanup, etc)

[TheCotMan]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

* Require people to fly naked
* Don't allow any carry-on luggage
* Don't allow any checked luggage

(These three could speed the passage through the gate, and check-in.)

No Checked Luggage: require people to mail or send their checked items ahead on cargo jets, or through the Mail/USPS/UPS/FedEx.

"People-Movers" could use something like MRI to scan for foreign objects in people's bodiesand search for fluid filled containers with different density than the human body.

The above is not 100%, since conversion/turning, bribery, coersion, extortion, and blackmail of employees at the airport, such as baggage carriers, stewards/stewardesses, pilots, engineers, food service people and people who perform screening of passengers and employees then become the weak links.

Physical Access to the planes before and near time of departure become a weak link.

Oh yes, and the "cargo portion" of any plane is built to include farraday cage.

[theprez98]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

EDIT: What do you think are reliable news sources in the US? I hear about Fox being so one sided etc, and people complain about certain websites, but I hear no praise for anyone particularly? Any generally unbiased national/international US based sites? From the point of view of the UK, I think it's generally accepted that the BBC do a resonable job.

Without getting too political, I think the BBC is incredibly one-sided, especially in their coverage of the Israel-Hezbollah conflict.

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: TSA Is getting Silly, Part 2

continued line of thought from the theme of...

I really am curious as to what the DefCon Community can come up with. Consider it a challenge?

so, with a few hours sleep and a couple belts of whiskey i figured i'd take another crack at this... since i'm exceedingly upset at the scene i just saw at an airport (PHL) when dropping my g/f off for a flight over to Erie, PA. (long story short, we were going to drive to a wedding out there this weekend and i wound up not going so her family flew her at the last minute)

her flight leaves at 7:30. we were at the airport at about 5:15. it was already a total zoo. people all over the fucking place... lines spilling out through traffic and along sidewalks, people jammed up in the overhead concourses, just a total fuck-ass mess. i don't even want to know how much money, time, and effort is being wasted in this whole process.

here's a basic rundown that i can spit out before (hopefully) crashing out for a few more hours sleep before my day starts...

1. nobody can do anything of real significance with hand-to-hand weapons in the passenger compartment anymore. yes, terrorists were able to hijack the planes on 9-11 using box cutters and pepper spray. that will never happen again. cockpit doors have been reinforced and are (almost always) kept locked during flight. there is nothing a person could do within the passenger compartment with a knife, sword, mace, or possibly even a gun that could actually bring the plane down. continued harrassment of passengers over such items (i'll continue to support checking of firearms with luggage, however) is a waste of time and effort.

2. bombs remain the #1 threat to air travel safety, and almost all the time a bomb would have to travel in a checked piece of luggage. checked luggage should be protected by a three fold process... it should all be x-rayed, it should all be subjected to decompression tests before being loaded on the plane, and it should all travel in RF-insulated compartments. (we presently do not x-ray everything... i don't know the exact percentage but it's pretty sad if i recall correctly. other nations simulate the decreased barometric pressure of flight in a special chamber, to the best of my knowledge the USA doesn't do this, and while current baggage compartments are somewhat shielded due to the plane's metal hulls, they aren't perfect faraday cages.)

3. "noses", either on dogs or in electronic form, should be used to screen as many people and bags as possible... with the express and sole mission of detecting explosive material. dogs and equipment should be specifically trained/calibrated to not detect drugs or other illicit material which, while possibly illegal, is a waste of time to track, intercept, etc. it contributes nothing to passenger security if you detect someone carrying a vial of coke or a bag of weed. (full disclosure: those who know me best are aware that i favor the absolute and total legalization of all drugs.) any time spent on detecting, detaining, and searching someone suspected of a drug offense is time not spent on security.

4. lists of names do virtually nothing to make us more secure. they make us less safe, in fact, since any reliance on them takes up time and resources while not moving the ball down the field. to continue the sports analogy... i'd say it's roughly akin to using your linebackers as cheerleaders. yes, they might make the other players feel better, but the benefit of pep and morale that they provide would not come close to the value they would exhibit if kept on the field in order to assist with the actual running and passing of the ball. watch lists, the pre-screened traveler program, and anything else which involves passengers providing some proof of ID is one of the best examples of "security theater." if empowered to do only one thing, i would eliminate the requirement that passengers show ID during check-in, security screenings, boarding, etc. this change would bring about dramatic ways in which the people in charge of security would have to do their jobs. instead of relying on computer databases and words on a screen we would have to spend money on professionals who are adept at recognizing and interpreting suspicious behavior and we would have to invest in hardware that does the real work of security... namely explosive and radiation detectors, decompression chambers, etc.

just my $3.25... not like it'll make any difference anytime soon. the hiawatha brays of the world will keep writing article after article in the "you think you can do better than our present leaders, mister smarty man?!? what would you do to make us more secure?" format. (i'm not comparing you to mr. bray, btw... just bemoaning what seems to be a trend with no end in sight)