Slashdot Mirror


Security Tips for Traveling with Tech Gear

securitas writes "Many Slashdotters will be traveling during the next week and PC World has an article about how to travel with tech gear with a minimum of security hassles. The Transport Security Administration maintains an allowable and banned items list (PDF) that you might want to check. Make sure that you have fully charged batteries for any tech gifts you received. I've had big hassles with all the tech gear that I routinely carry, especially when combining business trips with a vacation. One security screener even asked me to log in, decrypt and look at files on my notebook's desktop, which was unnecessarily invasive (not to mention against my then-employer's security policy). He settled for viewing the secure login screen 'to make sure it worked.' Any other horror stories out there?"

527 comments

  1. There seems to be a small error in the story... by welshsocialist · · Score: 0, Troll

    The story says:

    The Transport Security Administration maintains an allowable and banned items list (PDF) that you might want to check.

    The agency who manages airport security is the Transportation Security Administration. Looks like someone goofed here.

    --
    Support the Chagossians
    1. Re:There seems to be a small error in the story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe you modded this guy as a troll... unless it was because of his Jewel sig.

  2. We are Borg by moehoward · · Score: 4, Funny

    We carry around all this crap (yes, me included) and require it for our jobs and personal lives. We can't live without it. Right? Laptop, cell phone, Wi-Fi gear, PDA, and related equipment. Are we not borg already?

    Discuss...

    --
    "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
    1. Re:We are Borg by Llywelyn · · Score: 1

      Closer to Gargoyles (Snow Crash, for those who don't know the reference).

      Borg live in a shared conscious, which we don't have (yet), Gargoyles are just wired with accessories.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    2. Re:We are Borg by russellh · · Score: 2, Insightful
      We carry around all this crap (yes, me included) and require it for our jobs and personal lives. We can't live without it. Right? Laptop, cell phone, Wi-Fi gear, PDA, and related equipment. Are we not borg already?

      We spend enough time cursing our gadgets for me to conclude no, and it seems unlikely that integration paradise is right around the corner. But then, maybe ST has never explored the Borg well enough to find the sucky, irritating and mundane side of them. We need Quentin Tarantino for that.

      --
      must... stay... awake...
    3. Re:We are Borg by PacoTaco · · Score: 3, Funny
      Are we not borg already?

      Let's shoot a few of you and see if you adapt.

    4. Re:We are Borg by grumling · · Score: 2, Funny
      We spend enough time cursing our gadgets for me to conclude no

      Ever hear anyone complain about their bad back? Prostate troubles? The fact that they are too damn fat?

      Face it, we've been complaining about faulty tools since they've been with us, and we tend to humanize them as well.

      Personally, I welcome prostetic devices. At least if they're attached, I won't loose them!

      --
      "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
    5. Re:We are Borg by magick_ · · Score: 1

      Let's shoot a few of you and see if you adapt.
      Yeah, i think they will adapt, they start shouting back...

  3. I get these questions every year! by mistert2 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Let me try this again, I get these questions every year at Christmas. What am I a walking FBI agent. Why does everyone on ask the geek in the family about Cell phones, digital cameras, computers, airport screening, spam killers, pop-ups, OS,....

    I thought this article has some nice information. I printed it out and will be handing this to my father-in-law, sister-in-law, and my two brothers.

    1. Re:I get these questions every year! by kfg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What, you think they should call the plumber or something?

      I'm the general technology and science guy in my family. My formal education is in physics, so I get all the questions about black holes and stuff. I'm the computer guy, so I get to maintain everyone's computers and answer all related questions. I've worked as an automotive engineer, mananged a dealership and owned an R/C racetrack, so I get all the car questions.

      Guess what, I'm not surprised by any of this in the least. I would hardly expect them to ask, say, my 16 year old neice whose knowledge is largely limited to nail polish and Justin Timberlake.

      If you're really that uptight about being valuable to your own family they just might think all that much about you either.

      Solve the issue by removing yourself from the situation.

      KFG

    2. Re:I get these questions every year! by Simonetta · · Score: 0, Troll

      Let's take a minute and clarify the most important unspoken point here::: We are not the ones who are responsible for the brutal and horrible terrorist acts. Harrassing us and our equipment isn't going to reduce anyone's chances from being victimized by these psychos.

      An more effective approach to reducing terrorism would be to make it understood to the people who are causing these events that their underlining political agenda will not be considered if they coordinate and execute these actions. Not in a broad sense, but very specific quid-pro-quo (Latin phrase meaning one precise action traded for another). For instance if the Palestinians (or one of their "non-aligned" splinter groups) cause a terrorist incident to occur, then ALL State Dept negotiations, discussions, trade talks, diplomatic meetings, UN resolutions,ect. will be suspended for a year. They would be completely ignored by the international organizations upon which they depend to legitimize their political goals.

      If bozos living in caves manage to get together the resources to mount massive terrorist attacks upon the civilized world (and who believes that bozos in caves are the ones actually doing this?), then the AID shipments and relief work will be suspended for a year. Soldiers will actually shoot the doctors who refuse to comply.
      Bank accounts will be seized: trade embargos actually enforced.

      When people complain that their children are hurt and starving, we should very quickly and loudly point out that this is only happening because they gave money and shelter to a group that blew up a passenger airliner. It will continue for X months and then end. If it happens again, then the food, material, and trade embargo will go into effect again for X months. Sure, it makes us look like heartless assholes in their eyes, but we're not the ones dancing in the streets and handing out sweets to strangers when some piece of shit walks into a day-care center with ten pounds of Centex strapped around his waist.

      Terrorism continues to happen because the people who are supposed to be stopping it are more serious about harrassing ordinary people who have nothing to do with it than they are at convincing the perpetrators (and their supporters) that the guaranteed consequences from these horrible acts would not be worth it to their cause.

    3. Re:I get these questions every year! by velo_mike · · Score: 1

      Let's take a minute and clarify the most important unspoken point here::: We are not the ones who are responsible for the brutal and horrible terrorist acts. Harrassing us and our equipment isn't going to reduce anyone's chances from being victimized by these psychos.

      I'm with you there. If you haven't already, check out freetotravel.org which points out these kinds of things and more.

      If bozos living in caves manage to get together the resources to mount massive terrorist attacks upon the civilized world (and who believes that bozos in caves are the ones actually doing this?)

      Deluded millionaire religious fundementalist bozos in caves, but still bozos in caves.

      then the AID shipments and relief work will be suspended for a year. Soldiers will actually shoot the doctors who refuse to comply.

      I've switched my thinking on this one. Up til a couple weeks ago, I was right there with you. Now, I believe that the goal of these people is the destruction of the west and it's replacement with a theocratic islamic state based on sharia. These people don't want our aid payments, they want us bowing to mecca, veiling our women, censoring our "godless" entertainment, and wiping out all competing religions.

      my .02 euros.

      --

      At the bottom of the endless pile of paper work which characterizes all regulation lies a gun.
      Alan Greenspan

    4. Re:I get these questions every year! by mistert2 · · Score: 1
      I guess my feeling on this is, that I would like to not have to talk about work everytime we get together. I would like to talk about weather, sports, or even life.

      It seems that no matter where or when, people have hundreds of computer questions. When I am church, I guess I would like to put my thoughts towards worship, not why this guys ipod doesn't work. Or sitting in a backroom fixing Uncle Ned's computer everytime I come over for a holiday gathering.

      I don't mind helping my family with these questions, but there is an appropriate place and time.

      No, I don't want them calling a plumber for their cell phone problems. But they have me fix the plumbing, too.

    5. Re:I get these questions every year! by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      An more effective approach to reducing terrorism would be to make it understood to the people who are causing these events that their underlining political agenda will not be considered if they coordinate and execute these actions. Not in a broad sense, but very specific quid-pro-quo (Latin phrase meaning one precise action traded for another). For instance if the Palestinians (or one of their "non-aligned" splinter groups) cause a terrorist incident to occur, then ALL State Dept negotiations, discussions, trade talks, diplomatic meetings, UN resolutions,ect. will be suspended for a year. They would be completely ignored by the international organizations upon which they depend to legitimize their political goals.

      Ok, but make sure to include Israel in that bargain - if they provoke an incident, say by bulldozing some houses or building a giant wall around the occupied zone, then we ignore them for a year. Only difference is, after a year, I don't think they'll be around to ignore.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    6. Re:I get these questions every year! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      An more effective approach to reducing terrorism would be to make it understood to the people who are causing these events that their underlining political agenda will not be considered if they coordinate and execute these actions.

      Your argument defies logic and ignores history. The terrorists are not governments. They are independent groups of fanatics. And yet your method of addressing the problem relies on punishing civilians. Punishing civilians has never worked out for an occupying power in the long run. In the short term, violating human rights, exjudicial killings and collective punishment seem to be effective. But ultimately, it only creates more fanatics and creates more problems when the next generation of children grows up.

      Israel is now facing the generation of terrorists it helped create by keeping Palestinians in refugee camps and engaging in collective punishment. Their solution is now to create a wall between themselves and those they can no longer effectively subjugate. This too will probably fail if history is any guide. The Romans built a wall from one end of Scotland to the other to keep the highlanders out. But it ultimately proved impossible as trade continued with the highlanders and eventually the wall was abandoned. Israel will still want cheap Palestinian labor and that will be the undoing of the temporary security provided by the barrier.

    7. Re:I get these questions every year! by llzackll · · Score: 1

      Only way to avoid this is to not let people know that you know about computers. I used to have people call me all the time because their computer isn't working right.. Sometimes people I don't even know! How the hell did you get my number?

      Now when i'm out with friends I don't even talk about computers.. If the subject comes up I am just like, yeah I got a computer..

  4. Without the iPod??????? by kantai · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Try living without the IPod for a few days"

    What in the name of Linus Torvalds is this guy thinking? Living without my precious? I don't think so....

    1. Re:Without the iPod??????? by The+Unabageler · · Score: 2, Funny

      i got my ipod almost specifically for use on planes!!!

      --
      perl -e '$_="\007/4`\cp%2,".chr(127);s/./"\"\\c$&\""/gees; print'
    2. Re:Without the iPod??????? by JeffTL · · Score: 1

      It's called a "troll." Anyone can tell you that an airplane is the IDEAL environment for iPod use, and encouraging people to leave their PDAs at home is simply foolish; supposing someone foolishly followed such advice, and found need of an address book? Most PDA owners do not probably sit down and copy all addresses to a paper address book every Saturday night and carry that on planes, and you never know when you might forget an important phone number.

    3. Re:Without the iPod??????? by justzisguy · · Score: 1

      Excellent try, but you just pointed out your unfamiliarity with today's iPod. iPods have been carrying around our address books for quite some time now. You should try one.

    4. Re:Without the iPod??????? by CoreDump01 · · Score: 1

      Now why the hell was my last post a flamebait?

      The perl command is missing a linebreak.

    5. Re:Without the iPod??????? by JeffTL · · Score: 1

      I actually happen to have a third-generation iPod. I was addressing multiple points, but yes, if all you use your PDA for is address book you'd probably be better served on long-distance travel to just take an iPod if you have one.

  5. Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sorry, but some security guy trying to do anything on my computer is an attempt to bypass a security device and in violation of the DMCA. Federal law says I can't do what the federal agent says.

  6. Booting a laptop by stephens_domain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Showing that it works does not really mean much. How much stuff could you pack into a laptop and still have it boot once? Take out the CD/DVD bay, or take out the hard drive and boot from a live CD, hollow out the PC card slot. Make a false battery and tell the agent your battery is dead so you have to use AC, etc.

    --

    ..
    1. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      It's not as bad as you think. With an X-ray they can detect most of what you listed. The big problem for the is the battery. It's hard to tell if it's really a battery or an explosive. If your battery doesn't work, don't expect to be able to carry it on.

    2. Re:Booting a laptop by papasui · · Score: 2, Funny

      If a laptop explodes while I'm on my way to Punta Cana in the Domican Republic next week I'm blaming you.

    3. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That an excellent idea. Thanks you sir.

    4. Re:Booting a laptop by Torham · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe Israel used a working cell phone to kill Yahya Ayyash, a member of Hamas, in 1996. Still El Al seems pretty content if you can make your digital camera turn on, but insisted on opening all the snacks i had brought.

    5. Re:Booting a laptop by Kierthos · · Score: 5, Interesting

      From Wikipedia:

      He was killed by the Israeli Shin Bet in 1996 following a massive manhunt. They were able to compromise one of Ayyash's fellow Hamas members, who gave him a cell phone full of explosives. When they confirmed Ayyash was using it, the Shin Bet detonated it, killing him instantly.

      Now, supposedly, the cell phone worked as well, and the last call he got on it was from the head of the Shin Bet, who told him "Goodbye."

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    6. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, pack along some antimatter. It currently isn't on the banned list...

