Slashdot Mirror

PSA for those who dont already know: don't waste your money on PreCheck alone. If you're going to do it, buy Global Entry, which is only $15 more, includes PreCheck, and will get you through immigration incredibly quickly, sometimes without a single question.

Also PSA for those who don't already know: it's NOT a waste of money depending on your circumstances. PreCheck's.. checks.. are cursory at best, and its requirements are embarrassingly low, hence why I say it's basically "pay to win" because you're practically guaranteed approval unless you're El Chapo or something. However, Global Entry is actually the real thing, with an extensive background check including detailed criminal history, and it has very strict and generally unforgiving qualification rules. Many of those rules are unpublished too, they admit this openly that they don't provide a full list of disqualifiers for "security reasons". PreCheck does provide a full list.

I myself am barred for life from GE (I found out about one of the rules they don't list when my application was denied) because I was arrested once when I was young for misdemeanor possession. Charge was dropped, so I have no convictions just the one arrest, but that alone disqualifies me from Global Entry because it's drug-related, and that was stated plainly on the denial letter I received. I think it's bullshit, since I wouldn't be surprised if a quarter of the entire fucking country has an experience like that, but hey. War on Drugs(tm) and all that.

...$85 every 5 years (might as well just get Global Entry for $100)...

Big difference between the two programs. PreCheck is a very cursory examination and has only the barest of restrictions; it's actually extremely difficult to be denied. You can pretty much just pay the fee and get in, Dane-geld as was mentioned.

Global Entry on the other hand is an extensive background check including detailed criminal history, and they will deny (or even revoke an existing member) for the tiniest of infractions. There was the recent story of a woman who lost her GE (she did manage to get it restored, admittedly) because she accidentally brought an undeclared apple through customs. Simple as that.

Global Entry also doesn't actually provide specific information on what will disqualify a person, so dog help you if you have any criminal history at all, because your acceptance or denial is a complete fucking guessing game. Especially anything War on (X) related. I was arrested once, many, many years ago, for misdemeanor pot possession. Just arrested; the charge was later dropped, so I have zero criminal convictions, merely a single arrest record. I didn't find out this was a problem until I was denied GE, with the stated reason that ANY drug-related arrest, even low-level misdemeanors, even without any convictions, bars you from GE. For life. Would've been nice if they could have published that detail somewhere so I'd have known to not even bother applying.

On the other hand PreCheck is much more lax, and very specific about what is disqualifying. They were all too happy to take my geld and approve me.

"Kinda like Guantanamo or the no fly list."
Actually, those both actually have a due process:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/0... as an example of the former.
and
https://www.tsa.gov/travel/pas... for the latter.

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/sec...

"Four inches from the pivot, but if the agent is having a bad day he or she can stab you with them."

Or, you know, something like that. Paraphrasing.

Who said it was spamming? Verizon is charging text-based services (like Twillo) a fee to fund anti-spam efforts.

Remind runs 1.6 billion texts/year through Twillo on the Verizon network, and as the source of over 4 billion text messages year, Verizon is charging Twillo a fee to help fund anti-spam measures.

Remind isn't being targeted, it is being asked by Twillo to pay it's share of the fee Verizon is charging it.

Paying a fee to fight spam doesn't mean you are a spammer, just as paying a 9/11 anti-terrorism fee when you buy an airline ticket doesn't make you a terrorist.

I wouldn't recommend doing so, but you can fly without ID.

https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2013/04/09/tsa-travel-tips-tuesday-can-you-fly-without-id

nice
https://www.tsa.gov/for-indust...

Has anyone tried to smuggle explosives into an airport and been caught?

I think what you really want to know is if anyone has tried to smuggle explosives on to a plane, not into an airport. You don't get checked when you walk into an airport, you get checked when you go to the gates.

And, the answer is "yes". People have tried to smuggle explosives onto airplanes. Here is a partial list of 2017 attempts:

A checked bag containing an ammunition box with three live ground burst simulators, two live M83 smoke grenades, and one inert practice grenade was discovered at the Palm Springs International Airport (PSP).
A live flashbang grenade was discovered in a carry-on bag at the San Diego International Airport (SAN).
A live smoke grenade was discovered in a carry-on bag at the Raleigh–Durham International Airport (RDU). Not only do smoke grenades deploy a thick blanket of smoke, they also burn extremely hot and are considered hazmat.
A one-pound bottle of gun powder was discovered in a checked bag at the Ketchikan International Airport (KTN). Gun powder is never permitted on an aircraft..
Five one-pound bottles of gun powder were discovered in a checked bag at the Boise Airport (BOI).
A ten-ounce container of gun powder was discovered in a checked bag at the Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC). While properly packed ammunition is allowed in checked bags, gun powder is strictly prohibited altogether.

