Slashdot Mirror


Feds Undertaking Massive Passenger Profiling Plan

Logic Bomb writes: "The Washington Post is running an overview of a rather big-brother-ish airline passenger screening system the government is proposing. Keeping track of people's ticket purchases is one thing, but correlating people's addresses and living arrangements...! This attempt seems closer to completion and implementation than any other that's been proposed so far."

9 of 556 comments (clear)

  1. It's your own fault. by Krapangor · · Score: 5, Interesting
    In Europe we have information protecting laws which forbid such things. And we have these laws because some dudes sued at the constitutional courts and these court order the goverments to make such laws. You didn't fight for such things and claimed it to be "overregulation". And now your govs are fucking you up. So don't wine about being oppressed. Freedom is something you have to fight for. Everyday.

    --
    Owner of a Mensa membership card.
  2. One "little" problem by MosesJones · · Score: 4, Interesting


    What about the thousands of business travellers every year who attend a weeks worth of meetings and

    a) Don't buy their own ticket

    b) Don't book their hotel

    c) Give the address they are staying at as the company they are visiting.

    Or even crazier....

    DIDN'T BUY THEIR TICKETS IN THE US!

    For pities sake linking all of the reservations systems in the US to try and catch terrorists based in the middle east ? I hate to break it to the muppets out there who thought of this but I can go to a website outside of the US (e.g. This one) and book tickets.

    The first thing such a system would find is things like

    "Hey look IBMs corporate card has booked 4 people onto this flight, 1 in first class, 1 in business and 2 in coach. We'd better check it out"

    or

    "Some guy in Redmond is booking hundreds of flights a week going all over the world... including to the middle east"

    This wins two awards

    1) Brain dead of the year

    and

    2) Failure to recognise the world outside of the US

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
  3. Not to mention the false hits... by D_Fresh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Imagine if you lived in a house that, three owners ago, had a "known terrorist" (read: someone named Muhammed) living in it - you'd be searched constantly. Or if you had a name very similar to aforementioned terrorist (Mohammed Uta?) - you'd be harassed every time you bought a ticket and set foot in the airport. Or if you had to pay cash just once for a ticket - you'd be flagged and frisked at every security checkpoint known to man.

    These are the petty annoyances with systems like this - the false hits far outweigh the real ones, and innocent people get harassed and treated rudely by ignorant, underpaid security guards for things they never know about. It's like someone stealing your identity, ruining your credit rating, and leaving you to pick up the pieces - you don't see the authorities in the credit industry rushing to clean up the records of identity theft victims, do you? No - the victims must spend months if not years reclaiming their credit rating - just as he-who-lives-two-doors-down-from-Muhammed would have to somehow convince Big Brother that the same street name doesn't add up to jack.

    --

    Was that out loud?
  4. You've got the data, now what? by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This article raises a lot more questions than it answers.

    • If most of the records are going to be on US citizens, are we saying that US citizens pose a real threat? The September 11th murderers were all foreign, travelling openly on foreign passports. I assume we'll tie in the CIA database on foreign citizens, but do we assume a foreigner citizen not in the database is higher risk or lower risk than US citizens in the database? Does "no information" mean "assume innocent" or "assume guilt"?
    • What are the complete criteria for being promoted up the danger list? Being a member of a state militia? Being a muslim? Being a member of a citizen's right organization that has criticized these plans?
    • What are the criteria for getting off the danger list? Renounce your evil ways? Join the Republican Party? Report X acts of unpatriotism to the Office of Homeland Security? If you think I'm joking about this last one, go read about the McCarthy Communist witch hunts. This shit actually happened to real people in the USA within living memory, and it can happen again if we allow it to.
    • Who'll be responsible for administrating the database query? Local law enforcement? The new minimum wage "Federal Security Employees"? The FBI? The NSA?
    • Who'll oversee the people who run the database querying and ensure that the results and responses are both accurate and appropriate? Are we going to wait until we've tazered and maced the entourage of some royal Saudi scion before we start to question the system?
    • How do you find out what information is in there about you? Is asking about it unpatriotic and dangerous behaviour? Remember, this is all about how the government views your behaviour, not about facts that have been challenged and proven in a court of law.
    • How do you get your information corrected if it's wrong? Who do you go to if the administrators refuse to correct it?
    • Is the system going to pop up a "It is 67% probable that this person is a terrorist" box and let the minimum wage security guard make the decision about how to handle that? Last week, Joe was flipping burgers; this week he's got a shiny new gun and a shiny new badge, and has to make an instant decision about how to confront a presumed armed and dangerous subject. Is the system going to make it easy for Joe, and say "80% probability, recommend taser and mace, call for armed backup"? Or is it just going to set off a binary "Take 'em down!" alarm, based on crossing some arbitrary threshold of probability?