    7. Re:Booting a laptop by costas · · Score: 2, Informative

      They stopped requiring booting laptops a while back. Most US airports I've flown thru use instead chemical "sniffer" devices --they wipe your laptop with a sticky pad and then scan the pad in the sniffer machine. Much better than a simple boot...

    8. Re:Booting a laptop by KrispyKringle · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There are a couple of ways of looking at this. The first is that they use chemical sniffers (as a previous poster mentioned) to try to detect explosives, regardless of opening your device. This should be, in theory, far more accurate anyway.

      But I think the reality, disturbing as it may be, is that there are so many loopholes that they can do little more than a token effort. Remember that student who hid boxcutters on airplanes to show how insecure they still are? For that matter, if blades are a threat (and in reality, using a plane as a weapon is a far greater threat than simply blowing up the plane itself), one could easily a) get one of those nifty carbon fiber commando-style blades that don't set off metal detectors, b) hide a blade in some metal case (like a laptop chassis), c) hide a thin blade inside something metallic like a pen, d) watch James Bond movies for more inspiration.

      The point of the matter, in my opinion, is that it doesn't really matter if someone does damage to a plane or its occupants--I ride Amtrak regularly and there's no security at all--but rather the risk of someone taking over a plane. 250 casualties are certainly bad (but there are plenty of other public situations--Amtrak, for instance--in which we all face the same risk), but the real risk, as I said, is that of someone taking over a plane. And we could prevent that with a lot less effort and a lot less difficulty if we simply beefed up the cockpit doors.

    9. Re:Booting a laptop by swillden · · Score: 5, Funny

      And we could prevent that with a lot less effort and a lot less difficulty if we simply beefed up the cockpit doors.

      Or armed all of the passengers. Imagine what would happen to a terrorist who tried to take over a plane if the pilot could hit a switch and unlock a half-size baseball bat at each seat!

      Might make it hard to get the terrorists to trial, though...

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't need a carbon fiber blade or something like that which would REALLY attract attention to you if it was found during a random search. Simply sharpen the edge of a credit card, and it'll be quite workable as a deadly weapon to slash a throat.

      I know they have to try, but everyone with a clue knows that there's no way to prevent weapons from coming on board, what they really target is bombs and things that can be made into bombs. Prohibitions against box cutters and the like are just to make the sheep feel more secure.

    11. Re:Booting a laptop by Patik · · Score: 1
      They were able to compromise one of Ayyash's fellow Hamas members, who gave him a cell phone full of explosives. When they confirmed Ayyash was using it, the Shin Bet detonated it, killing him instantly.
      Obviously that idea was stolen from an episode of '24'.
    12. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And we could prevent that with a lot less effort and a lot less difficulty if we simply beefed up the cockpit doors.

      Unless the terrorists are the uniformed pilots. With beefed up cockpit doors, it would be impossible to get them out.

    13. Re:Booting a laptop by Speed+Racer · · Score: 1

      If your battery doesn't work, don't expect to be able to carry it on.

      That might not be a bad idea. It beats trying to find a recycling center for old notebook batteries.

      --
      Free Mac Mini. Yes, I'm
    14. Re:Booting a laptop by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      Yes, exactly. The Shin Bet are so damn good that they can look forward in time six years and get an idea from a TV show.

      And to think I used to just limit my ridicule to people who didn't read the articles.

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    15. Re:Booting a laptop by zm · · Score: 2, Funny

      Might make it hard to get the terrorists to trial, though...

      Well, at least the suicide part of their mission will still work...

      --
      Sig ?
    16. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dominican rocks! Have fun and make sure you are constantly drunk that's what I always do.

    17. Re:Booting a laptop by Patik · · Score: 1

      It was a joke. Here, check this out.

    18. Re:Booting a laptop by Thu+Anon+Coward · · Score: 1

      who told him "Goodbye."

      I'm surprised he didn't say, "Can you hear me, now?"

      --



      I'm good with numbers - .45, 7.62, 9.....
    19. Re:Booting a laptop by DavittJPotter · · Score: 1

      An armed air marshall in the passenger cabin would be the easiest thing to do. Barring "Passenger 57" type episodes, most would-be terrorist(s) would be dissuaded by the sight of a well-trained marshall with a firearm. Yes, depressurization is a threat. In your scenario, isn't a commandeered airplane a greater threat to a larger number of people?

      --
      "If there's hope, it lies in the proles..."
    20. Re:Booting a laptop by swillden · · Score: 1

      An armed air marshall in the passenger cabin would be the easiest thing to do.

      I think the baseball bats would be cheaper and more effective. One marshal can potentially be taken out. Two or more acting in concert would be really effective, but two or three times as expensive. 200 passengers with baseball bats would be even more effective, and very cheap.

      Yes, depressurization is a threat

      Not as much as you might think. There are frangible bullets that won't penetrate the aluminum skin of an airplane. Baseball bats also won't cause depressurization.

      In your scenario, isn't a commandeered airplane a greater threat to a larger number of people?

      Umm, the point is to prevent I commandeered airplane. I don't understand your question.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    21. Re:Booting a laptop by robhancock · · Score: 1

      It may be possible to bring such weapons on board an airplane, but now that people have seen what happened on 9/11, I don't think it's too likely that the passengers will allow one guy or even a few guys with knives to smash the plane into something..

    22. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who told him "Goodbye."

      I'm surprised he didn't say, "Can you hear me, now?"

      I'm suprised he didn't sing "If you don't know me by now, you will, never ever ever ever knoooow meee"

    23. Re:Booting a laptop by transient · · Score: 1
      Yes, depressurization is a threat.

      Not really. It may surprise you to find out that airplanes aren't remotely airtight. They leak air through door seals, body joints and so forth. For that matter, they aren't even pressurized to maintain ground pressure. The apparent altitude in the cabin at cruise is between 5000 and 8000 feet (which is why you feel the effects of increased altitude, particularly in your ears, despite the pressurization). The pressurization system simply replaces the aircraft's air faster than it leaks. There are valves that regulate how much air enters the aircraft. If you were to put a bullet hole in an aircraft's fuselage, the valves would open a bit more to account for the slightly increased leakage, and that would be the end of it.

      That's not to say that you can just shoot anything you want, of course. Putting a bullet through a window could very well take out the whole window, and then you've got a sizable hole. But even this isn't a huge problem, because there is a very simple procedure for dealing with decompression: Descend. You might be interested in the summary final report for Aloha Airlines 243, which lost 18 feet of its fuselage at 24000 feet. Fatalities? One. The aircraft landed safely.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
    24. Re:Booting a laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they used his cellphone to get targeting info for the bombs.

    25. Re:Booting a laptop by nzhavok · · Score: 1

      I think the baseball bats would be cheaper and more effective. One marshal can potentially be taken out. Two or more acting in concert would be really effective, but two or three times as expensive. 200 passengers with baseball bats would be even more effective, and very cheap.

      Fantastic idea, but I'd prefer tasers (or stun batons mabye) - not so cheap thou :-/

      --

      He who defends everything, defends nothing. -- Fredrick The Great
    26. Re:Booting a laptop by instarx · · Score: 1

      Security relies on the threat of having a weapon detected more than detecting each and every weapon, which is probably impossible. A recent security test found that inspectors missed 1 out of 10 hidden weapons in test bags. The press jumped on that figure and made the absurd claim that security was lousy since 200,000 bags per day went through the airport so 20,000 guns could have been smuggled onto airplanes. Other than the absurd assumption that each of the 200,000 bags would have to have a gun, that figure relies on inspectors doing nothing when they found a gun. Clearly inspectors would increase security if a single gun were found, and shut down the airport when the second gun was found. With a 9 to 1 hit rate this would happen after the second or third bag of the day. Since the number of bags actually containing weapons is very small, the security provided by a 90% hit rate is really very good.

      Most people call for consistent, strict inspections to increase security, but if security procedures were uniform the terrorists would find it relatively easy to find a way to bypass it - a perfect example was the shoe-bomb. Moussoui knew that shoes were never searched.

      IMHO what is really a big security issue is the focus on stupid things such as nail clippers, sewing needles other pointy objects. Looking for things that are essentially harmless given the awareness level of passengers and crew these days takes resources away from finding the really dangerous and hidden items meant to be used as weapons.

    27. Re:Booting a laptop by Joseph+Vigneau · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Fantastic idea, but I'd prefer tasers (or stun batons mabye)

      The passengers likely have much more experience operating baseball bats than with tasers or stun batons.

      (Note, substitute "baseball bat" with "hockey stick", "cricket bat", etc., for you non USians.)

  7. Inconsistent rules by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I just find it strange that we're not allowed to bring a pair of pliers, but can bring a spear-like umbrella, and "safety" razor blades (which take around 2 seconds to "unsafe").

    It's even stranger that we are allowed to bring explosives like LiIon batteries... Bypass the fuse, short it, and you have a nice little bomb (as the owners of many a Nokia phone can attest to).

    --
    *Art

    1. Re:Inconsistent rules by Lurker+McLurker · · Score: 1

      Until the next Timothy MacVeigh uses racial profiling to his advantage, waltzing through security while any Mohammed whose isn't a boxer with the surname Ali gets the rubber glove treatment.

      --
      Mod parent up!
    2. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Li ION batteries are NOT explosive, never have been.

      Now, the early metal core versions DID catch on fire....

    3. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once brought a 50 peice toolkit onboard a plane from belfast through schipol in holland and on. Said nothing, they allowed it just checked to be sure it did contain knives and so on, hell I had a hacksaw in the thing. Im not shitting you.

      This was 5 years ago though, cant do that now but looking back I find it fucking amazing that I could do that.

      50 fucking peice toolkit with saws and so on!

      What where they thinking!

    4. Re:Inconsistent rules by JanneM · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And that's really the core issue.

      If you view anything with a reasonable hardness and a real or potential edge or point as a weapon (which, realistically, it is), then the only way to secure a flight is to not let anybody at all on it (and that includes the pilots).

      Thing is, if you relinquish all trust, then you will end up with no travel at all. Oh, and "passenger profiling" is not trust - it is rather making "no-gooders" more, rather than less, likely on a given flight.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    5. Re:Inconsistent rules by pwiebe · · Score: 1

      Forget about LiIon batteries, how about a cigarette lighter. This thanks to lobbying by the tobacco companies who want their customers to be able to smoke right away in the destination airport.

    6. Re:Inconsistent rules by selmer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The one that still annoys me most is being strip-searched for the silliest items imaginable (name your favourites here), while at the same time you are allowed to bring a big bottle of tax-free alcohol. Ever considered smashing it? Way more threatening than the average pair of nailclippers.

    7. Re:Inconsistent rules by srleffler · · Score: 1

      The trouble is that it isn't safe to allow cigarette lighters in checked luggage, so they pretty much have to allow people to bring them in their carry-on. It's too common an item to forbid people from bringing it altogether.

    8. Re:Inconsistent rules by srleffler · · Score: 2, Informative
      The one that still annoys me most is being strip-searched for the silliest items imaginable (name your favourites here)

      Some of this seems to have been fixed. The new list explicitly allows most of the "silly" items, like nail files, blunt scissors, and butter knives.

    9. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Forget about LiIon batteries, how about a cigarette lighter.
      I think this one is a mitigated risk. In general there isn't much you can do with a normal cigarette lighter without someone else noticing and restraining the fuck out of you. Think Richard Reid trying to set his shoes on fire, the other passengers had him hogtied before he knew what happened. It's often hard enough to light a freaking cigarette with a cigarette lighter, setting fire to an airplane without anyone else getting in the way is pretty low on the plausibility scale.

      On the other hand, forget boarding with a Calibri (cigar lighter, "windproof" lighter, whatever else you want to call it). That little butane torch could do serious damage to part of the plane, or to another passenger, within a second or so. A little Bic flame isn't as dangerous.

      Now, if they let you on with a Bic and a can of hairspray... Fun times ensue ;)
    10. Re:Inconsistent rules by pwiebe · · Score: 1
      Now, if they let you on with a Bic and a can of hairspray... Fun times ensue ;)

      Or a lighter and a bottle of duty free vodka.

    11. Re:Inconsistent rules by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      It's even stranger that we are allowed to bring explosives like LiIon batteries... Bypass the fuse, short it, and you have a nice little bomb (as the owners of many a Nokia phone can attest to).
      Even stranger: a while back I took a dive light in my cabin luggage. The guy at the X-ray wanted to have a closer look at it. It's a 25cm long cilinder of aluminium, about as thick as your arm, with a heavy battery in it. Perfect for cramming full of Semtex and a detonator, or even just for whacking people over the head with.

