TSA will require separate screenings for electronics larger than a cell phone(theverge.com)
theverge.com
TSA will require separate screenings for electronics larger than a cell phone
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/26/16034694/tsa-xray-screening-electronics-tablets-laptops-game
70 comments
Me too. It's not just fact that TSA has the job to make travel more inconvenient and annoying and expensive, but that there seems to be no limit to how much extra expense and annoyance we're willing to let them inflict on us. And the fact that all this security theater clearly makes us less safe - killing extra people in car crashes and destroying economic productivity that could have saved far more lives.
There seems to be nobody willing to push back against the idiocy that is the TSA. In paying their salaries we are almost literally paying for rope to hang ourselves. If we can't eliminate or cut back programs this dumb and this destructive, is there any hope for technological progress at all? Or are all efforts to improve the human condition similarly doomed to be hamstrung by rent-seekers and grandstanders and paranoid muckrakers?
Every time I have to stand in that line I get a little bit more furious that we can't get rid of these idiots and their counterproductive procedures and just walk over to the gate and get on a plane like a civilized person.
There seems to be nobody willing to push back against the idiocy that is the TSA. In paying their salaries we are almost literally paying for rope to hang ourselves. If we can't eliminate or cut back programs this dumb and this destructive, is there any hope for technological progress at all? Or are all efforts to improve the human condition similarly doomed to be hamstrung by rent-seekers and grandstanders and paranoid muckrakers?
Every time I have to stand in that line I get a little bit more furious that we can't get rid of these idiots and their counterproductive procedures and just walk over to the gate and get on a plane like a civilized person.
I had to do this at DTW, I was carrying 3 laptops and 2 tablets. I also had my carry on searched because I had 12 cans of sardines which look funny in the x-ray.
Okay, I'll bite - why did you have 12 cans of sardines in carry on?
Just to eat, they're an easy ketogenic/low carb food. 12 cans is enough for one meal a day for the six days of my trip.
Just to mess with the agents.
I'm surprised that he didn't get required to throw them out. (They contain liquid)
I'm surprised that he didn't get required to throw them out. (They contain liquid)
Not cool. The agents are just trying to do their jobs. The fact that the system is fubar is not their fault.
On the other hand, people like you hold up the line for everyone.
On the other hand, people like you hold up the line for everyone.
The guy in front of me had 4 cans of soda which he had to throw out. My sardines just had to be scanned for explosives or whatever the scanner thing is, but it seemed like they were fine to bring.
At least they didn't see the supplement powder I packed in their own separate plastic baggies :)
At least they didn't see the supplement powder I packed in their own separate plastic baggies :)
Your supplement powder has different density than explosive, hence different color on their screens. They saw it for sure.
I wasn't worried about that, I was worried they would think it was drugs, since I had three snack bags full of white powder.
[deleted]
> The agents are just trying to do their jobs. The fact that the system is fubar is not their fault.
At many airports, they're not trying very hard - every time I ask for an opt out, they roll their eyes and drag their feet getting me checked out. Sometimes they give me verbal shit for it - which is part of the fubar-ness of the system, and is exactly their fault.
Having said that, I just try to get through with a minimum of interaction.
At many airports, they're not trying very hard - every time I ask for an opt out, they roll their eyes and drag their feet getting me checked out. Sometimes they give me verbal shit for it - which is part of the fubar-ness of the system, and is exactly their fault.
Having said that, I just try to get through with a minimum of interaction.
> At many airports, they're not trying very hard - every time I ask for an opt out, they roll their eyes and drag their feet getting me checked out.
Yes, that's because they think -- perhaps wrongly, but not entirely without justification -- that you are opting out in order to make some political statement or because you're frustrated with the process and are trying to take it out on them.
I don't think you have a full appreciate for how mind-numbing and soul-crushing a job being a front-line TSA agent can be.
