Slashdot Mirror

Obviously, you've never read the tripe^Wspin^Wdis^w^w^winformation that Blogger Bob posts on the official TSA blog. Bob never seems to let the truth get in the way of an opportunity to crow about the fantastic job his employer is doing :roll_eyes:

The airports and cargo are under the guidance of the TSA at the moment, but the FAA is in control of the airlines. So the option to be a grope free airline would really be beyond the scope of any kind of private deal.

Yeah. That was back in the good old days when I was able to carry my pocket knife (which is always with me except when I'm flying now). And when no one threw away my toothpaste for being too large (happened last week). And when the government's website didn't say I could bring 3.4oz bottles but the airport TSA signs said they could only be 3oz. And when the woman carrying a baby standing behind me in line didn't have three separate examiners check out her baby's bottle to make sure it wasn't very liquidy plastique. And when I didn't get a high-energy full-body X-ray followed immediately by a lower body pat down. And when the pat-down agent asked "are you carrying anything in your pockets?", I was too worried about the possibility of an express detour to Gitmo to reply sarcastically, "did your scanner see anything?" And when I didn't watch a foreign exchange student on the edge of tears as she was swabbed down for explosive residue.

Yeah, private screeners let some guys carry knives onto a plane. Strangely, I don't feel a single bit safer for having been through the new "security through intimidation" process.

You can bring matches, though. Go figure.

One book of safety (non-strike anywhere) matches are permitted as carry-on items, but all matches are prohibited in checked baggage

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm

I wish the TSA was more transparent and honest about the technologies and processes they use. I get the impression their imaging technology and their processes such as their rules for liquids were better thought out and better supported by real world facts. After the attempt to smuggle explosive liquids onto flights in the UK, many airports limited liquid size to 100 ml, or 3.4 ounces. This somewhat arbitrary amount is just under the size of many 4 ounce mini-drinks and mini-yogurts and baby foods in the U.S. So why not allow 4 or 5 ounces. Does that .6 ounce truly make the difference between life and death?

The TSA should engage in profiling, as the Israelis do. Although it's controversial, the Israelis have managed to prevent any hijacking incidents since 1969 so they must be doing something right. Even the Israelis aren't perfect and sooner or later it's possible someone will slip through and cause a calamity, but so far they have demonstrated a more intelligent approach to airport security that does not require body scanner imaging technology such as the TSA has enthusiastically promoted.

China's airport security is efficient and thorough, as well. A friend traveling there recently told me that when he came back to the U.S., it felt like going from a developed country to a 3rd world country in the airports. I suppose China has certain other problems having to do with civil liberty, not to mention a serious attitude problem on the part of one of their private airlines, but they seem to be doing something right with some aspects of the flying experience, anyway.

I wish the TSA was more transparent and honest about the technologies and processes they use. I get the impression their imaging technology and their processes such as their rules for liquids were better thought out and better supported by real world facts. After the attempt to smuggle explosive liquids onto flights in the UK, many airports limited liquid size to 100 ml, or 3.4 ounces. This somewhat arbitrary amount is just under the size of many 4 ounce mini-drinks and mini-yogurts and baby foods in the U.S. So why not allow 4 or 5 ounces. Does that .6 ounce truly make the difference between life and death?

The TSA should engage in profiling, as the Israelis do. Although it's controversial, the Israelis have managed to prevent any hijacking incidents since 1969 so they must be doing something right. Even the Israelis aren't perfect and sooner or later it's possible someone will slip through and cause a calamity, but so far they have demonstrated a more intelligent approach to airport security that does not require body scanner imaging technology such as the TSA has enthusiastically promoted.

China's airport security is efficient and thorough, as well. A friend traveling there recently told me that when he came back to the U.S., it felt like going from a developed country to a 3rd world country in the airports. I suppose China has certain other problems having to do with civil liberty, not to mention a serious attitude problem on the part of one of their private airlines, but they seem to be doing something right with some aspects of the flying experience, anyway.

Can't they carry guns in the cockpit?
http://www.tsa.gov/lawenforcement/programs/ffdo.shtm

The guns are meant to be used against "bad guys" but they work just as well on pilots, co-pilots, etc. Once the rest of the crew is dead, and the door is already secured, fly the plane into whatever you want. No need for box cutters. Profit (just kidding).

Note that this also includes TSA's Secure Flight database, you know, the one where you have to notify the government 72 hours in advance of any planned domestic travel. So this will also have all your comings-and-goings in it as well.