      The security officer aked me to turn it on, but nothing happened since I had removed the light bulb. You're supposed to do that: if the light comes on accidentally in your suitcase, it can cause a nice fire since it'll overheat when not used under water. When I told him that, he just waved me through...
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    12. Re:Inconsistent rules by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      You're not allowed to bring flammable "fuels" in either carry on or check in; whihc would include pure alcohol. But no mention of alcoholic drinks. A bottle of vodka makes a nice Molotov cocktail, but there's no way they're going to ban all those lucrative airport and on board alochol sales.

      Many years ago when going to Tasmania on a camping trip I had an aluminium fuel bottle in my luggage full of alcohol. No way was I going to declare it and lose it, considering that it was much safer than a glasss bottle of spirits that was perfectly acceptable. Of course now I'd empty it out in fear of being imprisoned or worse.

    13. Re:Inconsistent rules by arth1 · · Score: 1
      Some of this seems to have been fixed. The new list explicitly allows most of the "silly" items, like nail files, blunt scissors, and butter knives.

      Actually, it's "rounded knives".
      Does this mean I can bring a scimitar? O:-)

      Regards,
      --
      *Art
    14. Re:Inconsistent rules by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      A bottle of vodka makes a nice Molotov cocktail

      No it doesn't. Vodka is generally only 40% alcohol. The remaining 60% is non-flammable. Vodka makes a piss-poor molotov.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    15. Re:Inconsistent rules by CowboyMeal · · Score: 1

      If we outlaw pliers on planes, only the outlaws will have pliers on planes.

      --
      Your credit card information wants to be free.
    16. Re:Inconsistent rules by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      No it doesn't. Vodka is generally only 40% alcohol. The remaining 60% is non-flammable. Vodka makes a piss-poor molotov.

      Hmm... I was mislead by the "Molotov -> Russian -> vodka inference. I see that the usual recipe is "usually gasoline (petrol) or alcohol and a rag stuffed in the mouth of the bottle....Sometimes, if available, self-inflammatory materials (such as white phosphorus), could also be used to guarantee the bottle's explosion as it hits the target surface. Tar is often added to the composition in order to make the burning fluid stick to the target. Sometimes acid is added to the mix to increase the damaging potential."

      And checking up on vodka reveals that it goes up to about 50% alcohol; being distilled to about 95% and then diluted before bottling. But lacking personal experience, is there any normal drink that would be suitable as an explosive?

    17. Re:Inconsistent rules by swillden · · Score: 1

      I just find it strange that ...

      It's not strange at all. To understand it you have to realize that airport security is, as Bruce Schneier pithily put it, "security theatre". It's all a show. So, they can't exclude things that most people really want to take with them, even if they're dangerous, and they can exclude things that aren't dangerous and aren't generally needed on aircraft.

      Our planes are more secure today than they were prior to 9/11, but the metal detectors, chemical sniffers and better-paid federal security guards have little or nothing to do with it. What does help is (a) the strengthened cockpit doors and (b) passenger knowledge that the terrorists plan to kill them all.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    18. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bacardi 151(or any 151 proof rum) might. Bacardi 151 has huge warnings on it to keep it away from open flame. some of the bottles have a metal flame arrester on the spout. I figure you'd have a good shot with that.

      On a side note I was traveling home from a 10 day caribbean cruise with 6 litres of duty free alcohol in my carry on(I wasn't going to check that goodness) and they didn't bat an eye. but the blunt scissors stopped everything!

    19. Re:Inconsistent rules by grimtoothe · · Score: 1

      The rules have definitely changed... Around 1991 my wife took a trip to africa and returned with a roman style short sword for me in her carry-on bag. She tried to pull it out in the airport to show me and I thought I was going to have a heart attack before I could get her to put it away - no one ever said a word...

    20. Re:Inconsistent rules by Beowulf_Boy · · Score: 1

      I've seen 151 vodka before, which would be 75% alcohol.

    21. Re:Inconsistent rules by danila · · Score: 1

      In Kill Bill Vol. 1 the Bride flies from Okinawa to Tokio with her samurai sword fixed to her seat. I am not sure Japanese airlines really do allow that, but I wouldn't be surprised. And if it so, it's just cool! Screw terrorists! :)

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    22. Re:Inconsistent rules by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      I've seen 151 vodka before,

      Also Bacardi rum has a 151. There seems to be a fair number of "overproof" spirits in that range.

    23. Re:Inconsistent rules by jrkotrla · · Score: 1

      Everclear. 190 proof. 95% alcohol. yeah, full of warnings. but then again, anything that tells you not to drink it unless it is mixed with non-alcoholic beverages is just way to scary for me to open up and chug down. just bring jello shooters. Can be lethal if everclear is substituted for the water, says Webtender

      --
      In God we trust,
      everyone else we firewall!!
    24. Re:Inconsistent rules by pneuma_66 · · Score: 1

      Regarding Bacardi 151, I was recently in Puerto Rico, and i wanted to bring home a cheap bottle of 151 from the bacardi factory. During the tour, they mentioned that 151 is illegal to bring on planes, and, in the shop, there were warning signs, saying the same, placed around the shelf holding the 151. Plus, the bottle itself had warnings that it was illegal to bring on a plane. Needless to say, I was pretty disappointed.

    25. Re:Inconsistent rules by dmusicstud · · Score: 1

      What does help is (a) the strengthened cockpit doors

      That is, until some "Pilot" (aka would-be-terrorist) has himself locked INSIDE the cockpit, thus thwarting any efforts of passengers to avoid disaster (aka, Somerset, PA)

      --
      One ring to rule them all, and in the darkness named them...
    26. Re:Inconsistent rules by arth1 · · Score: 1
      Li ION batteries are NOT explosive, never have been.


      So these 218 links are just plain wrong then?

      --
      *Art
    27. Re:Inconsistent rules by swillden · · Score: 1

      Good point. So, at the end of it all, our best and final security measure is simply the fact that the majority of people aren't interested in hurting anyone else, and will defend themselves and others when necessary.

      Y'know? Maybe there is hope for humanity after all.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    28. Re:Inconsistent rules by Tassach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And of course you are still allowed to carry a walking cane. I don't know about you, but I think 3 feet of solid hardwood is a far more effective weapon than a razor blade.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    29. Re:Inconsistent rules by Necr0maN · · Score: 1

      that's why _most_ tax free alcohol bottles are made of plastic...

    30. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (a) the strengthened cockpit doors

      Why does the cockpit even need to have doors that open into the cabin?

      If the two are completely separate, all you need is higher security on the pilot's entrance and there's no way for a passenger to take over the plane.

      Of course that'd require all new planes...

    31. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So these 218 links are just plain wrong then?

      Why not? Do you think unicorns are real too? There's over a thousand links.

    32. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      while at the same time you are allowed to bring a big bottle of tax-free alcohol. Ever considered smashing it?

      You don't know many pilots. The sight of wasted alcohol will enrage them into beasts of hulk-like proportions - let's see a terr'ist get past that.

    33. Re:Inconsistent rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's why _most_ tax free alcohol bottles are made of plastic...

      plastic? where ? in Europe all wine/white drinks you by @airports are glass pure glass.

      but the problem isnt the container, its what is inside.

      Alcohol -- lighter -- explodes -- explosoions -- rings a bell ?

    34. Re:Inconsistent rules by Bandman · · Score: 1

      I just got back from Punta Cana, and they denied the lady in front of me's 151 because it was flammible. They let me get my rum through, but then, it was anejo, and couldn't be used to fuel a combustion engine...

    35. Re:Inconsistent rules by swillden · · Score: 1

      Why does the cockpit even need to have doors that open into the cabin?

      This has been discussed a lot, and probably will be a feature of airliners in the future. As you mentioned, it's not something that could easily be retrofitted onto existing fleets.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    36. Re:Inconsistent rules by jo42 · · Score: 1

      ...and you can bring a cup of coffee on board a plane. What if it was full of something other than coffee?

      The rules are truly, truly stupid.

  8. Don't take your laptop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most important, leave the laptop at home unless somebody's paying you to take it along--borrow friends' computers or stop in any cybercafe if you feel compelled to check your e-mail.

    Oh yeah, that's exactly why I bought a laptop: so that I can pay a cybercafe to use a computer on the road.

    1. Re:Don't take your laptop? by Cow007 · · Score: 1

      A flight without a laptop is boring. How are you gonna watch a dvd or play a game? Hell you can even surf over airphone dial-up (for exorbatant prices). i woiuld just miss the attention that a is attracted by using a nice new tibook 17 to watch fullscreen video.

      --
      411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
    2. Re:Don't take your laptop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems "Don't take your laptop" was the only advice there "expert" could come up with. Some expert.

    3. Re:Don't take your laptop? by op00to · · Score: 1

      No you can't. The connection is done over either HF in transoceanic flights, or VHF when flying about the US. Either way, the connection sucks, at least the last time i've seen someone try it.

  9. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by October_30th · · Score: 1
    Sorry, but some security guy trying to do anything on my computer is an attempt to bypass a security device and in violation of the DMCA.

    He's not doing anything. He's telling you to turn on the computer, log in and show him the files...

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
  10. What the? by OS24Ever · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You allowed someone to look at secure FILES on your system? What on earth made you think they had the right, or the authority for that matter, to look at FILES? They can physically inspect your system, but they do not have any right to search your laptops electronic contents.

    I've flown about 85 - 90 times this year from a base out of either Kansas City International, or Raleigh Durham International.

    I've flown to Dallas, San Francisco, Oakland, NYC Laguardia, Des Moines, IA, Orlando, Miami, Chicago, Las Vegas, and other cities and have carried even two laptops, a cell phone/pda, a iPod, and between 3 - 7 paper back books.

    At the most I've had my bag physically searched because the x-ray guy couldn't see something quite right because a few of my chargers were laying weird. I've even been told what caught them up a few times.

    I've carried a backpak full of camera equipment (digital SLR body, three lenses, battery charger, extra batteries, video camera, two microdrives, and a Powerbook G4) through multiple times on vacation and never had a single concern.

    If a screener *ever* asked to see the contents of my laptop they'd get the verbal equivalent of a polite middle finger. There is *no* way any TSA screener needs to look at the contents of anything I have that is beyond a cursory physical examination.

    --

    As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

    1. Re:What the? by October_30th · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If a screener *ever* asked to see the contents of my laptop they'd get the verbal equivalent of a polite middle finger.

      And after that? The best case: you'd never get your boarding pass. The worst case: you'd never get your boarding pass and you'd get to spend the rest of the day getting stripsearched and interviewed by the authorities.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    2. Re:What the? by supersmike · · Score: 2, Informative
      There is *no* way any TSA screener needs to look at the contents of anything I have that is beyond a cursory physical examination.

      Yes, yes, but aren't you getting a bit extreme? Why not type a short sentence into notepad and save it to your desktop for this occasion? This way everyone's happy.

    3. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The submitter is either a) lying or b) enough of an idiot that he doesn't realize he could show of his hosts file or something similar.

      Actually, he is probably both. This is slashdot, after all.

    4. Re:What the? by dr_dank · · Score: 5, Funny

      What on earth made you think they had the right, or the authority for that matter, to look at FILES?

      You never know if those pesky terrorists found a way to make a boxcutter look like an email to Mother... :)

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    5. Re:What the? by Llywelyn · · Score: 1

      0) You should already have your boarding pass to be at that point.

      1) If they do that, you would be well within your right to press charges.

      They can make your life difficult, yes, but you have far more control of the situation if you know how to creatively remind them of your rights.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    6. Re:What the? by October_30th · · Score: 2, Informative
      What rights?

      A captain has the authority to refuse to take you on board for whatever reason he/she thinks is appropriate and no-one can do anything about it.

      If cracking a bad joke about planes and tall buildings whilst queueing for the check-in can make you miss your flight, giving the security a hard time will certainly disqualify you from the flight.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    7. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      You do realize that after "reminding them of your rights" that they can hold you incommunicado for days, tell the press you're a suspected terrorist, and the sheeple will believe them and not you, right?

      ~~~

    8. Re:What the? by HairyCanary · · Score: 1

      Because "going with the flow" is the worst possible response. Sure, it'll get you past the screener and onto the plane, which satisfies your short-term goal. But more importantly, it makes the practice of searching your laptop electronically acceptable. This is how your rights get eroded a little at a time, the famed "slippery slope". When someone in a position of authority attempts to violate your constitutional rights, stand up and protect those rights.

    9. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You experience with airport screeners is completely different from mine. I used to carry a lap top, paper back book and a leather bound folder. I was searched 20 times for 18 flights in a twelve month period. I changed my business model so that I would not have to fly. You must different cops at your airport. By the way I used to fly out of Greenville-Spartnaburg airport in Greenville SC.

    10. Re:What the? by beni1207 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't forget the TSA screeners have the ability to ban you from flying. For life. I wouldn't risk it.