Yes, that's because they think -- perhaps wrongly, but not entirely without justification -- that you are opting out in order to make some political statement or because you're frustrated with the process and are trying to take it out on them.
I don't think you have a full appreciate for how mind-numbing and soul-crushing a job being a front-line TSA agent can be.
LOL. I had two TSA agents hone in on me and ask tons of questions because I had 2 laptops of the same model! That was like 10 years ago though; so many people carry around so much equipment now I doubt it would be of concern any more.
> In standard screening lanes, TSA agents will be stationed in front of X-ray machines to verbally assist passengers with the new screening procedures.
Is "verbally assist" a new euphemism for "yell at"?
Is "verbally assist" a new euphemism for "yell at"?
Yeah, I think it is.
I somewhat recently had a TSA agent bark conflicting instructions at me: "Please remove all metal and electronics before the metal detector." Okay, simple enough. But when I started executing her directive, "you can leave your watch on." "It's a smart watch — it's an electronic with metal." She didn't seem to understand that.
I somewhat recently had a TSA agent bark conflicting instructions at me: "Please remove all metal and electronics before the metal detector." Okay, simple enough. But when I started executing her directive, "you can leave your watch on." "It's a smart watch — it's an electronic with metal." She didn't seem to understand that.
Pretty sure this has been happening for a while. The last few times I've traveled, people were told to put laptops and tablets in separate bins as well.
Makes sense... we shouldn't discriminate laptops at the security lines!
All large electronics in separate bins!
Makes sense... we shouldn't discriminate laptops at the security lines!
All large electronics in separate bins!
The article says they've been trialing so I suppose you've been using pilot airports.
The people who complain about heightened security never have a better proposal. This article is pure pandering with no balanced opinion of the fact that there could be credible motivations to ask for this.
The TSA has stopped zero terrorists. It's security theater. It's just dumb. No other country requires people to take off their shoes. No other country will feel you up if you fail the millimeter wave scan. Their false positive rate is so high it's pretty much random chance.
Sure security is bad in other countries. I've had to remove everything from my bag in several airports, but America is still somehow the worst in spite of that. Fuck the TSA. When I do leave the US, I take a train to Canada and fly from there. Their security is mostly the same, but at least I feel like I can't complain since it's not my country.
Sure security is bad in other countries. I've had to remove everything from my bag in several airports, but America is still somehow the worst in spite of that. Fuck the TSA. When I do leave the US, I take a train to Canada and fly from there. Their security is mostly the same, but at least I feel like I can't complain since it's not my country.
They both have an insane false-positive rate as well as an insane false-negative rate (95%, as other people have pointed out).
[deleted]
The thing is this is just security theater. A terrorist might as well detonate a bomb for all the people patiently queued to be inspected for bombs. In fact, TSA scanners have failure rates up to 95% [0] (meaning they let through 95% of contraband, including guns and explosives). Making tablets be pulled out probably won't change anything.
0: http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/politics/house-homeland-securi...
0: http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/politics/house-homeland-securi...
"A terrorist might as well detonate a bomb for all the people patiently queued to be inspected for bombs."
That is precisely what happened in the Brussels bombing. The Manchester bombing also happened at the general entrance of the arena, not inside.
That is precisely what happened in the Brussels bombing. The Manchester bombing also happened at the general entrance of the arena, not inside.
I have a better proposal. Do nothing. It's cheaper and hasn't been proven to be any less effective.
Their own separate bin? I'm interpreting this to mean, electronics in their own bin, together, is fine. One bin for each laptop, tablet, phone, etc would be madness.
However, I don't think a laptop and an iPad will fit into one bin without overlapping each other.
So now we are at probably four bins per person including their carry-on bag as a "bin." This is really ridiculous and will lead to even longer, more chaotic lines.
However, I don't think a laptop and an iPad will fit into one bin without overlapping each other.
So now we are at probably four bins per person including their carry-on bag as a "bin." This is really ridiculous and will lead to even longer, more chaotic lines.