Looks like the mods looking at this article don't appreciate enough such logical arguments as yours if it doesn't match the general ranting.

And just to add something I just realized while reading the related articles -- specifically this one -- the TSA might not allow a strange looking device to board the cabin even if they think it's safe, because it could cause panic on other passengers.

Lesson to learn: stupidity is difficult to avoid. Could be a TSA agent, could be other passengers. It's easier to avoid giving stupidity a chance to show itself.

http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/rail/index.shtm

http://blog.tsa.gov/2011/02/screening-of-passengers-at-savannah.html

http://news.travel.aol.com/2011/02/28/why-did-tsa-pat-down-kids-adults-getting-off-train/

Trains have TSA goons as well. Next is subways and buses (if they aren't doing that already)

http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/rail/index.shtm

http://blog.tsa.gov/2011/02/screening-of-passengers-at-savannah.html

http://news.travel.aol.com/2011/02/28/why-did-tsa-pat-down-kids-adults-getting-off-train/

Trains have TSA goons as well. Next is subways and buses (if they aren't doing that already)

Before you responded the conversation had been about X-Ray backscatter scanners not millimeter wave scanners. I believe it is correct to say that X-Ray is ionizing radiation and that thus far millimeter wave scanners haven't been shown to be an issue. Since the TSA doesn't really talk too much about the difference and it may not be obvious from the machine itself as to which type of emission it generates the perceived threat is still there. Link. Please don't detract from the fact that if this backscatter technology was so safe their own employees would be wearing dosimeters. It also doesn't change the fact that while the amount of radiation is small the concentration in the skin is still a factor. Contrived Example: You are willing to stand in the sun for 5 min unless I place a large lens between you and the sun to concentrate the radiation you may have more a problem with it.

Heck, there was a story recently about the TSA busting a guy with C4 by using an explosive detection device.

Funnily enough, that story is about the TSA congratulating itself for detecting a small amount of detonatorless explosive (1/2 ounce of C4 in a tobacco tin), in checked luggage. - ie. a non-threat to anyone on the plane.

The really sad thing is that the luggage would have been searched (and the C4 found) not because the explosive itself was detected, but because trace amounts of probably unrelated residue on the outside of the bag were detected. I suspect that 99% of 'trace' detections lead to searches that don't end up finding anything; mainly because there are too many legitimate ways that 'explosive' residue can find its way onto a bag.

It's still the SAME thing. They're still regularly blasting folks with unnecessary radiation. Still misappropriating priorities and funds.

Let's be real - how many planes are going to be coming down with knives and similar now that The Door (tm) is in place? Perhaps I'm grossly misinformed - if so, by all means educate me. But I'd rather see more investments being made in explosive detection.

Heck, there was a story recently about the TSA busting a guy with C4 by using an explosive detection device.

These infinitesimally self-important cries of "my rights are violated!" are but the whinings of children, especially to the terrorists.

Cite "the 4th" as much as you like, the true spirit of that right remains. For one person to say "your reasonable cause doesn't qualify" is as effective as telling the ocean to be quiet. You're boarding a sensitive and fragile mode of transportation with the lives of dozens, often hundreds of people at stake. That is your probable cause, right there.

As for your numbing ignorance of screening technology, you can be as paranoid as you want. Don't go near those cell towers! They emit x-rays too! Your microwave? Don't open that door within ten seconds after your coffee is heated! You'll get a dose of x-rays! Don't carry that car-clicker in your pocket! Don't you know it's irradiating you!? [/satire] Paranoia truly knows no boundaries... so where's your evidence to support your stance? Have you even seen the website? Don't you know there's two different body-scanners in use? Are you so afraid of being duped that you'll blissfully avoid viewing a government website? I got bad news; you've already been duped.

A quick google reveals...
drug-dealers: http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/seattle_drug_bust.shtm/
money-launderers: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110605/22322814558/senator-schumer-says-bitcoin-is-money-laundering.shtml/
terrorists: http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/11/new-tsa-pat-down-procedures.html/
pedophiles: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20078653-281/police-internet-providers-must-keep-user-logs/

These are all from this decade. It may be an old meme but it is still relevant.

A quick google reveals...
drug-dealers: http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/seattle_drug_bust.shtm/
money-launderers: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110605/22322814558/senator-schumer-says-bitcoin-is-money-laundering.shtml/
terrorists: http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/11/new-tsa-pat-down-procedures.html/
pedophiles: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20078653-281/police-internet-providers-must-keep-user-logs/

These are all from this decade. It may be an old meme but it is still relevant.