There were also about 4,000 guns that TSA seized in 2017 when stupid jackoffs (mostly rappers, professional athletes and Republican officials) tried carrying them onto a plane.

People also like to bring inert explosive devices onto planes for some reason. A bunch of inert hand grenades, claymores, suicide vests and other goodies were seized in 2017. Also, throwing stars, daggers disguised as hairbrushes and tons of other whacky shit.

https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2018/...

"Carry On: It is recommended that you keep your belongings in sight during the screening process. If you are carrying or wearing an item that might alarm our officers, requiring additional screening, you may ask that your belongings be brought to you to keep your property in sight." https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2016/...

Data on electronic devices can show a persons support of and funding for a banned group. That they travelled to a nation to support and funded a banned group. Photographs, faith based and political support for groups of interest to the USA. Funds for and meetings with people and groups of interest to the USA. GPS, images that show the device owner when questioned was in a nation they failed to mention when asked about.

While these are within the scope of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) search, all of the above are outside the allowed activities of the TSA.

The article states " This lawsuit comes after a number of reports came in pertaining to the searches of electronic devices of passengers traveling domestically.... TSA does, however, have public policies pertaining to the search and seizure of electronic devices at the border and during international trips."

The complaint seems to conflate TSA and CBP searches, and alleges TSA is searching the contents of electronic devices held by domestic travelers flying through SFO, but provides no evidence to support this claim.

Sure feel like my luggage is secure

There is a concept called "appropriate levels of security". I'm sure it has an official name, but that's what I'm going to call it for now.

If you thought the TSA luggage lock was intended to provide "security" in any absolute sense, then it is your worldview that needs adjustment.

What is the purpose of the lock? It cannot be to provide "security", because most likely your luggage is soft-sided. A simple box cutter or pocket knife will open it up. If it's hard sided, then a blow with a two-by-four will crack it, or a knife will cut the fabric where the zipper is, or a screwdriver will strip the zipper open.

So, why the lock? Notice that the methods I mentioned are all irreversible. It's easy to see a cut-open bag. A busted hard-side bag is obvious. The obvious answer is, the lock is there only to make any trivial break-in harder, and make the actual break-in obvious earlier than it would be otherwise. A baggage handler who sees a cut open suitcase while loading the plane can report it, and you don't have to wait to get home at the end of the trip to find out that you're missing something. (A secondary purpose for the lock is to make sure the zipper stays closed, but a paperclip can do that, too.)

Now, maybe you're someone who uses a commercially manufactured shipping case with actual locking mechanisms, but the vast majority of people do not. If you are, then you have a trivial solution to the problem of "TSA locks". Go to any local gun shop or show and buy a small package of ammo. I got a box of 20 rounds last weekend for $5. Put the ammo in the suitcase. Declare at checkin that you're carrying ammunition. Guess who HAS to lock his case then? You.

Aren't they already?

No.

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/sec...

See page 21 -- that stupid TSA website sucks.

I

While the cost of damage would be very high, the risk to life isn't really any different than a bus or train full of people.

Perhaps you missed that TSA is involved with trains. Hyperloop, due to its huge pricetag and high tech, will be a prime target. While you can't hijack a car, you can certainly make it disintegrate in a spectacular way.

It will not be TSA that pushes for their control of security checkpoints for Hyperloop terminals, it will be people, once the first hyperloop train is destroyed by anyone who can have a political agenda attached to them. Even if not. There are already calls for tighter security in HOTELS because of the Las Vegas shooting. How COULD anyone get so many guns into a hotel room? (Carry them in. Next question?) Doesn't this show a need for gun control? (He was using AK-47s if what I heard is correct, one of the guns that is already heavily controlled, so no. Next question?)

How hard would it be to derail a passenger train with an IED on the tracks?

Passenger trains are low-tech commonplace things. The first (and second and probably third) public Hyperloop will be the opposite.

Quotes from the TSA:

We are always testing procedures to help stay ahead of our adversaries. We were testing the removal of books at two airport locations and the testing ran its course.

So, with that out of the way, you might be wondering why we were interested in books. Well, our adversaries seem to know every trick in the book when it comes to concealing dangerous items, and books have been used in the past to conceal prohibited items.

We are always testing procedures to help stay ahead of our adversaries. We were testing the removal of books at two airport locations and the testing ran its course. ~TSA

The TSA disagrees with you:

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/sec...