> One bin for each laptop, tablet, phone, etc would be madness.
The current case, in every airport I've traversed, was each laptop in a separate bin.
I believe I stumbled through an airport "piloting" this program (BOS) as we had to remove tablets, too. We were not told "everything larger than a phone", we were told "laptops and tablets" — all in separate bins. It took five bins to get through.
"Piloting" new security regulations, to the passenger, appears as if TSA has no idea what their own rules are. Every airport I visit seems to have its own inconsistent idea as to what I need to take off, what needs to go in a bin, etc.
In my experience, the baggage X-ray is the bottleneck at the checkpoint; I don't see how this is going to help.
Also, does this include cameras? Who's the judge as to whether a camera is larger than a cell phone? (And just what I want, to advertise even more loudly the valuables I'm traveling with.)
The current case, in every airport I've traversed, was each laptop in a separate bin.
I believe I stumbled through an airport "piloting" this program (BOS) as we had to remove tablets, too. We were not told "everything larger than a phone", we were told "laptops and tablets" — all in separate bins. It took five bins to get through.
"Piloting" new security regulations, to the passenger, appears as if TSA has no idea what their own rules are. Every airport I visit seems to have its own inconsistent idea as to what I need to take off, what needs to go in a bin, etc.
In my experience, the baggage X-ray is the bottleneck at the checkpoint; I don't see how this is going to help.
Also, does this include cameras? Who's the judge as to whether a camera is larger than a cell phone? (And just what I want, to advertise even more loudly the valuables I'm traveling with.)
Do you think it would be any faster if you had to "check" your carry on at check-in, they were all scanned asynchronously from you actually going through security, and you pick up the bag on the other side in a mini baggage claim scenario? I know baggage claim proper is generally a madhouse, but if it's just literally going through a wall to allow the actual security screening to happen faster, I think it could be faster overall.
Would definitely need some infrastructure changes in the airports themselves, which is probably a pretty big negative.
Would definitely need some infrastructure changes in the airports themselves, which is probably a pretty big negative.
Considering I trust the average TSA employee about as much as a junky I found on a street corner, no way am I letting my electronics out of my sight. I already take them all on as carry on specifically to keep the TSA from stealing them, moving to a system like this would mean I couldn't travel with electronics (other than the exempted cell phone) anymore since there's like a 25% chance that the TSA will decide to swipe it.
just flew last week and yes it did include cameras.
I'm puzzled by this as news because, at least on the east coast where I do most of my traveling, I've had to put laptops in separate bins for several years. I used to have to put the iPad in a separate bin also until they said it could stay in the bag. Now I guess it is back into a bin.
I generally travel with my CPAP machine also so it is quite an ordeal to get through security:
I generally travel with my CPAP machine also so it is quite an ordeal to get through security:
• work laptop
• personal laptop
• iPad
• CPAP machine (outside of carrying case)
• CPAP carrying case
• shoes and jacket
• backpack
• and often my carry-on luggageThey actually ask you to remove your CPAP from the case? That's so strange. I usually keep my CPAP and iPad in the same bin. I also use my CPAP bag to hold stuff like my house keys, pens, and small bills as it gets scanned.
I have been pulled aside once just so they could swab it, but my CPAP is mostly ignored by the TSA. I'd imagine they see enough gray ResMed bags that as long as it get scanned, it's nothing special.
I have been pulled aside once just so they could swab it, but my CPAP is mostly ignored by the TSA. I'd imagine they see enough gray ResMed bags that as long as it get scanned, it's nothing special.
This will make stealing electronics much easier. And the TSA has been unresponsive to complaints about being separated for prolonged periods from control of your own carry ons.
[deleted]
Eventually one of the TSA workers will think, "hey let's invent bins that are actually shaped to hold the common case of a laptop, iPad, and phone all in one, not overlapping". And a few years later, they may actually implement it.