    11. Re:What the? by kaybi · · Score: 1

      I he might be hinding at some discomfort at being asked to the TSA people the files on his laptop... What right do they have to root around in what you may have written or created on your computer? Do they thing their going to find some terrorstic checklist? Programs for hijacking the plane without even leaving your seat?

      I seriously would not submit to their demands beyond turning it on and letting it boot up, therefore they have seen that it is an actual working laptop, and not a dummy filled with C4.

    12. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the author got a little ahead of his enthusiasm.... what else will happen if you know your *precious* writings are gonna appear on Slashdot ???

      Its all FUD

    13. Re:What the? by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      A captain has the authority to refuse to take you on board for whatever reason he/she thinks is appropriate and no-one can do anything about it.

      So why don't they just kick all the arabs off the plane? Oh right, we can't racially profile people but we can force el-nerdo geek boy to turn on his Powerbook, root around his porn files, and then send him on his way? Where is the justice in the world? When's the last time a geek blew up an airplane?

    14. Re:What the? by Stradenko · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just stick the goatse.cx guy as the background on your laptop...after seeing that a couple times, these security bozos will learn not to ask.

    15. Re:What the? by OS24Ever · · Score: 1

      I call shenanigans. There is no way they can ban me from flying when I refuse them access to confidential company information. I can easily prove my laptop is a laptop by opening the lid and letting it wake from sleep to a nice login screen requiring a username and password, any more than that and they're on their own.

      Viewing the contents of my confidential encrypted databases with proprietary company information on it are not allowed unless we've suddenly gone Third Reich which there are days I wonder if we're not headed in that direction in the name of 'security'

      --

      As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

    16. Re:What the? by Y2 · · Score: 2, Informative
      You allowed someone to look at secure FILES on your system? What on earth made you think they had the right, or the authority for that matter, to look at FILES? They can physically inspect your system, but they do not have any right to search your laptops electronic contents.
      If you're entering a country, they have just about any rights they feel like having. The UK used to demand that you boot your incoming laptop from their magic floppy disk which was somehow supposed to detect pornography. It doesn't seem to happen any more. Can't imagine why, nope, nuh-uh.
      --
      "But all your emitter and collector are belong to me!"
    17. Re:What the? by llefler · · Score: 1

      And you have the ability to talk to your local TV station. I haven't flown 85-90 times this year like another poster, but I do fly occasionally and always carry my laptop for work. I always get asked to take it out of it's case and run it through the x-ray separately. I have had them check my carryon because the chargers are too dense. But I have never even been asked to turn on my laptop.

      I'm all for cooperating, but I'm not opening files or executing applications for them.

      Here's the drill; put your cell phone, keys, change, pagers and any other toys in your carry on and run it through the machine. If you wear boots like I do, take them off and run them through, the steel shanks set off the metal detectors at any airport north of Texas. Put your coat through the machine. And last, take your laptop out of it's case and put it in one of the trays. WAIT until it goes fully into the machine before you walk through the metal detector. If you get hand searched, politely tell them that you need to stand so that you can keep an eye on your possessions.

      Oh, and always have your photo ID easily accessable. Nobody wants to wait for you to dig through your wallet or purse for the ID you used 10 minutes earlier to pick up your boarding pass. You're just being rude.

      --
      It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit. -- Harry Truman
    18. Re:What the? by OS24Ever · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, all the flights i've been on and all the crews I've spoken with to make polite 'god this is a long flight' conversation, a lot of them do not really like some of the things the TSA does either.

      If I told a captain of the flight I was getting on that A) I've flown his airline 72 times this year so far and B) I don't want them to have access to company confidential information i'm betting the HUMAN that is the pilot would look at the crack smoking TSA guard and think he was insane as well.

      I'm getting concerned at the number of people that are thinking like sheep. We aren't sheep, we are people that started a government where we had the right to do anything (including be stupid for that matter)

      If a TSA wants me to prove my laptop boots, fine, I'll wake it up. If a TSA agent wants me to log in and show him something I'm going to question him. My whole point is that the person who started this topic said he decrypted company confidential files. *that* my friend is a huge no no and in my company the bare admission of doing something like that is instant termination and grounds for getting sued for violating trade secrets.

      --

      As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

    19. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A captain has the authority to refuse to take you on board for whatever reason he/she thinks is appropriate and no-one can do anything about it.


      You can question that 'appropriateness'. I mean, what FILES you have HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PLANE'S PHYSICAL SECURITY. Thereforr, keeping someone off the plane becaus ethey won't allow you to read their files is NOT "appropriate".

    20. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The UK used to demand that you boot your incoming laptop from their magic floppy disk which was somehow supposed to detect pornography.

      When was this? My laptop doesn't have a builtin floppy or cd, and I don't travel with the external ones normally :)

    21. Re:What the? by Effugas · · Score: 1

      I tend do be rather deferential to those who have latex gloves, and believe you me, are willing to use them.

      About the most that's safe to do is state a complaint will be made -- and actually make it. After.

    22. Re:What the? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      If you're entering a country, they have just about any rights they feel like having.

      Fair enough. But the context here is the United States, which has a Constitution which explicitly states

      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

      The authority of TSA screeners is limited to making sure that I'm not carrying a hazardous item. Viewing the contents of files is not relevant to that determination.

      If a screener asked me to display files on my laptop, I would demand to speak to his/her supervisor. If I was prevented from boarding the plane, legal action would be called for.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    23. Re:What the? by michael_cain · · Score: 1

      That's supposed to be a joke, right? A federal court would have an extremely difficult time imposing a lifetime ban on commercial flying on anyone. And you want me to believe that an $8/hour screener has such authority? Granted, you probably want to be nice to them, they can ruin your day merely by detaining you long enough to miss your flight, but a lifetime ban? Show me any sample case where such a ban was attempted and has stood up to court scrutiny.

    24. Re:What the? by KrispyKringle · · Score: 1
      I have a friend who used to joke that he really wanted a bootup screen that said, ``This laptop will self-destruct in 5 minutes...4...3...''. Figured it'd be great fun to watch the guys scramble when they ask him to boot up his machine.

      Then again, I think that was before September 11. Now the risk of having someone else inspecting my body cavities would convince me not to try it.

    25. Re:What the? by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

      If I told a captain of the flight I was getting on that A) I've flown his airline 72 times this year so far

      The 9/11 hijackers flew their flights many times without incident. Reconnaissance, dry runs, building rapport to lower suspicions, ...

    26. Re:What the? by KrispyKringle · · Score: 1
      What if the person is not an American citizen? Last I checked, immigrants--especially of the illegal variety--aren't given the right to an attorney, or a fair trial, or to be secure from search and seizure. In fact, check out this story (which was reported on by numerous mainstream news outlets, but the facts of which are admittedly hazy).

      Then again, look at Jose Padilla. In plenty of situations, citizens aren't given those rights, either.

    27. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want them to have access to company confidential information

      Mod this to "get over yourself"

    28. Re:What the? by sfe_software · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the TSA screeners have the ability to ban you from flying. For life.

      Is this actually true? If so, that certainly gives these people far too much authority/power (which likely affects their behavior). There should be some kind of due process involved here, and some method to appeal.

      Got a reference on this?

      --
      NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
    29. Re:What the? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      But people DO behave sheeplike - i.e. sheeple.

      Just a couple of days ago, I was with my Dad. We picked up our baggage from the airline baggage carousel, and we were the first to walk to the exit.
      Trouble is, in our absentmindedness, we both set out for the door marked 'Fire Escape' instead of the proper (well-marked) exit. At least a dozen people blindly followed us, by which point we realised our mistake and turned around...

      You'll see sheeple-like behaviour all around you every day - it's almost unavoidable. I think humans have a herding instinct.

    30. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And after that? The best case: you'd never get your boarding pass. The worst case: you'd never get your boarding pass and you'd get to spend the rest of the day getting stripsearched and interviewed by the authorities.

      This sounds more like Soviet Russia, or Communist China than the land of the free. Papers Please. Be a good little sheep.

    31. Re:What the? by treat · · Score: 1
      If a TSA wants me to prove my laptop boots, fine, I'll wake it up.

      What if the laptop doesn't boot for a totally legitimate reason, like some other security guy dropped it and broke the hard drive?

    32. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      he decrypted company confidential files. *that* my friend is a huge no no

      Amusing implication: revealing company info is somehow more intolerable than revealing personal info.

    33. Re:What the? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Do they thing their going to find some terrorstic checklist? Programs for hijacking the plane without even leaving your seat?
      I wonder what will happen if one presses the power button and the laptop resumes from hibernation -- into Flight Simulator 2004...

      --
      *Art

    34. Re:What the? by Golias · · Score: 1
      "Slippery Slope" arguments are almost never valid.

      Real tyranny is not subtle or gradual, it's sudden and brutal. A waiting period to buy a handgun will not lead to your hunting rifle being taken away. A ban of "partial birth" abortions will not lead to women being locked up in breeding chambers with no rights.

      Reasonable people accept reasonable intrusions on their freedoms for the sake of a smooth running society in which people get along as well as can be expected. Put down the Ayn Rand novel, and join the real world.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    35. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Baggage screeners start at about $15/hour, not $8. When the security jobs were federalized, lots of people applied, and more than 90% were rejected. They may seem like dumb hicks to you, because they are annoying you while you are on your way to your oh-so-important job of doing an Oracle installation or something, but the truth is that they have been carefully screened, selected, and trained to know their shit.

    36. Re:What the? by Y2 · · Score: 2, Informative
      If you're entering a country, they have just about any rights they feel like having.
      Fair enough. But the context here is the United States, which has a Constitution which explicitly states [...] The authority of TSA screeners is limited to making sure that I'm not carrying a hazardous item.
      Yes. That applies to domestic travel. Entering the country (by any mode of travel), there's a no-man's-land before you clear customs where you do not have the full rights of a legal resident or visitor. Traveling within the US, a warrantless demand for inspection of your files or your dead-tree matter would set off constitutional alarm bells no judge would be deaf to.
      --
      "But all your emitter and collector are belong to me!"
    37. Re:What the? by michael_cain · · Score: 1

      Whether they make $8/hour, or $15/hour, or are all $300/hour consultants is immaterial. The assertion up there is that they can impose a lifetime ban from commercial air travel on an individual. I counter that a federal court would have difficulty imposing such a ban and making it stand up, and that I find it unlikely in the extreme that a screener can do so. Again, cite any single case where such a ban has been attempted, and has withstood any legal scrutiny in court.

      I intended no disrespect towards the screeners in general. They have a job that requires that they do things that inconvenience people, and that some people will resent -- it's a tough position to be in.

    38. Re:What the? by Caedar · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just don't have these files on your desktop, and you'll be fine:

      "Kill President.doc"
      "How to Make an Effective C4 Explosive.doc"
      "BOX CUTTERS ANONYMOUS.doc"

    39. Re:What the? by CBravo · · Score: 1

      I would consider that more dangerous than a nailclipper...

      --
      nosig today
    40. Re:What the? by fdawg · · Score: 1

      When's the last time a geek blew up an airplane?

      I could name a few. There is always an engineer involved.

      btw, geek != race.

      My family has an arabic last name and my father travels alot...for Uncle Sam. He's over fifty, has been working for the gov't for over 25 years and he STILL gets checked. He doesnt complain about the extra half hour to an hour he has to spend waiting in another line to be "screened". I think geek boy can take it.

    41. Re:What the? by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      Here's the drill...
      Why does this remind me of the Simpsons?

      Marge: How was your day at work, dear?
      Homer: Oh, the usual. Stand in front of this, open that, pull down this, bend over, spread apart that, turn your head that way, cough...

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    42. Re:What the? by Thu+Anon+Coward · · Score: 1

      the point being is that he SHOULD NOT have to take it. I fly all over Texas for my job and the idiots at Amarillo take the cake. Because of the way the terminal is shaped with parking garages, they have to search the trunks of every vehicle that goes thru. Mind you, NOT THE LUGGAGE IN THE TRUNK. So it usually goes like this, 1) drive up to the converted food van that looks like a SWAT van, 2)pop the trunk,3)guy looks and says "OK, you can go on". Like THAT inspection will catch a bomb coming thru. Morons. And then they have the balls to announce that "due to heightened security, , you cannot leave your car parked unattended in front of the terminal." so as I go thru there in my rental car, why do I see at least 5 unattended cars with the cops standing around doing nothing?

      And then going thru their security to get to the plane, they tell me to "lose the attitude and calm down". I tell them to "shut up and learn how to do your job the right way". This was after they had already searched my carry-on, etc. Only reason I even got pulled over for personal search was that the penny nails in the heels of my dress shoes set the walk-thru detector off. Wasn't wearing any other metal, not even watch, belt buckle, wedding ring, coins, etc. Machines are obviously set too goddamn sensitive......and they still didn't spot the carbon-fiber knife in my rolling computer case. IDIOTS!