The TSA disagrees with you:

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/sec...

https://www.tsa.gov/contact/co...

You play a critical role in identifying and reporting suspicious activities and threats. If you notice a security concern or vulnerability, please let us know.

Security Issue

Thank you for contacting the Transportation Security Administration. Your submission has been received. While many routine inquiries can be responded to in less than 48 hours, some responses that require additional information may take longer.

I think the fact that they are actually catching a lot of stuff ... you know, the point of TFA ... proves the screening worthwhile.

Really? Catching a few knives and guns (not to mention the honey, fake grenades, and home electronic projects) is worth the $7,599,999,999.95 we spend on it every year? How many people planned on using these "weapons" on the aircraft? Oh that's right. None of them (except the lady with the hot sauce grenade, because airplane food sucks). We should be going after dangerous people, not dangerous things. But we know these are not dangerous people, because after the TSA finds the knife or gun, they confiscate it and let the person get on their plane.

They're reporting they found 33 loaded firearms in carry-on luggage in one week, and remind readers that gun-carrying passengers "can face a penalty as high as $11,000. This is a friendly reminder to please leave these items at home."

... muh freedoms!

And, seriously, how hard is to remember to unload your weapon before packing it?

From: Transporting Firearms and Ammunition

Firearms

• When traveling, comply with the laws concerning possession of firearms as they vary by local, state and international governments.
• Declare each firearm each time you present it for transport as checked baggage. Ask your airline about limitations or fees that may apply.
• Firearms must be unloaded and locked in a hard-sided container and transported as checked baggage only. Only the passenger should retain the key or combination to the lock.
• Firearm parts, including magazines, clips, bolts and firing pins, are prohibited in carry-on baggage, but may be transported in checked baggage.
• Replica firearms, including firearm replicas that are toys, may be transported in checked baggage only.
• Rifle scopes are permitted in carry-on and checked baggage.

Ammunition

• Ammunition is prohibited in carry-on baggage, but may be transported in checked baggage.
• Firearm magazines and ammunition clips, whether loaded or empty, must be securely boxed or included within a hard-sided case containing an unloaded firearm. Read the requirements governing the transport of ammunition in checked baggage as defined by 49 CFR 175.10 (a)(8).
• Small arms ammunition, including ammunition not exceeding .75 caliber and shotgun shells of any gauge, may be carried in the same hard-sided case as the firearm.

I don't know why they would tell you to leave your guns at home. If you do that, you won't have any guns where you are flying to. You should instead check them in baggage.

They even have a webpage for it: https://www.tsa.gov/travel/tra...

Note if you have an expensive and/or fragile scope, you can carry that through the checkpoints as per normal.

About 60% of passengers check a bag if you calculate it out from TSA's numbers

(TSA screened 708 million passengers) / (TSA screened 432 million checked bags) = 0.61
source

So if Delta's passengers check bags at a rate similar to the industry average then they lost about 0.3%, or roughly 1 in every 300 bags.

"explosives in a firearm cartridge"? wow, some big words to say ammunition.

it's legal to bring ammunition on board, in a locked box. I've done it many times; check the firearms.

anyways they already use "explosives scanners". they look for concentrated nitrogen.

It's not allowed to carry on ammunition - it has to be checked. I'm not sure where you got the info, nor how you carried it on multiple times...

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/sec... (look under "firearms")

They already charge a fee to be nearly TSA-free. It's call TSA Precheck. $75 for 5 years. You get to skip the long long and keep your belt and shoes on.

https://www.tsa.gov/precheck

It is a huge failure as most people who don't fly regularly don't want to be bothered with the fee or the background check hassle. It takes 2-4 months to get it done ahead of time, depending on where you live and your airport, etc.

... and also makes it much easier to remove for airport security.

TSA Pre®

Do you really think the TSA would be able to remain funded and functional without having the airlines and airports actively consenting to their presence?

https://www.tsa.gov/for-indust...

"The Passenger Fee, also known as the September 11 Security Fee, is collected by air carriers from passengers at the time air transportation is purchased. Air carriers then remit the fees to TSA. The fee is currently $5.60 per one-way trip in air transportation that originates at an airport in the U.S., except that the fee imposed per round trip shall not exceed $11.20."

Mind you, if people don't fly, Congress could just retask the TSA to collecting fees from buses, trains, and ordinary citizens trying to use the highway in order to keep their special interests afloat...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08...

In usa after 9/11 think they added laws say that we can control / ban filming at any public transportation location

They haven't. For instance, from the TSA's own FAQ:

Can I film and take photos at a security checkpoint?