For years, I have put my MacBook Air and iPad in a bin together. As long as they are not stacked, it has always been fine. Not to say things couldn't change, but I would expect tablets to be treated the same way laptops have been historically.
Also, if they do need separate bins for all of these items, they'll run out of bins faster, which would be a pain for the TSA employees. I expect that if interpreting the rule strictly creates a hassle for the TSA employees (who have to cart the bins around), they won't take the strict approach.
Also, if they do need separate bins for all of these items, they'll run out of bins faster, which would be a pain for the TSA employees. I expect that if interpreting the rule strictly creates a hassle for the TSA employees (who have to cart the bins around), they won't take the strict approach.
> However, I don't think a laptop and an iPad will fit into one bin without overlapping each other.
Not a problem in US, the X-ray devices show the operator a view X, Y and Z axis so sandwich isn't a problem. And if there is an uncertainty, it can be checked manually. A separate bin per bigger device would increase the queue length.
Not a problem in US, the X-ray devices show the operator a view X, Y and Z axis so sandwich isn't a problem. And if there is an uncertainty, it can be checked manually. A separate bin per bigger device would increase the queue length.
> Not a problem in US, the X-ray devices show the operator a view X, Y and Z axis so sandwich isn't a problem.
That would still be a problem. A side shot of the sandwich doesn't fix the fact that there's no good top shot.
That would still be a problem. A side shot of the sandwich doesn't fix the fact that there's no good top shot.
Tsa has not allowed items on top of the laptops for a long time and this has been heavily enforced ime.
As long as you don't have to stack them, and you don't have an asshole screener it should be fine. But rules are rules and some high school dropout will probably send you to the back of the line if you fail to put your iPad Mini in a bin separate from your laptop.
I was hoping to never hear the term "phablet" again.
>Of course, those enrolled in the TSA’s Precheck program will not have to remove their oversized electronics, due to their willingness to trade their fingerprints (and $85) for speedier screening. The TSA notes that Precheck is now available at 200 airports nationwide, up from 180 at the start of the year.
Despite the snark, precheck is worth the money if you're a regular domestic traveler as are the trusted traveler programs [1] if you travel abroad. Some airlines seem to flag a trusted traveler as precheck although it's not terribly consistent, so I wouldn't rely on that.
[1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs
Despite the snark, precheck is worth the money if you're a regular domestic traveler as are the trusted traveler programs [1] if you travel abroad. Some airlines seem to flag a trusted traveler as precheck although it's not terribly consistent, so I wouldn't rely on that.
[1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs
Canadian here with NEXUS (which bundles TSA PreCheck in);
Absolutely worth it -- albeit both the US and Canadian governments basically now know every single detail of my life, including biometrics of fingerprints and rental scans.
For someone that essentially travels by air every few months for work (and sometimes pleasure) the ability to spend 1 minute in security means I get to spend my time on things that matter.
And its nice when I go back to Canada to just go through a machine; I don't see why I need to talk to anyone when I'm going home to my country of citizenship.
On the other side of the border, going to immigration into the States, the border people will usually be much more friendly and relaxed so thats also a plus.
Absolutely worth it -- albeit both the US and Canadian governments basically now know every single detail of my life, including biometrics of fingerprints and rental scans.
For someone that essentially travels by air every few months for work (and sometimes pleasure) the ability to spend 1 minute in security means I get to spend my time on things that matter.
And its nice when I go back to Canada to just go through a machine; I don't see why I need to talk to anyone when I'm going home to my country of citizenship.
On the other side of the border, going to immigration into the States, the border people will usually be much more friendly and relaxed so thats also a plus.
American with NEXUS including Global Entry and PreCheck;
It's a real treat to bypass 2 hour line-ups at the road border crossings on holiday weekends. In six years I've never had an unpleasant time at the border going in either direction, even though I usually cross at entry points that don't have dedicated NEXUS lanes.