I like to critise as much as the next guy, but credit where it is due
They already do have a variety of armed officers on the planes, they are just in plain clothes to make them more effective and less likely to cause panic.
The door to the cockpit is also locked.

Some of the security theatre is actually required to keep people flying, I agree that it goes too far but I also think that there are some people at the TSA somewhere that really know what they are doing. Even if they did break off my TSA approved lock that I paid extra for, and threw out my bottle of water that I bought inside their 'secure' area.

"It also happens less when I can actually lock my luggage with a lock for which the TSA doesn't have a key."

They just cut it open, as advertised. (or the conveyer belt does, as the same article below shows)

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/customer/claims/damagedlocks.shtm

D/E ($25-44K) for an ordinary TSO. They don't bother listing "Inspector - Dangerous Goods & Cargo". Probably for a reason...

List of TSA Salary I doublt Mr Serrano, or for that matter, any of the pseudo-cop screeners are being paid at band F or above.

They tend to treat me like I'm crazy. But then, I don't look anything like a cop; I look like a slacker software engineer.

A few years ago at Sea-Tac, I had an Alaska rep tell me I couldn't check in a firearm. We had to call her boss over. Fortunately he was familiar with the form, and knew what to do. And the first rep was very apologetic and friendly after. And the best part is: nobody stole the external HDD out of my suitcase!

I also recommend printing out a copy of the TSA page on flying with firearms, in case you get somebody who doesn't have a clue.

Why does this not surprise me. Keep an eye on this I bet he gets a slap on the hand.

Maybe you can ask Blogger Bob (no relation to Baghdad Bob!) over at the TSA blog, WTF?

...I'd be surprised if they don't want to expand their coverage to trans and buses as soon as it's feasible.

Have you been living under a rock the last six months? They are already moving that direction. Here's a short list of links, for your reading/viewing pleasure:

In train stations.
...and again.
In a bus station.
Video of the Savannah, GA train station search.
TSA's spin^Wresponse to the Savannah, GA search.
What a VIPR operation is.
Napolitano musing about expanding the scope of TSA's operations before the above searches happened.

HTH!

Check out this site for a list of the TSA's accomplishments. It seems that their greatest accomplishment is spending billions and billions of dollars without any *real* accomplishments.

This site has a much better approach to listing the accomplishments of the TSA.

Check out this site for a list of the TSA's accomplishments. It seems that their greatest accomplishment is spending billions and billions of dollars without any *real* accomplishments.

This site has a much better approach to listing the accomplishments of the TSA.

The TSA has done nothing to make us more secure. Every attempted airline incident has been stopped by passengers and/or air marshals.

You mean the Federal Air Marshals employed by the TSA, right?

Yeah. Those air marshals. Imagine if we were spending that money on, I don't know, something to make us safe from terrorists.

The TSA has done nothing to make us more secure. Every attempted airline incident has been stopped by passengers and/or air marshals.

You mean the Federal Air Marshals employed by the TSA, right?

Federal Aiur Marshals existed long before the TSA (Wesley Snipes as an air marshall: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105104/ ).
The TSA is a rollup entity created after 9/11.

The TSA has done nothing to make us more secure. Every attempted airline incident has been stopped by passengers and/or air marshals.

You mean the Federal Air Marshals employed by the TSA, right?

Scissors are not banned, so instead of bringing one knife, you just need to bring two of knives that combine into a pair of scissors.

One knife: banned. Two knives joined by a pivot: not banned.

The TSA has an $8.1 annual billion budget and has yet to have a single success.

The TSA actually has a new section dedicated to their successes at http://www.tsa.gov/press/goodcatch/

There are currently three stories: on March 30th they found some pot in a jar of peanut butter, on April 15th they found what appears to be a really tiny knife (or a normal knife in a gigantic DVD player) and on May 5th they found a knife in a shoe (knife not shown).

So, they have had some successes, but these are small, meaningless victories (and, in the first case, completely unrelated to safety).

The TSA has an $8.1 annual billion budget and has yet to have a single success.

The TSA actually has a new section dedicated to their successes at http://www.tsa.gov/press/goodcatch/

There are currently three stories: on March 30th they found some pot in a jar of peanut butter, on April 15th they found what appears to be a really tiny knife (or a normal knife in a gigantic DVD player) and on May 5th they found a knife in a shoe (knife not shown).