      --



      I'm good with numbers - .45, 7.62, 9.....
    43. Re:What the? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Just stick the goatse.cx guy as the background on your laptop...after seeing that a couple times, these security bozos will learn not to ask.

      DONT!

      These people are in charge of cavity searches, it might give them... ideas.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    44. Re:What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had more trouble with my lead-lined film bag than anything else. What actually bugs me is the times they didn't ask me to open it up and show what's inside. It went through without question several times pre-TSA, but never since. I hope it stays that way, because this is a bag about the size of a large paperback that is nothing but a solid black blob to the x-ray machine. You can hide a lot in there (in my case, a half-dozen rolls of Kodak VPS-120).

    45. Re:What the? by adamsc · · Score: 1

      This actually happened to a journalist after 9/11 - he had a darkly beautiful column describing the conversation he had with the airport security guy explaining that his powerbook had been perfectly functional until it fell off the ramp in front of said unconcerned security guy while he was being delayed for the wand search (and told to quiet down when he asked someone to grab the laptop).

      Other horror stories have very similar sounding unconcerned people who threaten passengers for asking that their multi-thousand-dollar property not be broken.

  11. Horror? Where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    What is horror? I travelled from Durban to Amsterdam on september 15th, 2001, and still have pictures of every security-guard who frisked me on the way. "Make a picture, Sir. Show me its a real camera."

    Oddly, security-personell shouldn't let themselves get photographed. That's a violation of security. :P

  12. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're not Federal agents AFAIK. They're still rent-a-cops.

  13. TSA doesn't like old IBM laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have one of those old clunky IBM craptops. TSA not only made me turn it on, they had me open it up and check the internals.
    Luckily, those old IBM models come apart quite readily, just pop the keyboard to access the drives and battery.
    So I had to remove the C4 (wrapped in tin to look like a second battery) and the detonator (masquerading as a floppy drive), put them through the metal detector before they'd let me board the plane.
    But I must have crossed a wire when I reassembled it all, because somehow the plane actually made it to Albuquerque.

  14. Interesting List by supersmike · · Score: 1

    Some of the stuff on there seems pretty obvious. Blasting caps?! But I guess there's always someone who must try not necessarily out of malicious intent, but perhaps pure stupidity for them to have to list these things. On the other hand, some of the things you are allowed to take via checked baggage are pretty scary too- like firearms.

    1. Re:Interesting List by Lurker+McLurker · · Score: 2, Funny

      Matches are allowed in hand luggage, though the ban on smoking means the only use you have for them is lighting the explosives in your shoes.

      --
      Mod parent up!
    2. Re:Interesting List by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      I've never carried blasting caps through security, but I've had a few cases where a thorough check of my carry-on before leaving home exposed some ammo that I forgot to remove (usually single rounds -- I've never actually forgotten to remove a whole box of ammo). Whoops. It's mostly because I have so many laptop bags that I typically use them to transport stuff to the range (it's a little less obvious than the "STEAL ME! I'M A GUN" cases you get at gun stores).

    3. Re:Interesting List by October_30th · · Score: 1
      the "STEAL ME! I'M A GUN" cases you get at gun stores)

      Maybe I'm missing something here, but how is "STEAL ME! I'M A LAPTOP!" any better?

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    4. Re:Interesting List by beni1207 · · Score: 1

      Why exactly do you find it frightening that unloaded firearms can be carried in baggage? You can't transport ammunition or other explosive materials...an unloaded gun is just a hunk of metal. It isn't as though you're going to be able to tunnel down into the cargo bay to retrieve it during the flight.

    5. Re:Interesting List by iiioxx · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, some of the things you are allowed to take via checked baggage are pretty scary too- like firearms.

      Why is that scary? The TSA allows people to transport *unloaded* firearms in checked luggage. So what? Checked luggage goes into the belly of the plane (safely out of reach from anyone except baggage handlers). The bag or case is clearly labeled by the ticket agent as containing a firearm and is sealed, and baggage check-in and pickup areas are outside of the secured terminal areas.

      How else are hunters and sportmen supposed to transport their firearms when they go on a trip?

    6. Re:Interesting List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and why should i now be able to check my firearm???

      what is i ws flying to montana for moose/elk hunting??? leave my rifle behind and not hunt??

      pull your head out of you ass. guns are not killers. peaple are, and after reading some of the posters we have some pritty scary one who can make a wepon from anything ALLOWED on the plane.

      firearms SHOULD be checked as bagage. and pilots should have one as well.

    7. Re:Interesting List by Stradenko · · Score: 1

      Ammunition *is* allowed in small quantaties if it is packaged correctly.

    8. Re:Interesting List by beni1207 · · Score: 1

      Yep...I saw that too after I looked at that list. In any case, I don't see why the original poster would be worried about passengers being able to transport firearms in checked baggage.

    9. Re:Interesting List by Stradenko · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's because guns kill people!

      Especially unattended guns locked in relatively secure containers that only the gun-owner is allowed a key to...

      Very dangerous...

      Why, I saw in the Weekly World News just last week a story about a gun going wonky on a flight in argentina... It just broke the lock on its container somehow, loaded itself and shot a hole right through the floor and out the ceiling of the aircraft...instantly depressurizing the cabin...the plan exploded with the force of the air exiting and 30,000 people were killed as the plane, all of its passengers and its fuel load plummeted right down into the Christmas parade in Buenos Aires

      Yes, my friend, guns are dangerous

    10. Re:Interesting List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm from Buenos Aires and this is just a hoax. We've never had a plane accident with 30.000 (!) casualties.
      Bah maybe there's no need to clarify this since the post is so absurd nobody can believe it.

    11. Re:Interesting List by Golias · · Score: 1

      I had the same thought. A thief would comsider it much easier to fence a $2000 laptop than a $600 gun. That's why I like to keep my iBook in one of those little backpacks that college kids use for their books.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    12. Re:Interesting List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm ... this IS Slashdot.
      If you have ever read the Weekly World News, they might have such a story.

      but yes, before anyone comments, the original post was "Sarcasm", and obviously so.

    13. Re:Interesting List by beni1207 · · Score: 1

      You know, interestingly enough a single shot from a handgun would *not* be sufficient to cause explosive depressurization and bring down a plane. Most people don't know that.

  15. Always charge your batteries before a trip by Bayouman · · Score: 1

    ...and don't forget to bring said charger. This past weekend I flew to California to meet up with the rest of my team for a party. I figured having my cell with only half the battery charged would be fine for that day since I forgot to charge it. Boy was I wrong, the battery just about died when I got there. Luckily I had just enough juice to turn it on to recieve a phone call that someone was picking me up from the airport. Even worse, my portable DVD player ran out of juice on the flight back. Had I brought the charger for that I wouldn't have had a problem. Curse you short battery life.

  16. Using CD-players onboard a plane? by tindur · · Score: 1

    Some years ago you weren't allowed to use a CD-player on a plane. Why was that?

    1. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      The same reason you're not allowed to use CD players, ipods, laptops or any electronic device during liftoff/landing: they erroneously believe those devices may by chance emit some small amount of radiation that - coupled with others near you on the plane - could disrupt pilot control/communication. There are no studies that confirm this (I'm not talking about cellphones/wifi/etc here, but only non-emissive devices) but they stand by it...

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    2. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The onboard electronics would sometimes react to the pasengers personal electronic devices. Supposedly it was harmless, but nobody was sure of that until years had passed and nothing came of it.

    3. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by defwu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Depends on what you mean by confirmation. I have personally tested RMI/RFI on airplane electronics, and have seen noticeable interference from a running cd player in a computer. I have also seen deliberatly introduced less than random noise in a system and seen a rudder go hard over. The issue is really where the acceptable risk is. If a control surface fails due to interference at 30,000 feet, the pilot will in all likelyhood be able to compensate. If it happens while you are at 500 feet, you may end up with a controlled flight into terrain.

      --
      If at first you don't succeed, redefine 'success'
    4. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by Spruitje · · Score: 1


      The onboard electronics would sometimes react to the pasengers personal electronic devices. Supposedly it was harmless, but nobody was sure of that until years had passed and nothing came of it.


      Heheh, that's why we have the CE standard.
      And the change anything would happen to a plane due to electronic equipment is almost zero because all electronic equipment sold in Europe is CE tested.
      Second, if the plane didn't pass the CE testing it isn't allowed to fly in Europe.
      It's as simple as that.

    5. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason you can't use those things on takeoff and landing, is that if there were an incident and you had to evacuate, you might not be able to hear instructions clearly, and/or your item and it's cable might get caught, or trip up another passenger as you/they were trying to evacuate. The way planes burn, you seriously don't have time to unentangle your headphones from the armrest, and still make it out alive.

      There is a different reason you couldn't use CDs while in flight, and we may see a return to that ban in the near future. I can't post about it, cause it's a security issue.

    6. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by KronicD · · Score: 1

      does anyone here have any idea what this guy is talking about?

      --
      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
    7. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by eth00 · · Score: 1

      When you turn on a electronic device a small amount of electromagnetic radiation is emmited. Basically they fear that if lots of people turn on stuff during a takeoff or landing then the landing instruments may have trouble operating. That is why today you are not allowed to turn on anything electronic until ~10 minutes after take off and have to turn it off before landing...the pilots want to be able to use the instruments. I have heard stories of how some instruments have screwed up during landing but nobody has ever confirmed what caused it, the pilots have enough backup instruments its not a big deal. They might as well prevent it though since its simple enough to tell everybody to turn all the electronics off.

    8. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. There's a problem with suicide bombers in that they don't always want to commit suicide. Sometimes, if they're feeling hesitant, they'll listen to the song "milkshake" over and over again, and then they'll be more than ready to kill themselves.

    9. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by mlyle · · Score: 1

      I doubt this. I've seen plenty of evidence for EMI causing difficulty with reception of navaids in flight.

      But given that on most airliners the primary actuators for control surfaces are hydraulic and hooked up directly to control cables run from the cockpit... it's hard to see how this would occur. The actuators used for autopilots are also purposely weak and generally can't accomplish full control surface deflections in flight.

      Note that "full rudder deflection in cruise" would most likely mean "tail departing from the airplane and subsequent in flight breakup". Demonstrating that a full control surface deflection can be tolerated in cruise is not part of certification requirements. It's quite possible to pull the wings or tail off almost any airplane.

      And by definition-- a failure of control systems will not result in CFIT.

    10. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interference? Maybe in the old days... these days it's all in the name of "safety"... think about it. Here in the US, it's usually you can't use electronic devices below 10000 feet. I feel (and this may be opinion) that it's the airlines getting worried that can't yell instructions to you about how to "save yourself" if you're distracted by electronic gizmos and the plane's gonna crash. That said, I have seen many people leave their cells on the whole flight... the point about emissive electronics interfering is moot.

    11. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But given that on most airliners the primary actuators for control surfaces are hydraulic and hooked up directly to control cables run from the cockpit...

      Not on FBW aircraft (Airbus A320 family, A330, A340, Boeing 777). On these aircraft, the controls are linked only electronically to flight control computers. Cut those wires and the aircraft will be unflyable, like the Sioux City DC-10 was unflyable (no control over any primary control surfaces, nor flaps, spoilers or landing gear). Airbus aircraft also have electronically controlled throttles, so you can't even fly the plane by adjusting thrust levels on starboard/port engines. There's a good reason why these planes are called "Scarebus". If the computer crashes then the plane is uncontrollable until the system has rebooted. VERY dangerous.
    12. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by mlyle · · Score: 1

      No shit sherlock. That's why I said on most airliners.

      And you do realize that there are multiple systems, running in parallel, over multiple communications buses, with fault-isolation models, right? FBW planes are generally acknowledged to have a higher control-system reliability than conventional control-system couplings.

      Sure, the software has to be reliable. But the certification requirements are intense, with all of the code getting exercised and intensely inspected.

    13. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by jaf1230 · · Score: 1

      I flew out to California 2 days ago (and am there now) and they allowed me to use my cd player, and my laptop, on the plane when I flew Oh, and before the plane left, they let me into the cockpit. In fact, I have a picture (too lazy to post it, and don't want my home computer [web server] slashdotted) of myself in the pilot's seat. Security. Right.

      --
      SIG 666 - Signature stolen by the devil
    14. Re:Using CD-players onboard a plane? by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      Here's the thing: you're not surviving a crash, period. You're doomed, just come to grips with it. If the crash is something you're going to walk away from, it doesn't matter what you do so long as you're in your seat.

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
  17. Put them in your bag by Via_Patrino · · Score: 1

    Put them in your bag, not in the hand bag, there is much less hassle than carring them with you, because it isn't checked every time, maybe just once on the check-in.