Indeed I just wish it worked both ways. Entering the country is a breeze; going out of the country has (so far) found me parked in a long line with everyone else. On the other hand it's a small price to pay to travel and see the world. I'm not going to complain.
To whom does the $85 for TSA pre-check go? Seems like a racket that, like most other things in this country, is aimed mainly at the poor. Pay more, get through. Can't pay? Fuck you.
Well, pre-check does actually require a human being to do something with your application and work to happen on the part of the government. I'd rather the folks requesting the service pay for that than the taxpayers as a whole. Don't ascribe to classist malice what is simply a fee for service.
[deleted]
I'm not sure I really agree - if you're poor, how many international flights are you making per year? This seems like a tax targeting those who can most afford it rather than least.
This applies to all flights. Considering that airline tickets are quite cheap, Amtrak lines are likely to be closing down outside the NE Corridor, and the TSA is just security-theatre at best, it seems like a pretty shitty thing to charge for.
It goes to running an extensive background check and doing an in-person interview and sending out paper letters and cards, staffing separate lanes etc.
Well, you still get through, it just takes you longer and is less comfortable.
Because if you can pay $85 you can for sure be trusted, right?
It may be just me with a European perspective, but from where I am sitting that is completely ridiculous.
It may be just me with a European perspective, but from where I am sitting that is completely ridiculous.
It is also a perk of a number of credit cards. For example, Amex Platinum = $100 Global Entry credit + $200 airline credit + (up to) $180 Uber Credit + xx,000 signup points > $550 fee (if you travel)
I have NEXUS and I agree it is worth it. But the relevant question is that TSA pre is not difficult to get. If someone (US citizen or PR with relatively clean record) wants to blow up a plane with themselves on it then I don't see how TSA pre stops them.
More like a pristine record. I guess the admin assumes the terrorists work their way up to that point from other "gateway crimes".
You are literally arguing that people should pay for their own oppression.
Honestly, and I ask with sincerity as the answer is important to me, does that not bear at least a little upon your conscience?
Honestly, and I ask with sincerity as the answer is important to me, does that not bear at least a little upon your conscience?
I think I remember reading that Israel found laptop bomb batteries. Or some country found them.
You remember the president of the USA disclosing code-word level classified intelligence, gathered by Israeli agents in Egypt, about ISIS planning laptop bombs, to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador, without going through the necessary internal approval channels or getting permission from Israel.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/17/pres...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/17/pres...
I've never been to the US. I'd love to visit though, so many beautiful places to see! I had this idea to rent an RV on the west coast and spend a few months visiting bunch of places.
But lately I've been deterred by all this TSA crap and the political 'developments'. I just no longer feel comfortable about traveling there. Don't get me wrong, my home country is far from peachy. But everything I read about US these days screams - don't come here. I'm sure their tourism industry wont fall apart because of one person, but I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one that feels like this.
Seems like I'll just go somewhere warm for the winter to chill out (Canary Islands, anyone?)
But lately I've been deterred by all this TSA crap and the political 'developments'. I just no longer feel comfortable about traveling there. Don't get me wrong, my home country is far from peachy. But everything I read about US these days screams - don't come here. I'm sure their tourism industry wont fall apart because of one person, but I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one that feels like this.
Seems like I'll just go somewhere warm for the winter to chill out (Canary Islands, anyone?)
I feel the same sense of unwelcome, except I have lived & contributed to the US economy for almost 10 years now. I'm planning on leaving in < 18 months or so (could leave right away, but there's a number of things I need to wrap up).
I have many foreign friends (and a few americans) who have either left already, or are planning to. This is all highly educated, skilled people - academics, inventors, potential company founders, etc - the kind that the US probably should aspire to keep.
I don't think the US tourism industry or economy will fall apart just because of you or I. That being said, it feels like at this rate, US hegemony might look very different a decade or two from now. Fewer brilliant grad students and company founders coming to the US in 2017 will probably be felt in 2027.