So, they have had some successes, but these are small, meaningless victories (and, in the first case, completely unrelated to safety).

The TSA has an $8.1 annual billion budget and has yet to have a single success.

The TSA actually has a new section dedicated to their successes at http://www.tsa.gov/press/goodcatch/

There are currently three stories: on March 30th they found some pot in a jar of peanut butter, on April 15th they found what appears to be a really tiny knife (or a normal knife in a gigantic DVD player) and on May 5th they found a knife in a shoe (knife not shown).

So, they have had some successes, but these are small, meaningless victories (and, in the first case, completely unrelated to safety).

The TSA has an $8.1 annual billion budget and has yet to have a single success.

The TSA actually has a new section dedicated to their successes at http://www.tsa.gov/press/goodcatch/

There are currently three stories: on March 30th they found some pot in a jar of peanut butter, on April 15th they found what appears to be a really tiny knife (or a normal knife in a gigantic DVD player) and on May 5th they found a knife in a shoe (knife not shown).

So, they have had some successes, but these are small, meaningless victories (and, in the first case, completely unrelated to safety).

Not sure if you've heard, but for the last ten years, Commanders-in-Chief from both of the major political parties have been busy stacking that judicial branch with their poster boys/girls (Roberts, Thomas, and Alito courtesy of GWB, and Sotomayer and Kagan courtesy of Obama) while doing everything they can to gut and/or reinterpret the Constitution . I'm not holding out a whole lot of hope that the courts are going to do a whole lot to help out...if you even manage to get to the courts before being dragged off to Gitmo for providing "material aid or support" to "terrorist organizations".

And this is just the @#$!!! we have heard about. Somehow I suspect, no matter how bad you think it is...it's actually much, much worse.

From the NIST NSTIC link in TFA:

# Voluntary: The identity ecosystem is voluntary. You will still be able to surf the Web, write a blog, participate in an online discussion, and post comments to a wiki anonymously or using a pseudonym. You would choose when to use your trusted ID. When you want stronger identity protection, you use your credential, enabling higher levels of trust and security.

Yeah...I trust the government's statements about privacy and security just about as much as I trust anything Blogger Bob says: not at all.

I was surprised to see the TSA's full-body screening systems didn't make the list ... until I saw the reports of how much radiation it exposes us to. I'm using data from NPR's Scientists Question Safety Of New Airport Scanners (2010-05-17) and TSA's X-ray Screening Technology Safety Reports (date unknown, cited on the TSA Blog 2011-03-12).

Note, to compare with XKCD's chart, both TSA and NPR state that a standard chest x-ray is 100 uSv rather than this XKCD's 20 uSv. NPR puts a mammogram at 700 uSv while XKCD holds it as 3000 uSv.

The stated radiation from these backscatter scanners is 0.05 uSv (TSA, reported as 0.005 mrem) to 0.2 uSv (UCSF via NPR) per usage. UCSF suggests that measuring this radiation on the skin would result in a larger value. The TSA report includes a disclaimer that they are re-testing these numbers and should have results around the end of this month. Another post here noted 0.09 uSv but had no source (reported as "0.09 Sv" because Slashdot eats the Greek letter mu).

The real danger with respect to the backscatter scanners was to the TSA workers (who had zero protection) and others who work in airports. The NPR piece also cites David Brenner, head of Columbia University's Center for Radiological Research, saying that 5% of the population is especially sensitive to radiation and that "we don't really have a quick and easy test to find those individuals." Fortunately, these machines are not in use any more, though that might change if the TSA's new report doesn't increase those numbers (or it gets trumped by fearmongering on behalf of some news outlet or politician).

I was surprised to see the TSA's full-body screening systems didn't make the list ... until I saw the reports of how much radiation it exposes us to. I'm using data from NPR's Scientists Question Safety Of New Airport Scanners (2010-05-17) and TSA's X-ray Screening Technology Safety Reports (date unknown, cited on the TSA Blog 2011-03-12).

Note, to compare with XKCD's chart, both TSA and NPR state that a standard chest x-ray is 100 uSv rather than this XKCD's 20 uSv. NPR puts a mammogram at 700 uSv while XKCD holds it as 3000 uSv.

The stated radiation from these backscatter scanners is 0.05 uSv (TSA, reported as 0.005 mrem) to 0.2 uSv (UCSF via NPR) per usage. UCSF suggests that measuring this radiation on the skin would result in a larger value. The TSA report includes a disclaimer that they are re-testing these numbers and should have results around the end of this month. Another post here noted 0.09 uSv but had no source (reported as "0.09 Sv" because Slashdot eats the Greek letter mu).