    OK, let's hear the arguments in favour of it, but whatever they are, I contend that if we put in place a vast, complex, expensive system that is too problematical to use, then all we're doing is spending Federal money to perform a PR exercise for the airline industry.

    And if we do use it, then god help us all. I never, ever want to hear this phrase spoken to me or to anyone else:

    "The computer says you're 67% likely to be guilty, based on your past actions and associations. We're not going to release you until you can prove your loyalty."

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  5. Quote from the BBC. by Noryungi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No comments:



    In the only interview with the al-Qaeda leader since the 11 September attacks, Bin Laden declares that "the battle has moved to inside America".



    "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The US Government will lead the American people - and the West in general - into an unbearable hell and a choking life," he says.



    Click here for the whole article

    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
  6. My Three Year Old Daughter was Flagged by Uggy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After reading this article, I reflect that my three year old daughter was flagged. She does NOT have a beard. I am an Army Reserve Captain and fit the Topgun Iceman profile (big white guy with a short military haircut and demeanor). We all got flagged and searched (carry ons emptied, patted down again etc.)

    Although I understand people's concerns, Europe for all their supposed laws about privacy and information continues to be the most racist place in the world. I can't tell you how many (serveral) times coming through customs in Spain, France, Germany and Switzerland, I sailed through with nary a glance but the Latin American's behind and in front of me were interogated (who are you visiting, why are you here, who are you with, where are you staying).

    In Bilbao, Spain, I was watching their local television news program where they were patting themselves on the back because they didn't have the same race problems as the US. "We have no such problems in Bilbao," The anchorwoman beamed, "We are proud of the six black families that live here in our city and consider them equals."

    YOU COUNTED THEM?! And you know where they live, don't you? That's an indictment of the first degree. You can see that immigrants are not fleeing worlds of oppression and landing in Bilbao Spain that's for sure... doesn't that tell you something?

    I've lived all over the world, and although the US is certainly not the utopia people think it is, we really are the best place to come if you are different or oppressed. Millions of immigrants can't be wrong *G*.

    --
    Toddlers are the stormtroopers of the Lord of Entropy.
  7. Re:what's wrong? by j-beda · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Most of the profiles are based on dry, boring math, just probabilities churned out by a computer somewhere.

    Actually, I think that most of the "profiling" that is done is based on various people's *perceptions* of the probablilities.

    The number of people stopped on drug related suspicion grounds generally disproportionaltely favours blacks, yet in that particular area, the number of people actually convicted disproportionatly favours "whites". The profiling in this case was actually wrong, yet it still occurred. (And of course I have no citation to back this up :-)

    If the system used an independantly audited algorithm that accurately reflected the known factors associated with "bad" behaviour, and randomly selected people for further checks based on representitive data and modeling, then I might not have as much problem with it.

    Of course I would still be concerned about the potential for privacy abuses.

    One must also consider the effectiveness of any system designed to merely catch those intent on destruction. If we make the airlines "safe", would not the determined terrorist just start blowing up busses? NFL games? Little League? If you want to kill 10, 20, or 100 random people, you do not need an airplane to do it. Inciting terrorcan be done in even the most strict of police states - so is it worth the cost to become one?

  8. My Airline Security Story by FFFish · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm sure a lot of us have stories about the utter stupidity of so-called airport "security."

    I fly once in a blue moon. As a result, I'm not exactly up-to-speed on the new security paranoia. I go to check in, and answer some silly questions, none of which include "are you carrying anything sharp -- a knife, nail clipper, knitting needles, that sort of thing?"

    My luggage goes through. I waste an hour waiting to for the boarding call. It comes. I enter the security area. Toss my coat and carry-on onto the xray, and I'm about to walk through the metal detector. Then I remember my car keys. I step back, take 'em out, toss 'em into a tray.