    And it would botter me so much if someone ask me to turn the notebook on because the battery is dead for a long time ago (does anyone knows how to recover it btw)

    1. Re:Put them in your bag by gomoX · · Score: 1

      This happened to my dad once: a security agent asked him to turn on his notebook but the battery was empty. They took him into a weird room, managed to get his bag out of the plane, extract the battery charger, turn it on and wohoo here you go!

      --
      My english is sow-sow. Sowhat?
    2. Re:Put them in your bag by NetDanzr · · Score: 2, Informative
      Put them in your bag, not in the hand bag, there is much less hassle than carring them with you, because it isn't checked every time, maybe just once on the check-in.

      Are you a baggage handler by any chance? ;) According to the new rules, you are not supposed to lock your check-in baggage, and if you do, the screeners are allowed to break the lock. I've had enough friends and family members finding that this way things were stolen from their baggage, especially when they flew overseas. As a result, the only think I'm still comfortable with putting into my luggage is my underwear.

    3. Re:Put them in your bag by jdeking1 · · Score: 1

      I had my PDA and digital camera stolen from my checked baggage during a short 200 mile domestic flight in the USA. The airline refused to reimburse me for the loss. Nothing of any value goes in my checked baggage anymore. Nothing! If possible, I don't check any bags at all.

      --
      "A generation which ignores history has no past and no future." -- Robert Heinlein
    4. Re:Put them in your bag by MAPA3M · · Score: 1

      As a result, the only think I'm still comfortable with putting into my luggage is my underwear.

      What, and risk losing my BSD boxers?

    5. Re:Put them in your bag by wheresdrew · · Score: 1

      I ran into this exact situation when flying from Seattle to Seoul earlier this year. You aren't allowed to lock checked baggage until after it's gone through the TSA screeners. All you have to do is wait until after your luggage has been x-rayed and cleared, then you can re-lock it before it's sent to the plane.

  18. Do teddy bears count as tech stuff? by NickFitz · · Score: 4, Funny

    OT, but it is the holiday season...

    About a month ago, my brother's family flew to Florida from the UK, and my young niece's beloved teddy bear (travelling as hand baggage - she can't bear to be parted from it) had to go through the X ray machine at a US airport. The security officer in charge joked "How do you want it - medium rare, or done to a crisp?" She gave him a very hard stare...

    (Well, it tickled me.)

    --
    Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    1. Re:Do teddy bears count as tech stuff? by DrewCapu · · Score: 1
      I know it's a rhetorical question, but just for those who don't actually RTFA:
      Marty says the latest concern is the stuffing in toy animals. So that is one item you may want to leave at home, if your child allows.
      Mom [whispers to security guard]: Sir, please don't tell Molly that her teddy bear has a camera in it.
    2. Re:Do teddy bears count as tech stuff? by Shockmaster · · Score: 1
      (travelling as hand baggage - she can't bear to be parted from it)
      I GET IT! Bear to be parted! Get it? BEAR!

      Wokka Wokka!

      Anyway, I don't blaim the guy. I had a Teddy Ruxpin when I was younger and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to hear that he had fallen in with terrorist cells. He sure as hell freaked me out!

      --

      ---
      Take it sleazy,
      -The Shockmaster

    3. Re:Do teddy bears count as tech stuff? by NickFitz · · Score: 1
      I GET IT! Bear to be parted! Get it? BEAR!

      Damn, I wish I'd noticed and fixed that before posting. Now I look like a punster. Ah well...

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    4. Re:Do teddy bears count as tech stuff? by jridley · · Score: 1

      The security guys can make lame-assed jokes. Try joking with them and see if you aren't up against a wall damn pronto. That's pretty unprofessional.

  19. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by CrazyTalk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, you don't have to do what he says. And he doesn't have to let you on the plane.

  20. I know I feel safer by grrr223 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    because they took my mom's sewing scissors away from her, they have blades that are about 1/2 an inch long and are used to cut thread. However, she is allowed to carry knitting needles! Why don't they just let people bring knives on with them? I just don't understand.

    1. Re:I know I feel safer by SteveAstro · · Score: 1

      My wife now takes one of those little metal things to cut dental floss instead, when she does cross-stich on the plane.

      Steve

    2. Re:I know I feel safer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hell, that's nothing. you can't take fingernail clippers in your carry on luggage, but you *can* take a ball point pen (a dangerous weapon indeed!)

      "we're taking over this plane, and if you don't do exactly as we say, we're going to give you a manicure!"

    3. Re:I know I feel safer by John+Courtland · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They even did this to my then-girlfriend when I took her to court one day. They made her take out her cuticle scissors....

      I mean, come on, they've got armed guards. Cuticle scissors would hardly go through a layer of fat, much less do any real damage, plus that by the time they could be used, they'd have 17 bullets in the scissor wielder. I think they do it to feel like they have some sort of bullshit control, or feel more powerful, or something. It's retarded.

      --
      Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
    4. Re:I know I feel safer by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      you think THAT is dumb? I went to court one day and I had to go back to my car and put my wallet in it because it has a chain on it. A twelve inch, fairly light chain. Who the hell am I going to strangle with a twelve inch chain? You know, pencilneck geek is just an expression.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:I know I feel safer by dondelelcaro · · Score: 1

      Federal courts specifically outlaw wallet chains, most likely because they've had issues with them before, not to mention the noise the things make when people are seating in the hard wooden seats adorning most courts.

      State courts may or may not depending on the jurisdiction.

      --
      http://www.donarmstrong.com
  21. No problems traveling here.... by M-2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I mean, I flew, with my laptop, a week and a half after the Planes Hit, and didn't get any kind of ding from security. I've flown a bunch of times since then, and nothing. Four or five flights from Dulles in DC, and nothing at all like this.

    The worst I had was in Denver, where I hadn't realized my ID card had expired two weeks before (hey, I thought they all expired at the end of the month), and they just had me go through a secondary search. At that point, they had me boot the computer (which was easy, as I'd had it on standby instead of having to power it up), and checked my shoes.

    Since the TSA came in, I've been overall pleased with the situation - most of the people I've encountered have been pleasant, and the rest at least passable, and all of them have done their job with a minimum of stressing me out about it. While I'm not a big fan of 'add another federal agency', traveling by plane has actually gotten EASIER from Newark International since the TSA got up to speed, and I make sure to thank them for their help every time I go through.

    1. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      In general I've been pleased with how the TSA has run the check points, The level of professionalism among screeners has gone up and gotten more consistant than it was before. Plus they all speak English now (a problem in the past).

    2. Re:No problems traveling here.... by miketang16 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call anything involving Newark International easy. That airport's a pain in the ass all the time. Once you get past the security, and board your plane you get to sit in traffic on the runway for 40 minutes. Of course that's the best case, non-delayed scenario.

      --
      -------
      "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
      -- George Orwell
    3. Re:No problems traveling here.... by MoTec · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree. Travelling with electronic gear is really not much of a hassle. I travel about every other week (just domestic in the USA) and I've not had any issues at all.

      I carry a laptop, pda, cell phone, and sometimes a digital camera and an mp3 player, all in my carry on bag, along with the power supplies, chargers and adapters for all of that. Also a CAT5 cable, phone cable, etc.

      I've got it down to an art... As I'm approaching the table I open up my backpack, put my cell phone in and take my laptop out. I also make sure my car keys and change are in the backpack.

      The backpack goes in a plastic tub all by itself - don't put anything on top of it or in the tub with it... For some reason they're picky about that. All the other electronic gear stays in my backpack. I usually take off my shoes and put them in a tub, too. That's about it.

      I've NEVER had to turn any of my electronic stuff on. Not the laptop, not the cellphone, not the PDA. Some airports might have different policies I suppose but I've been thru most of the major airports in the USA in the past three years.

      One tip... Don't be "that guy" that slows everything down. While you're waiting in line take your change out of your pockets, take off that pimp chain, take your cell phone out of your pocket... Put all that stuff in your carry on before you're at the table.

      Oh, and if you're that hot woman that went thru security in San Franciso last week wearing the studded leather jacket and no shirt or bra underneath it... By all means, forget to dress again before putting on you jacket. I know I enjoyed seeing your bare top and the stunned faces all around. I think the TSA guy enjoyed it too, even if he couldn't speak for a few minutes afterwards.

    4. Re:No problems traveling here.... by sporty · · Score: 1
      Flame me all you want, but after the WTC thing, I got the entire "while brown" thing.


      I'm not saying that "non brown" don't suffer, but everytime I've flown, a majority of the people checked for shoe bombs and stuff, are mostly non-black, brown skinned people. Hell, I've gotten yelled at just walking down the streets citing that I'll bring down some other buildings. Cripes. And I have no family outside of the Americas!


      You my friend, are lucky.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    5. Re:No problems traveling here.... by M-2 · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah. That's always a pain in the ass (literally). But the getting to the plane part was sometimes worse before the TSA came in. It's far easier now.

    6. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Y2 · · Score: 1
      Since the TSA came in, I've been overall pleased with the situation - most of the people I've encountered have been pleasant, ...
      Last year at the x-ray station my son, aged 6 at the time, asked me what sorts of things you weren't supposed to have. I said I'd tell him later and that elicited a smile from the baggage-inspector droid.
      --
      "But all your emitter and collector are belong to me!"
    7. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever.

      I'm white and I've been searched every single time I've gotten on a place since 9/11. Searched as in the extra-special, take-off-your-shoes-coat-etc-please-sir search. It's fucking annoying as hell. I hate flying, and I hate the fuckers in charge of all this shit.

      What I hate the most is the assholes in these tiny backwater cities like Dallas. Who the fuck is going to blow up Dallas? If they want to, I say good riddance.

    8. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Fjord · · Score: 1

      Do you have long hair? I'm white and have the same problem. I'm not sure what it is and why, but I'm always the "randomly selected" person to extra search. Now they don't even have me go through, they just direct me off to the side.

      I'm trying to figure out if there's some other aspect I'm missing. I was thinking it was a long hair/goatee combo, but I shaved recently and had the same problem so that isn't it.

      --
      -no broken link
    9. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Otter · · Score: 1
      I've got it down to an art... As I'm approaching the table I open up my backpack, put my cell phone in and take my laptop out. I also make sure my car keys and change are in the backpack.

      Yup, this is key. You _will_ have to take out your laptop, so pack it and balance your bags so it can be done smoothly. (This was an Ask Slashdot a few days ago, but my Brenthaven bag rules.)

      acket and no shirt or bra underneath it... By all means, forget to dress again before putting on you jacket.

      It's not up to the level of your story but -- a couple of weeks ago I was in the x-ray line behind a teenage girl wearing super-low-rider J.Lo. jeans and boots with platform heels. She stood on one foot to unzip the other boot, jumped up and down and her pants fell down around her ankles. Funniest thing I've seen since the X-Games, when a skater ended his vert run, jumped up on to of the ramp and his shorts fell off on national TV.

      On the whole, I agree about the TSA -- two stories while I'm rambling.

      1) I check in at SFO, get ID'd by one guy, go through a long line, get ID'd a second time for some reason by a woman who says, "This isn't you!" OK, the story is mixed -- the first guy didn't notice my ticket said "Harbeet Singh" instead of my name. I dealt with the problem and went off wondering what had happened if Mr. Singh had a ticket with my name. I'm on the plane and at the last minute a frantic guy with a turban rushed onboard. I was afraid to ask.

      2) Two weeks ago, the x-ray crew in Oakland stopped an idiot woman who had packed a wrapped package with no idea what was inside. I went back and thanked them for doing their job thoroughly.

    10. Re:No problems traveling here.... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      The biggest security screening issues come when you have only a single-direction flight with a given airline. Whenever I have an invoulentary re-route, I get that special little S. It's allocated by the airlines, so they don't give it to their better customers.

      I know in the old days, a black dot on your passport would always get you screened when entering the US, but I'm sure there is an electronic equivalent of that today.

      Everything is about image when it comes to profiling. Look lost and confused, you will attract more suspicion. Look stoned, and likewise.

      The granparent's comment about TSA efficiency is spot-on. It is much better, especially if you fly a lot. The lines are much more predictable, "problem people" are quickly taken out of the critical path, and if you hit the highest level of airline loyalty, you get the special check-in lines.

      I'm lucky in not flying tourist-heavy airlines much (Southwest, etc.), but the screening process is better now. The fact that it is more thorough is inmaterial. Although I am still pissed at the TSA and United for loosing my Leatherman Wave...

    11. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Oh, and if you're that hot woman that went thru security in San Franciso last week wearing the studded leather jacket and no shirt or bra underneath it... By all means, forget to dress again before putting on you jacket. I know I enjoyed seeing your bare top and the stunned faces all around. I think the TSA guy enjoyed it too, even if he couldn't speak for a few minutes afterwards.

      I'm guessing you're not a teenager anymore, so, uhh, what's the big fucking deal about yet another pair of boobies? Never seen 'em before? Hard up? Sheltered much? Live in Utah or Iraq?