The real danger with respect to the backscatter scanners was to the TSA workers (who had zero protection) and others who work in airports. The NPR piece also cites David Brenner, head of Columbia University's Center for Radiological Research, saying that 5% of the population is especially sensitive to radiation and that "we don't really have a quick and easy test to find those individuals." Fortunately, these machines are not in use any more, though that might change if the TSA's new report doesn't increase those numbers (or it gets trumped by fearmongering on behalf of some news outlet or politician).

http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/SecuritySystems/ucm227201.htm

http://www.tsa.gov/research/reading/index.shtm

Look at, in particular, the radiation safety engineering assessments.

Thanks to a new type of X-ray scanner unveiled in Australia, annoyed TSA agents won't have to send you to a hospital for a body cavity scan, they can do it in-house.

TFA is written in Australia and is about Australia. The Transportation Security Administration is a division of the USA government. (Or did we annex Australia and not tell anyone?)

http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/grants/programs/ibsgp/2010/index.shtm

TSA already groping at the bus stop.

It's interesting to note, though, that Obama talked about how high-speed rail would allow you to travel "without the pat-downs". I would have expected that he would be in the loop about the TSA's desire to extend airport-style screening to both rail and bus terminals, or that they've already carried out pilot tests doing just that. It makes the President look as if he's losing control when he doesn't appear to be aware what his own administration is doing.

It's interesting to note, though, that Obama talked about how high-speed rail would allow you to travel "without the pat-downs". I would have expected that he would be in the loop about the TSA's desire to extend airport-style screening to both rail and bus terminals, or that they've already carried out pilot tests doing just that. It makes the President look as if he's losing control when he doesn't appear to be aware what his own administration is doing.

For professionals traveling with very expensive equipment, handguns in the Pelican cases are insurance. Heck, just the cases cost more than the pistols used to gain lock-ability.

Wouldn't call it a "loophole," though. I don't think there's been any intent to block otherwise legal firearms from *checked* baggage.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1666.shtm

I'll do something like this, when I have to send a server in checked luggage. You don't actually need a starter pistol or a real gun - just the ammo. Just follow the rules for packing a single 22 caliber round, locked up properly, and chained to the chassis. You can throw the bullet away if the server is making a one way trip. (grin)

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1666.shtm

Will soon be back in the USA.
Sold to every small town PD with a long term no bid contract.
Big sis will watch you long before you get TSA ed or xrayed in your local community.
"respond intelligently to new and unforeseen events." Your face matched to your gait. Anything change, time for big sis to have a chat?
http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/vipr_blockisland.shtm
ie augmented security at key transportation facilities in urban areas around the country - your face part of a huge data stream.
Want a vision of the future, imagine a camera streaming a human face - forever .. they have cell voice prints been detected over cities, now its going visual.

Do you only go to the doctor when you're sick? You should also go to regular checks to ensure your health is good.
As for the benefits, maybe the lack of gory discoveries is a benefit after all.
As for your inquiry: http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/brandon_alexander.shtm
Of course, "It's on their website, doesn't mean shit" will fly right out of your lips. Oh well...

Here's what would be posted.. http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2009/08/imaging-technolgy-bigger-picture.html ... ohhh .. hubba hubba.

Did you know that NewYork City has 468 train stations, only 35 less than the total number of train stations in the rest of the country? And has a daily ridership of 5.1million people. Compare this with the airline industry which (from various sources) claim that as many as people fly in the United States each day.

Btw, in the US there are 14,951 airports as of 2008, including 5,146 with paved runways, and 9,805 with unpaved runways.

The problem here is that you have 5.1million people trying to make it through 468 train stations each day. That doesn't include people taking regional (like Amtrak) trains into NY and then transferring to local trains.

Can anybody imagine trying to scan all the passengers that go through 42nd Street? 58million per year... If I have to get to the subway station an hour ahead of my subway, I might as well take a cab, or walk.

For those of you not familiar, knitting needles are often up to seven (or more) inches long; they can be made of wood, plastic, or metal. A sturdy needle can also slide nicely into soft tissue without any major difficulties assuming the wielder is strong enough.

But hey, at least it's not like they let the REAL deadly things on board. Like factory-sealed bottles of soda, and similar threats.