    The security guard just about shits herself. "Is that a knife?!" she asks. "Er, yah?" I reply. It's my little keychain knife. It's as sharp as a spoon and has a 1/2" blade. I use it for opening envelopes and potato chip bags.

    Well, my god, you'd think it was the discovery of the century. She literally grabs them from my hand and goes frantic removing my knife from the key ring. Does not ask to look at them, does not ask if she can fuck with my property, and then hands me a bullshit line about either throwing it out or mailing it to myself. I got rude about that: it's not a cheap knife, and there's no post office in the airport.

    It ended up being checked in as luggage, in an envelope and an enormous plastic bag. Must have cost the airline 3x what the knife was worth.

    Anyway, the security bitch took my name. I suppose I'm in some database now as a badass, to be cavity-searched next time I come within a mile of an airport.

    Now, what really pisses me off is the implied insult in the whole thing. They really think I'm stupid enough to believe that the security check has anything to do with making the plane safe!

    I could have carried a 6" lexan dagger through the metal detector and they'd *NEVER* have known about it. I could have walked through with plastic explosive in my shoes. I could have run piano wire through my belt and used it as a garrot. I probably could have walked on with a glass bottle of Coke.

    Or I could have snapped the pull-out handle off my carry-on luggage, and weilded two 16" long sharp-pointed metal sticks.

    Or I could be trained in the martial arts, and way more dangerous than most anyone who is carrying a weapon.

    (Or if I'd left the damn knife in my pocket, I'd probably have cleared the metal detector: it didn't detect my belt buckle, which contains about 10x the metal content of the knife!)

    THERE IS NO FUCKING SECURITY ON AN AIRPLANE!

    I am deeply insulted that the airlines are playing this stupid little game of pretending to make us safe by disposing of our nail clippers. That isn't improving our security at all. It's just an insult.

    I'm also PO'd that the check-in desk isn't suggesting to passengers that they think about any sharp objects that might be confiscated, and consder checking them in with the luggage.

    And I'd like to slap the bitch that was so rude about it all. I'm going through a small-town Canadian airport, riding a piddling small jet, and I'm carring a piddling small knife. It wasn't the find of the century: it was an obvious mistake, and she should have politely asked me to step aside and remove the knife myself.

    It also pisses me off that the best I can do is gripe about it all here on Slashdot, because if I go to the airport and talk to her supervisor, I'll probably be filed in some freaking Interpol database as Dr. Evil.

    Ok, your turn: what's your airport security horror story?

    --

    --
    Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
  9. Re:Don't cry when stopped in other countries by slykens · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Young white American male/female backpacking across Europe - search for illegal drugs

    In my experience in flying between European countries customs has been a joke, if anyone was even there to talk to. Hell, my last trip over in November I didn't even get an entry stamp.

    Single male entering Thailand - visa declined

    US passport holders are not required to have a visa for stays of less than 30 days. Thailand is part of the visa waiver program. Before I started travelling a lot (office in India) I thought it was difficult to go some of these places. It isn't. The visa waiver program makes it very easy, and for most other places it just takes a little bit of money. I realize it is ethnocentric to say but in my experience merely holding a US passport changes the ease with which one can move between certain countries.

    I see your point, however, that if we (Americans) begin to profile people based on their ethnicity that we should also expect to be examined in a similar manner entering other countries. Well, I have news for you. We're already pulling Arabs aside! I flew from Heathrow to Dulles about a month ago and found that the United gate agent had a list of people she wanted to hand check. They asked what seat you were in (1D for me! upfront is nice) and if you weren't who they wanted you got to board, if you were unlucky you had your bags hand inspected. Let's just say when I went through there weren't any white people being checked out.

    Another anecdotal note, when I came home in December 2000 via Dulles no one even looked at my passport. As I found out later, and an article here talked about it, our flight was precleared, there was no one they were interested in so the immigration guys just ignored those of us with US passports.

    I have been around the world twice in the last 18 months and the only country I had trouble with was Japan. The guy couldn't understand that I was only going to be in Osaka for a day and wanted to enter the city to look around. Eventually he just stamped me and let me go.