I have many foreign friends (and a few americans) who have either left already, or are planning to. This is all highly educated, skilled people - academics, inventors, potential company founders, etc - the kind that the US probably should aspire to keep.
I don't think the US tourism industry or economy will fall apart just because of you or I. That being said, it feels like at this rate, US hegemony might look very different a decade or two from now. Fewer brilliant grad students and company founders coming to the US in 2017 will probably be felt in 2027.
It really is not as big of a deal as everyone acts like it is. Take your stuff out, take off your shoes, and your belt. Walk through, get on your plane. Enjoy the US. This place is HUGE.
Get detained in a tiny cell at Houston airport for 12 hours with no explanation (happened to my father). Get your entry denied and have your vacation plans + all the money you spent on hotels/rentals/etc go to waste (happened to a friend of mine).
Speak to any foreigner that has had prolonged contact with US immigration/border agencies (particularly if they are from a poorer country - doubly so if it's a muslim country) and you will hear plenty of stories like that.
Speak to any foreigner that has had prolonged contact with US immigration/border agencies (particularly if they are from a poorer country - doubly so if it's a muslim country) and you will hear plenty of stories like that.
Take your stuff out, take your shoes off, get in line for the machine of dubious quality, watch your items disappear into the X-ray checker, go through machine of dubious quality, realize that two of your items are not on the belt along with your others, realize that they were taken aside for additional checking; wait for someone to bark at you to come watch your stuff get tested.
I'm not saying that people should skip coming to the US because of all of this, but it is a ridiculous process, especially the separation from your belongings. I once thought a man took my backpack - it was an identical model - and I yelled for about 30 seconds until I saw my bag come out of the machine. Nobody paid attention.
I'm not saying that people should skip coming to the US because of all of this, but it is a ridiculous process, especially the separation from your belongings. I once thought a man took my backpack - it was an identical model - and I yelled for about 30 seconds until I saw my bag come out of the machine. Nobody paid attention.
As long as I can take the laptop / camera on the plane and don't have to fret over it being stolen by the baggage handlers who look in bags.
Putting a device on its own tray means that an algorithm can apply heuristics to it to determine if it should receive a wipe test or additional human screening.
By placing the items onto a tray, the orientation of the device is more likely to be consistent and not obscured by other objects in the line of sight of the scanner, making algorithmic object recognition easier when a 2D scanner is used or if the bag contained items that make the data harder to process.
Imagine if your goal was to get a weapon through security, what would you do?
- Enclose it in a fluid or gel-filled case that appeared similar to a rechargeable battery pack on the scanner.
- Enclose it in an appropriately sized shielded sub-enclosure of a common device, so that it appeared similar to the unaltered device on the scanner.
For some reason laptops were identified as a likely device for this sort of use-case, hence the ban on laptops for flights originating from some places.
So after the ban the adversaries likely decided to try using a boombox or a SLR camera to house a weapon, and maybe even tried an electronic drum pad or other less common device.
Consider what kind of information the scanner obtains about the objects being scanned. Some is 2D but newer ones area increasingly 3D. So you have a 3D capture of the various relative densities and thicknesses of materials used to construct a device. Chances are machine learning algorithms are very good at determining which scan is an unaltered electronic device and which has been altered (additional wires, components, materials included).
It's also necessary to train the system, so asking travelers to place their digicams, drum pads, etc., in a separate bin allows the scans to be used as training data for unaltered device characteristics, and help officials learn how to train the algorithms to detect subtle modification or alteration of devices.
Chances are the same kind of highly advanced machine learning is being applied to the live video of passengers lining up for screening, with face, vital sign, and body carriage recognition algorithms designed to detect anxiety, deception, etc. For example, if you are rocking back and forth with a clenched chin and elevated heart rate that might be a small data point which (if combined with a laptop that has a >10% probability of having been altered) might result in a human screening and pat down.