      Sorry, your little "I saw boobies" end comment just made me feel sorry the lives most traveling suits must lead. You even wrote your booby comment in sterile-speak. :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    12. Re:No problems traveling here.... by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      One tip... Don't be "that guy" that slows everything down. While you're waiting in line take your change out of your pockets, take off that pimp chain, take your cell phone out of your pocket... Put all that stuff in your carry on before you're at the table.

      Why the hell shouldn't I be "that guy" that slows everything down? I am not, in fact, the one slowing everything down anyway; the security people are. I don't see why I should go out of my way to make inconvenient, useless security work slightly more smoothly. The less smoothly it works, the better the chances are that somebody will wake up and overhaul our completely useless, broken system.

      I hate almost every aspect of modern airline security. Just because I know it backwards and forwards doesn't mean I should be obligated to remove my frigging belt buckle without being asked. And while they're having me take it off and wanding me down for my trouble, I'll pass the time coming up with yet another dozen ways to bypass security and end up on the wrong side of the magic gate with a highly lethal object.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    13. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He did say he enjoyed the stunned faces too, so he wasn't just staring at "boobies". I've never understood my own country's fear of breasts, so I'd like to see it too.

    14. Re:No problems traveling here.... by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      I'm on the plane and at the last minute a frantic guy with a turban rushed onboard.

      I think that's fairly telling in itself. Let me guess, you're a 20 or 30 something middle-class white guy? I am, although I tend to go casual when travelling, and airport secuity pisses me off big time. I can only imagine what it's like if you fit their "potential terrorist" passenger profile, and if you're boarding with the wrong ticket - good luck getting that sorted out.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    15. Re:No problems traveling here.... by sparkz · · Score: 1

      Isn't everyone on /. 14-30, white and middle-class?

      Caring that Mr. Singh missed his appointment because you took his ticket would be unAmerican, surely ;)

      America stands for "beating the infidels and creating an Empire of America", and anyone who stands in its way is a terrorist to be held without charge.

      Unless I missed a press release, that seems to be the agenda for the past few years.

      Okay then, mark me "offtopic" for saying something contraversial.

      --
      Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
    16. Re:No problems traveling here.... by sparkz · · Score: 1
      And while they're having me take it off and wanding me down for my trouble, I'll pass the time coming up with yet another dozen ways to bypass security and end up on the wrong side of the magic gate with a highly lethal object.
      So you're saying you're planning a terroist attack, are you? That's the only rational explanation for such a statement.

      Oh, I forgot... you aren't rational.

      --
      Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
    17. Re:No problems traveling here.... by naxi · · Score: 1

      personally, I wear a vest and just stuff everything that I'll need easy access to in the nice big pockets. wallet, ticket, change, cell phone, pda, mp3 player, keys; all end up in the vest. I get to the table and sling my vest and jacket in a bin with my shoes.

      besides, my jeans don't have enough pockets anyways

      --

      He's dead, Jim. You get his tricorder, I'll get his wallet.
    18. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need a lesson in civics before you make such accusations about what "America" stands for.

      First of all, The U.S. is made up of every race, ethnicity, political agenda, or otherwise distinctive characterist so making such a blanket statement is just plain irresponsible or ignorant depending on what you know of the U.S.

      Yep, there is a second; The U.S. will hand over control of Iraq to the Iraqi government in July, it is not a colony nor was it ever intended to be. So how do you get off saying anyone was ever creating an "Empire of America?" Afganistan had its own government within months as well so your point is either ignorant or inflammatory.

      Third; You have it backwards as the U.S. is being called an infidel and thus is not out to beat the infidels although sometimes it seems that way. The U.S. was judged by radical muslims, for its behavior and harm was inflicted on those who had no control over past events and are thus innocent.
      Even the U.N. accepts this as a crime, there is no chance anyone would punish the extremists so the U.S. is then forced to act even at the expense of its economy and foreign relations.

      And as for marking you offtopic, you are way off, not because its controversial or just plain wrong, but because we are talking about airline security or lack there of.

    19. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Wilk4 · · Score: 2
      "Why the hell shouldn't I be "that guy" that slows everything down? I am not, in fact, the one slowing everything down anyway; the security people are. I don't see why I should go out of my way to make inconvenient, useless security work slightly more smoothly."

      don't be an ass. Just because they have a job to do that you don't appreciate or respect doesn't give you the right to waste more time for everyone else by being unreasonable. Taking reasonable measures to help the line move along better shows respect for those behind you as well as for the screeners.

      ... or do you think *you* are just *so* special that you can just play your little attitude to entertain the line? I assure you, noone else is entertained nor do they think you are special...

      As far as respecting the screeners, perhaps they aren't perfect, nor is the system... but those people screening you didn't make up the rules of how it works, so being a pain in everyone's butts won't change the system, it'll just annoy everyone and make the job harder for screeners legitimately trying to do a job that is important, even if flawed... Regardless of what you think of the security system, the people trying to keep you from blowing up do deserve respect, as anyone in any job who is trying to do their best does...

    20. Re:No problems traveling here.... by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand. I do what I'm asked, and I don't make a mess of things. What I specifically don't do is anything 'above and beyond' what is asked. If there's a sign that says I need to take my laptop out of its bag, I take it out of its bag. If there is no sign, then I don't. Of course, when I get to the scanner, some guy is going to ask me to take it out anyway, at which point I do so. Same thing goes for shoes, belts, whatever. If something says I should remove it, I do. If I have to wait for a real live human being to ask me to remove it, I wait. The exception is my keys and other crap in my pockets, for whatever reason. I always take them out.

      I respect the screeners. I do what I'm asked, and I don't dick around. I also don't say 'thank you' or make idle talk with them, because, well, they aren't forced to take the job either.

      I'm not doing anything particularly remarkable for somebody on his first or second flight. The only difference is that I've flown a few hundred times in my life, and I mostly just pretend not to learn what makes the process go faster.

      The screeners' job is not important, and the system is beyond 'not perfect'. The system is completely broken. Good security should accomplish two things: it should prevent the things we want it to prevent, and it should inconvenience people as little as possible. The current system is the complete, exact opposite. It inconveniences people as much as possible while still doing absolutely nothing to prevent anything that it is supposed to prevent. I wouldn't mind a bit of annoyance if I knew that it was actually stopping people from walking through with a bunch of explosives, but it's not. While I'm having to get to the airport three hours in advance to have a good chance of making my plane, anybody who wants to blow my plane up just has to spend a few extra minutes thinking about how to get around our completely useless security. We could easily eliminate 90% of the crap we have to go through, cut costs, and still end up with a safer system. But the thing is, people don't want real 'safe', they want the illusion of safety. They prefer waiting in line for hours and having security guards wand down grandmothers with metal detectors to anything that would actually be effective, because it makes them feel safer when the buckle their little seat belts and watch their little safety videos.

      If the current airline security system were actually vaguely effective, I wouldn't be nearly as pissed with it as I am now.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    21. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Wilk4 · · Score: 1
      "You misunderstand. I do what I'm asked, and I don't make a mess of things. What I specifically don't do is anything 'above and beyond' what is asked."

      ok, from the way you spoke before you sounded like you were being deliberately obstructive and perhaps deliberately disrespectful of the screeners trying to do their jobs. There are a lot of people doing that and I though you were one of them from how I read your post. I'm glad that's not the case.

      I certainly understand your frustration with things and perhaps the system is about useless... I just hope we don't blame the screeners themselves for more than their share of the blame. When they personally overstep or do something really dumb, that's one thing, but when they are trying to do their best to do their part of a dumb system that they can't change, it doesn't help or change the system to blame or abuse them personally... We need to abuse people higher up to get changes ;-)

      again, I'm not saying you're doing this, but it seems to be the attitude of many out there... I just hope we can maintain reasonable respect, cooperation and politeness. That at least helps things go easier.

    22. Re:No problems traveling here.... by Otter · · Score: 1
      I think that's fairly telling in itself.

      Before you make _too_ much of that story -- if that guy even was Mr. Singh, which I don't know, I have no idea whether he got a ticket in the wrong name or if he did, how much longer his delay was than mine. If he had had a problem, it definitely happened after they noticed me, and given the delays at the airport that day it's very possible that he was just late.

    23. Re:No problems traveling here.... by sparkz · · Score: 1

      Ah, bless. Must be nice, in your world. So the US will give up governance of Iraq in July. Actually, I find that very easy to believe. "We liberated you, the fact that you didn't want to be liberated isn't our problem any more, much less the anarchy we've left behind" - Pontious Pilate washed his hands, too. Please look up the word "infidel" - anybody can use it against anyone else here; the fact remains that before 9/11, America had no control over Iraq's oil fields, and now it has control over them. You can shout until you're blue in the face (please do) that it wasn't about oil, but the end result is plainly visble. (even, risible). We can, of course, choose to ignore history as suits best (something America seems so good at, as it has none) but America and the UK put Saddam into power in the first place. Detail, of course ;-)

      --
      Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
  22. I'm depressed by mfivis · · Score: 0

    What will I do on vacation without my tasteful collection of Realistic Replicas of Explosives?

  23. No fly? by FreeMars · · Score: 1

    And how many geeks refuse to fly commercial flights because of TSA restrictions?

    --
    Email: slashdot3@FreeMars.org (Address will be abandoned when it gets spam.)
    1. Re:No fly? by bninja_penguin · · Score: 1

      And how many geeks refuse to fly commercial flights because of TSA restrictions?
      I would be one of them.

      --
      For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
    2. Re:No fly? by altp · · Score: 1

      Me.

      I carry a pocket knife with me everywhere. I use it everyday both on the job and for simply opening boxes. If they are taking sewing scissors away from people what will they do with my 3" blade?

      I'll drive, and arrive with all my tools intact.

      Hell. If the terrorists are gonna have knives, I want mine too.

      Altp.

    3. Re:No fly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a dick.

    4. Re:No fly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you are also a dick.

      Put it in your suitcase or something, you arrogant fuck. There's no need to carry it on the plane.

    5. Re:No fly? by dougnaka · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The new TSA restrictions hardly bother me, even though I am "radomly selected" to be searched on every flight I've been on since 9/11 (about 7). What bothers me most is the complete lack of customer service, the losing of checked bags, no room in the seats, delays, horribly managed temperature/environment, lines, stupid cheezy jokes, oh yeah, and all the other people.

      --
      My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
    6. Re:No fly? by zeugma-amp · · Score: 1

      Count me in on this. I'll not fly until the brainless morons in control of "security" recognise that pocket knives, sewing kits, scissors, and other similar tools that ordinary people carry with them on a daily basis are allowed on the plane. Screw them. I'll drive or not go at all rather than be subjected to the humiliation that is commonplace at airports.

      Making you turn on a laptop (as ha been pointed out several times) is completely idiotic as well. If I were a determined terrorist, I could easily rig my laptop to allow the morons play TuxRacer while booted off a Knoppix CD so they'd overlook the bomb sitting where a harddrive normally would. Since any thinking person can easily demonstrate that their procedures actually provide zero increase in safety, why even bother? Because it fools Joe Sixpack into believing that it makes him safer is not an adequate reason to institute the regime they've set in place.

      --
      This is an ex-parrot!
    7. Re:No fly? by jdeking1 · · Score: 1

      I take Greyhound if at all possible. It takes a little longer, the crowd is a bit different (to put it lightly), but there are no latex-glove wearing idiots inspecting by shoes and asking "did you put these insoles in yourself?" "What are odor ... eaters?"

      Fortunately my kids recently moved to within a couple hundred miles of my home. Now I have no reason to fly on a regular basis. A few hours on a bus beats the aggravation of an airport terminal and the potential theft of my goods from my checked baggage.

      --
      "A generation which ignores history has no past and no future." -- Robert Heinlein
  24. It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by thirty2bit · · Score: 4, Funny

    I had my laptop bluescreen once while navigating the terminal security gauntlet once. I tried explaining to the woman "Uh, it doesn't normally do that" but got a blank stare in return. Almost like a stare of... acceptance. Then I realized she had already been taken by MS.

    The funniest encounter was when my chest set off the guy's wand when getting the body scan. He got this totally locked-up look as he tried to come up with some kind of reasonable explaination.

    Guy: Uh, did you have... surgery or something... uh... pacemaker?
    Me: No, that's my nipple ring.
    Guy: (big grin, sign of relief) Oh, OK!

    1. Re:It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by mcpkaaos · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's nothing. You should see the kind of fun you can have at an airport with a cucumber wrapped in tin foil.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    2. Re:It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by mfivis · · Score: 0

      wait so do you have a nipple ring?

    3. Re:It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by saldek · · Score: 1

      Sure, if you like having somebody's arm up your ass.

    4. Re:It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by a1englishman · · Score: 2, Funny
      Wait until you have to describe what a Prince Albert is. ;-)

      Err, not that I have one.