TSA does not prohibit photographing, videotaping or filming at security checkpoints, as long as the screening process is not interfered with or sensitive information is not revealed. [...]

pfha.
The 1% that will be able to fly on this thing will just pay for preferential treatment at security screening.
They don't even bother to pretend this is a democracy anymore.

Easier answer, stay out of the USA.

Since I'm a US Citizen that might be a tad problematic.

Kiosks for passport control? Never wait? This has never been a problem for me...

That is not the standard experience. I've traveled out of the US a fair bit. About 20-30% of the time the wait has been minimal. The rest of the time the wait has been at least 30 minutes and I've had waits as long as 90 minutes. Curiously the US is generally the more hostile (for lack of a better word) to people entering the country than most of the countries I've been to and I've been to places like Vietnam and China which are not exactly bastions of democracy.

Never heard of Global Entry or PreCheck.

If you haven't heard of TSA Pre then you haven't traveled in a US airport in the last several years. It's pretty hard to miss the signs. Global Entry is a bit less well known but is available to US Citizens plus a few other countries.

According to the TSA they found 31 loaded guns in carry-on bags *this week* so they must be doing something right. http://blog.tsa.gov/2015/12/ts...

What they don't tell you is that TSA red team folks put over 100 guns in carry on bags this week.

Oops.

According to the TSA they found 31 loaded guns in carry-on bags *this week* so they must be doing something right. http://blog.tsa.gov/2015/12/ts...

Are you a Human?

Then you are on a watchlist.

FBI checklist:
http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

Ever used tor or a vpn?
Ever posted anything anti-government?
Ever traveled outside your country?
Ever phoned/skyped/g-talked to anyone outside your country?

I have a friend, David Nelson. I've known him since we were about 10yrs old. He and 2000 other "David Nelsons" are on the TSA watchlist. That was a problem for my friend since he used to travel every week for business. After missing about 10 flights due the watch list triple-checking, he was asked to quit his job. Here's the TSA side of the story.
http://blog.tsa.gov/2008/07/my...

Google is your friend. Here is a similar one except it involves TSA.
http://blog.tsa.gov/2011/08/wierd-science-traveling-with-homemade.html

This just proves they don't care about our personal security.

I am certainly no TSA cheerleader, but lets keep things in perspective. The TSA has never claimed to care about your personal security. Their mission statement is pretty clear.

Protect the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.

https://www.tsa.gov/about/tsa-...

Actually, if you travel with a firearm - and the action from a sub-$100 single shot shotgun qualifies as such - you can use real locks on your luggage, it will be inspected in front of you, and then you can properly secure it. And, the airline can't flag it as having a firearm in it...

Bonus is if the luggage doesn't make it you get to ask "You gonna call the BATFE or am I?" and stuff gets found really quick.

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/tra...

Recommended to print out the policy for whatever airline you are traveling on as well... but this works for lots of folks.

Fingerprints and other biometric data go always to the FBI's IAFIS and are kept for god only knows how long.

What is included in IAFIS: Not only fingerprints, but corresponding criminal histories; mug shots; scars and tattoo photos; physical characteristics like height, weight, and hair and eye color; and aliases. The system also includes civil fingerprints, mostly of individuals who have served or are serving in the U.S. military or have been or are employed by the federal government. The fingerprints and criminal history information are submitted voluntarily by state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies.

In the age of the Patriot act, it all goes into IAFIS. Oh and sign up for the TSA Pre-Check program and guess what, you're fingerprints go there too, for at least 75 years. Oh and recent supreme court rulings have allowed DNA evidence to be collected in connection with 'serious' crimes. The definition of serious is still nebulous but I know a guy who had to give a mouth swab for a public intoxication arrest.

There's multiple reasons why I object to this kind of data being retained except for the purposes intended and it should have a lifespan suiting the needs, or it shouldn't be collected at all. Unfortunately for all of us in the US, everybody wants to collect data on us and our government is no different. If you're convicted of a felony, yes retain the data indefinitely but shit if you get a parking ticket or non-felony you shouldn't have this crap follow you around for the rest of your life.

Everybody who buys suitcases. https://www.tsa.gov/traveler-i...

There is already a line for people who had background checks.

Have you not been to an American airport in the last 3 years? You should have seen signs for TSA Pre. It's part of the Trusted Travels program, and you do a little light paperwork for the background check and have your fingerprints taken.

In both cases, don't bother buying flares or starter caps; all you need is the appropriate suitcase, gun case, and lock.

All you need is ammunition. Buy a cheap box of 22 or shotgun shells.