When filmed at high frame rate, heart beats are detectable via blood vessel coloration changes. Animals (like humans) are very easy to analyze this way with the right hardware and algorithms.
By placing the items onto a tray, the orientation of the device is more likely to be consistent and not obscured by other objects in the line of sight of the scanner, making algorithmic object recognition easier when a 2D scanner is used or if the bag contained items that make the data harder to process.
Imagine if your goal was to get a weapon through security, what would you do?
- Enclose it in a fluid or gel-filled case that appeared similar to a rechargeable battery pack on the scanner.
- Enclose it in an appropriately sized shielded sub-enclosure of a common device, so that it appeared similar to the unaltered device on the scanner.
For some reason laptops were identified as a likely device for this sort of use-case, hence the ban on laptops for flights originating from some places.
So after the ban the adversaries likely decided to try using a boombox or a SLR camera to house a weapon, and maybe even tried an electronic drum pad or other less common device.
Consider what kind of information the scanner obtains about the objects being scanned. Some is 2D but newer ones area increasingly 3D. So you have a 3D capture of the various relative densities and thicknesses of materials used to construct a device. Chances are machine learning algorithms are very good at determining which scan is an unaltered electronic device and which has been altered (additional wires, components, materials included).
It's also necessary to train the system, so asking travelers to place their digicams, drum pads, etc., in a separate bin allows the scans to be used as training data for unaltered device characteristics, and help officials learn how to train the algorithms to detect subtle modification or alteration of devices.
Chances are the same kind of highly advanced machine learning is being applied to the live video of passengers lining up for screening, with face, vital sign, and body carriage recognition algorithms designed to detect anxiety, deception, etc. For example, if you are rocking back and forth with a clenched chin and elevated heart rate that might be a small data point which (if combined with a laptop that has a >10% probability of having been altered) might result in a human screening and pat down.
When filmed at high frame rate, heart beats are detectable via blood vessel coloration changes. Animals (like humans) are very easy to analyze this way with the right hardware and algorithms.
It's strange to me that we screen for weapons at all, other than explosives. The cabin is sealed. There is a marshal on the plane to limit gun/box-cutter level damage. At that point the plane itself is no more dangerous (actually considerably less dangerous) than an ordinary subway car.
With explosives, I've always thought an internal smuggle would work the best. I mean, you're going to suicide anyway, so why not stick C4 up your ass? Or if you're really serious, have some surgically installed into you.
One threat would be a small shaped charge to open the cabin, but that seems very unlikely. Last but not least, the WMD threat of biological weapon, 12 Monkeys style, which is a) not specific to planes and b) impossible to guard against, once the weapon is lost.
With explosives, I've always thought an internal smuggle would work the best. I mean, you're going to suicide anyway, so why not stick C4 up your ass? Or if you're really serious, have some surgically installed into you.
One threat would be a small shaped charge to open the cabin, but that seems very unlikely. Last but not least, the WMD threat of biological weapon, 12 Monkeys style, which is a) not specific to planes and b) impossible to guard against, once the weapon is lost.
I agree. I think that the threat posed by weapons was already fully mitigated on the day of 9/11 when the passengers on the last aircraft tackled the hijackers in spite of the box cutters. All this with no marshal, no sealed cabin door, etc.
The airport screening stuff has been a fiasco that is far more political and psychological than based on actual risk reduction, and the additional cost and time it takes to go through security has cost the economy billions in lost productivity.
I think that the big target at present is actually explosives. I think that C4 resembles the contents of a typical LiIon cell when viewed on a scanner, or could be made to appear quite similar if prepared by someone moderately skilled who had access to (or knowledge of) the scanner and the physics behind it.
Your point about a subway is interesting because we've seen no attacks on subways in the US since 9/11 and even a failed, low-budget attack would result in massive subway line closures and military presence in the subway for months, making it an effective fear-creation attack that would cost a city hundreds of millions of dollars, and potentially much more in lost productivity and mental anguish.