Implied is that they will not be able to take anything out of the luggage, while you are watching them.

I don't know why you think that is implied. I think you infer it incorrectly.

Err, you know you are not only allowed to lock luggage containing a gun, but you are required to do so? It's spelled out explicitly in the rules.*

While it was a few years ago and the laws may have changed, I read somewhere that you should travel with a starter pistol. The TSA considers them guns, which means you are allowed (required) to securely lock your checked baggage, but (most) states don't consider them weapons, so you can travel with them to different states without multiple concealed carry permits.

* this is with a real lock, not a TSA lock

I've heard the same suggestion in reference to a flare gun. In both cases, don't bother buying flares or starter caps; all you need is the appropriate suitcase, gun case, and lock.

Note that TSA will search your bag that contains a declared firearm. Unlike all the other bags they open in the luggage caverns, they will search yours right in front of you, before you lock it. Implied is that they will not be able to take anything out of the luggage, while you are watching them.

Err, you know you are not only allowed to lock luggage containing a gun, but you are required to do so? It's spelled out explicitly in the rules.*

While it was a few years ago and the laws may have changed, I read somewhere that you should travel with a starter pistol. The TSA considers them guns, which means you are allowed (required) to securely lock your checked baggage, but (most) states don't consider them weapons, so you can travel with them to different states without multiple concealed carry permits.

* this is with a real lock, not a TSA lock

http://www.tsa.gov/tsa-prechec...

Note that there is a fee involved. The sad thing is, if I flew more often than 3-4 times a year I might be tempted to pay.

http://deviating.net/firearms/... Airlines really really REALLY do not want to lose a bag with a "gun" in it. and just for a Chapter and Verse copy of this see http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-in... so if you are traveling with valuables (nice costumes of some sort??) slip a pistol into the bag (and properly declare same).

You sir, are grossly mistaken.

Do you have any idea how many people get their wallet stolen while on vacation, or leave it in a cab on the way to the airport?

People fly without ID every. single. day. The TSA has a nice page on it, but even it uses weasel words like "may not be allowed."
http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-in...

They Q&A you with the same sort of questions you'd need to answer to verify an online credit check (did you live on Mulberry St?), they'll give you an anal probe (excuse me: "Enhanced Screening") and then you'll pass through security unless you can't answer questions about yourself.

So, if you can afford a background check on someone and memorize a few details, you can pretend to fly as them. WHEE!

You can't fly without ID because they won't let you through security without it.

Yes, they will.

This was specifically for international flights into the US originating from certain countries, not a TSA-wide procedure.

Yet... give it a month. I know a couple of TSA people for some reason. Their IQ is slightly above your typical McDonalds worker, only because they need to know how to put on a tie. A lot of their "procedures" are only there because they heard it was a good idea on the news yesterday. Granted, I'm near Chicago so maybe they have smarter people working in the newyork airports but I doubt it.

Keep in mind, that TSA has yet to have stopped a single bombing. The only reasons we've not had a plane go down is due to lack of effort, not any increase in security. The few attempts that have been made, made it through the TSA with ease and it was the efforts of passengers or the stupidity of the attacker that saved the plane.

In tests, they fail to stop devices from getting on the plane pretty much every time:
http://nypost.com/2013/03/08/t...

They've no evidence that they have ever stopped anything:
http://www.slate.com/articles/...

The majority of what they catch are people trying to smuggle things they shouldn't like plants and animals or people that try to take legit firearms into the cabin when they should have put it in their luggage:
http://blog.tsa.gov/2012/01/ts...

Does this apply to the TSA who regularly searches laptops and cell phones?

http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/01/ca...

The airline submits this information to Secure Flight, which uses it to perform watch list matching. This serves to prevent individuals on the No Fly List from boarding an aircraft and to identify individuals on the Selectee List for enhanced screening. After matching passenger information against government watch lists, Secure Flight transmits the matching results back to airlines so they can issue passenger boarding passes.

In other words, YOU are required to tell the government you plan to travel, and they get to decide, in advance, whether you can. Assuming you're not, in their own words, on any "government watch lists".

You can read all about the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

Normal disposable lighters (Bic or whatever), Zippo lighters, and book matches are all explicitly allowed in US carry-ons. Quantity=1, I think. High-powered cigar "torches" are forbidden. http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-in...

Well, you don't need Global Entry, there's a program that just takes a criminal background check (but doesn't help with international travel). You just need a Known Traveler Number. So unless your "failure to declare" was actually felony smuggling, you should be good. Assuming, of course, that there's not someone with a similar-sounding name on the arbitraty No Fly List.