I think the reason we haven't seen those attacks is because so few people would actually want to do them. A can of gas brought into a subway car in a backpack and ignited while the door was closed, combined with an armed shooter using a handgun would cost < $500 and would easily result in widespread closures. If two individuals did this same attack on two separate lines on the same morning, the financial damage would multiply substantially, even if nobody was killed. Suddenly there would be TSA scanners in all subway entries and it would take an extra few hours to ride a few stops.
But on a plane, even a small explosive charge can take the aircraft out of the sky, so I think there is still motive for attackers to try this vector, but if the goal is to make airplanes crash it would be far more effective to use a high powered rifle near an airport and actually shoot at the aircraft. Some airports offer geographical features where this attack would be particularly effective.
That we haven't seen anyone do this also suggests strongly that there is virtually nobody who wants to harm American citizens living in the US, or perhaps that all those who do have extremely grandiose ideas for attacks that are very unlikely to succeed.
The 9/11 attacks were a brilliant way to weaponize aircraft, but after that was used once it becomes a lot harder to use it again. My guess is that if there ever is another large attack it will be something completely different. The first WTC bombing failed, but (similar to 9/11) relied on a very open loophole (fertilizer + van + parking garage under skyscraper). So I think authorities should be focusing on identifying the attack vectors that we are still vulnerable to that haven't been tried.
The airport screening stuff has been a fiasco that is far more political and psychological than based on actual risk reduction, and the additional cost and time it takes to go through security has cost the economy billions in lost productivity.
I think that the big target at present is actually explosives. I think that C4 resembles the contents of a typical LiIon cell when viewed on a scanner, or could be made to appear quite similar if prepared by someone moderately skilled who had access to (or knowledge of) the scanner and the physics behind it.
Your point about a subway is interesting because we've seen no attacks on subways in the US since 9/11 and even a failed, low-budget attack would result in massive subway line closures and military presence in the subway for months, making it an effective fear-creation attack that would cost a city hundreds of millions of dollars, and potentially much more in lost productivity and mental anguish.
I think the reason we haven't seen those attacks is because so few people would actually want to do them. A can of gas brought into a subway car in a backpack and ignited while the door was closed, combined with an armed shooter using a handgun would cost < $500 and would easily result in widespread closures. If two individuals did this same attack on two separate lines on the same morning, the financial damage would multiply substantially, even if nobody was killed. Suddenly there would be TSA scanners in all subway entries and it would take an extra few hours to ride a few stops.
But on a plane, even a small explosive charge can take the aircraft out of the sky, so I think there is still motive for attackers to try this vector, but if the goal is to make airplanes crash it would be far more effective to use a high powered rifle near an airport and actually shoot at the aircraft. Some airports offer geographical features where this attack would be particularly effective.
That we haven't seen anyone do this also suggests strongly that there is virtually nobody who wants to harm American citizens living in the US, or perhaps that all those who do have extremely grandiose ideas for attacks that are very unlikely to succeed.
The 9/11 attacks were a brilliant way to weaponize aircraft, but after that was used once it becomes a lot harder to use it again. My guess is that if there ever is another large attack it will be something completely different. The first WTC bombing failed, but (similar to 9/11) relied on a very open loophole (fertilizer + van + parking garage under skyscraper). So I think authorities should be focusing on identifying the attack vectors that we are still vulnerable to that haven't been tried.
I honestly don't understand what the motive for the TSA is. I mean, yes it's security theater and political "we must do something" in action, but it doesn't seem like that's enough to justify the continued stupidly of that organization. The best guess I have at this point is that the combination of a convenient jobs program that isn't republican kryptonite, plus convenient pork projects (hello body scanners), with the added bonus of a perpetual excuse to eliminate personal freedoms and drum up the boogeyman man of terrorism whenever it's convenient is just too tempting to let go.
I can't think of any other organization that evokes that near-rage quite as fast or as strong. Even Immigration doesn't seem as hateful.