    5. Re:It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      Wow, you got even more creative with that cucumber than I would have.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    6. Re:It's not a weapon, it's Windows. Er, wait.... by Spic · · Score: 1

      You know, I've got 17 piercings, including both nipples and a pa, and 14 in my head, and I've never set off the metal detector or wand... kind of sad. I have had them get nervous over the keychain "back massager" I got as a gift however.

  25. Laptop theft at airports... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... Apparently one of the common methods is to use a shill to slip in before you so your laptop is sitting at the other end of the x-ray machine while you are still waiting to clear. Thief then takes off with it.

    Last trip thru LAX, one of the "security" drones tried to get me to wait about 100 feet away from my work supplied laptop and other possessions, while he re-examined my shoes. Told him it wasn't gonna happen. He eventually agreed to me toting all my crap over, and then checking my shoes.

    Honestly, this whole security thing wouldn't bother me too much if it was done with any common sense - and if it actually made me feel a little more secure.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    1. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by NickFitz · · Score: 2, Informative
      while he re-examined my shoes

      When some members of my family were in the US recently, they noticed that people's shoes were checked - except those who were wearing trainers.

      Someone should tell the relevant authorities that shoe bomber Richard Reid concealed his explosives in trainers.

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    2. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      Apparently one of the common methods is to use a shill to slip in before you so your laptop is sitting at the other end of the x-ray machine while you are still waiting to clear. Thief then takes off with it.
      There is an urban legend about this method of theft being an urban legend :) It isn't.

      It's not that common though: most people send their coats with wallets and cell-phone in it through the X-ray as well, and generally keep a close eye on them while they clear the metal detector. If someone grabs their belongings and they cry 'thief' immediately, the thief isn't going to get very far, with all the security guys around.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by treat · · Score: 1
      When some members of my family were in the US recently, they noticed that people's shoes were checked - except those who were wearing trainers.

      I think this is UKish for sneakers. Every time I fly, the people in front of me wearing uncomfortable shoes are asked to take them off, and if they're not clear about it (e.g. "shoes off" instead of "boots off") I ask "are sneakers OK?" and they always are. Until the last time I flew, in which I was asked to take them off. And I had to stand on the COLD floor in my socks for about 15 minutes while they discussed what was in the bag in front of mine.

    4. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by OS24Ever · · Score: 1

      The few times I've set off security scanners (ie stupid shoes got a metal arch in them) they let you point out your stuff and then they took it to where they searched you. If you voice your concern for leaving your belongings I've found that they usually will accomodate you.

      --

      As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

    5. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by NickFitz · · Score: 1

      Of course, sneakers. I knew there was an American name for them, I just couldn't remember it :-)

      And I had to stand on the COLD floor in my socks for about 15 minutes

      My sister and her husband were coming back from South America recently and had to change planes somewhere in the US. One of their group was an elderly gentleman who'd suffered a mild heart attack while on holiday; the doctors had given him the all clear for the flight home, but cautioned him against overexerting himself.

      My brother-in-law carried the guy's bags for him while they were transferring - until a US Customs officer bawled him out for it, and insisted that the sick man carry his own luggage across the airport, doctor's note notwithstanding.

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    6. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by costas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed; I've travelled a lot internationally and my favorite solution to this is in place at Hong Kong's airport: security gives you a big laminated piece of paper for each tray you put thru the X-rays, with a number that matches another piece of paper laminated to the bottom of said tray. On the other side of the machine, you can only pick up the tray(s) that you have the token(s) for. Simple, quick and pretty secure.

    7. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by tholomyes · · Score: 1

      Personally, I thought it was ludicrous when I was wearing shorts and SANDALS, and was asked to take them off, while they waved the security wand around my bare lower legs. Oh yeah, because I am hiding a bomb in my realistic-looking prosthetic leg?!?

      --
      When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
    8. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by danila · · Score: 1

      Checking shoes? Doesn't that feel like the whole US is a medium-security prison already? I flew enough in Russia, a few times to Europe, once to Japan and I never had anyone check my shoes. I can tell you - I will be really pissed off when someone tries it with me.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    9. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by treat · · Score: 1

      Checking shoes? Doesn't that feel like the whole US is a medium-security prison already? I flew enough in Russia, a few times to Europe, once to Japan and I never had anyone check my shoes. I can tell you - I will be really pissed off when someone tries it with me.
      <p>
      The US *is* a medium-security prison already.
      <p>
      If you get pissed off with the security screeners, something bad will happen. Maybe you'll be seriously hassled yet allowed on the flight. Then you're lucky. You might be not allowed on. You might be arrested and charged with something minor like obstruction of justice or disorderly conduct. You might be charged with a really serious (many years in prison) offense.

    10. Re:Laptop theft at airports... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is UKish for sneakers. Every time I fly, the people in front of me wearing uncomfortable shoes are asked to take them off, and if they're not clear about it (e.g. "shoes off" instead of "boots off") I ask "are sneakers OK?" and they always are. Until the last time I flew, in which I was asked to take them off. And I had to stand on the COLD floor in my socks for about 15 minutes while they discussed what was in the bag in front of mine.

      My family discovered the answer to this when touristing the UN, way back before this current debacle. (About the time they tore that wall in Germany down.)

      See, lots of *uncomfortable* shoes -- namely Rockports -- come with a plate of steel in the sole. To, uh, make them uncomfortable, one supposes. With the metal detectors turned up all the way (as at a relatively secure location, a-la the UN, or one of today's airports), you'll *BIP* *BIP* *BIP* no matter what if you're wearing them, demanding either a wanding, or a removal, or a shoe inspection, depending on the paranoia du-jour.

      Sneakers, on the other hand, may be prove fine for hiding wads of plastique, but at least they won't hold the line up for every single wearer.

  26. Laptops and Airport Security by Roofus · · Score: 1

    Last week I went through airport security 3 times, and not once was I asked to power up my 12" Powerbook. I was surprised by this, as many of the PC laptop users around me were asked to.

    1. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This may have something to do with Profiling that they are trained to do now. As we all know from popular TV shows, mac users are the good guys, and PC laptops equate to evil.

      Of course it doesn't help to wear a turban or your "I heart Saddam" button either.

      We're not all equal in the eyes of security, we're profiled on sight and a judgement is made.

    2. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Roofus · · Score: 1

      True. Me being well dressed, short-haired white guy probably helps too.

    3. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man .. you are such a dirty fag. I really hate you.

    4. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Roofus · · Score: 1

      I'll have you know that I showered this morning, you cunt!

    5. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, how 'dangerous' could a Mac be anyway...

    6. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by emilymildew · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine was stopped by security because they didn't believe his iBook could "turn on" so quickly - it was asleep and woke up right as he opened the lid.

    7. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Tenebrious1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In the past three months, I've been through Kennedy four times, La Guardia 2x, Newark 4x, times, Detroit, Chicago O'Hare, LAX, Tokyo Narita 4x, Singapore 2x... and never have I been asked to turn on my laptop. They never bothered me about my PDA. They checked my shoes a few times, my flip-flops a few times as well, deep searched my backpack a few times. Maybe since I was travelling business class they didn't give me as hard a time as others.

      And yet, my daypack has four steel stays that make up the frame... pretty easily removed. Surprised they let me on with it. Aluminum uprights in pullman could also be used as weapons, broken duty free bottles of whiskey... I think the "security" measures are just to give travellers the warm fuzzys, I feel they're kinda worthless considering what you can bring on the flight..

      --
      -- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
    8. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Krunch · · Score: 1

      Some bad guys use Mac.

      --
      No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
    9. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please accept my apologies, sir. I mistook you for one of these Linux geeks.

    10. Re:Laptops and Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the "security" measures are just to give travellers the warm fuzzys

      judging from what I hear, they don't even do that- they just piss people off.

  27. Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by GoofyBoy · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Will airport scanners do any harm to CF/SD/Memory Stick cards?

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    1. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've send my PDA and digital camera w/ memory sticks through X-ray many times, without any apparent data loss.

      I've also noticed that in some airports, they've put up stickers on the X-ray equipment stating that they are safe for such devices.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by HardCase · · Score: 1

      No.

    3. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by DrewCapu · · Score: 1
      from the article:
      Marty maintains that the scanners at the security gate will not harm film, hard drives, or digital cameras. The stronger scanners for checked baggage, on the other hand, run the risk of causing damage to any of these items.
      Since he mentions digicams, it might be safe to presume that includes whatever media is contained in the digicam. Try it out and let us know what you find out :)
    4. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by saitoh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well they dont erase them. Who knows what else happens.

      I came back from hawaii this last summer and had my digital camera in my backpack (which was scanned 6 or 7 times on the trip since I went to multipul islands) and all of the pictures came back fine.

      -- Page

      --
      We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
    5. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it'd be hard to *erase* Flash with such exposure, but you could potentially flip a bit somewhere if you were really, really unlucky.

      CF cards tend to have a bit of metal in them (and a thick epoxy chip package), that probably provide a little extra shielding. SD, I don't know about (but you knew those come with CPRM, right?)...

      The way I'd look at it is, if an airport X-ray is *enough* to corrupt your Flash, it wasn't going to live much longer anyway. Film is another matter, because it will corrupt in 'analog' ways, and it's up to you to decide how much fogging is too much.

    6. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by brgnever · · Score: 1

      On my last vacation my microdrive and my cf card work perfectly even after going through 7 airport scanners in 14 days. So I guess your memory cards should be pretty safe...

      brgnever

    7. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by caznetworks · · Score: 1

      Flash memory and most solid state media should be fine, but despite the notices on the scanners to the contrary, I would be cautious about putting floppy disks through the X-ray machine. I have made many flights with almost new floppy disks, and always ended up with bad sectors on a number of them after going through the scanner. This stopped after I put them in the plastic tray and insisted that they were not X-rayed. Not that anyone uses floppies now anyway...

    8. Re:Harm Xray machines do to flash memory? by scott_davey · · Score: 1

      I had a CompactFlash card and digital camera in my carry-on luggage in Europe last year, and it came out fine after being through lots of airports in the region.

      However, at the end of my trip I put the cards and camera into my check-in luggage, which was scanned at Vienna airport. At the end of that leg of the trip (Melbourne, Australia) my CF card was permanently destroyed.

  28. Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by gaijin99 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I've never understood the odd fixation the airport "security" corporations have with techie toys. Yes, I suppose you could hide a knife, or a small gun, or a small explosive charge, inside a laptop. However how does turning the bleeding thing on (which, as Mr. Berry points out, seems to be the whole point of many airport security types existance) proove that it doesn't contain hidden weapons? A smaller battery pack, designed for only a few minutes of life would provide ample space for concealing just about anything. Likewise replacing the CD or floppy bay with a false cover would provide a nice little hiding place for unpleasant things. Both would still leave the computer functional (at least long enough to get past Mr. Minimum Wage and bored).

    Airport security was a joke before Sep 11, and remains a joke today. At my local airport we have the same minimum wage, minimum training, minimum testing, "security" guards that we had prior to 9/11. The only difference is that now they want to make you think you're more secure so they add all sorts of obvious and invasive procedures. Show a photo ID, sure that'll stop terrorists, I'm sure they've never heard of fake IDs...

    Big surprise here: private, for profit, "security" corprations have the same priority that all private for profit corporations have. They want to make the most money by spending the least money as goal number 1. Actually providing security is, by definition, goal number 2 at the best. This isn't to say that private, for profit, corporations are bad. Its just a recognition of reality, the way corporate law works their prime goal must be making money, everything else is secondary. Real security might involve several things, but at the minimum it must involve removing the profit motive from security. Why? Because every dollar that goes into profit isn't going into *security*. I'd be happy if they started using real police officers as airport security.

    So, by all means, let's get busy not doing anything real to improve airport security, instead let's harrass the geek crowd. Not that I'm bitter or anything...

    --
    "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
    1. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by will_die · · Score: 1

      As for profit in the security, thier is not longer any. It use to be that the secuity at an airport were hired by the airport which were got thier money from the airlines, as the requirment was that the airlines provide the security. However with the recent law change all thoses people are now government employees or are being covereted over to that.

    2. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      A small amount of explosive concealed in a radio cassette recorder brought down Pan Am 103. If the passenger demonstrates that the device actually works, the assumption is that the the electronics have not been replaced with an explosive device. Still, advances in miniaturization may make it possible to have a fully working computer control /dev/bomb.

    3. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Sony laptop comes with a real nice false cover for the DVD-RW drive that is in it.
      It's lighter and looks real nice without the drive.

    4. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by HardCase · · Score: 1
      I've never understood the odd fixation the airport "security" corporations have with techie toys. Yes, I suppose you could hide a knife, or a small gun, or a small explosive charge, inside a laptop. However how does turning the bleeding thing on (which, as Mr. Berry points out, seems to be the whole point of many airport security types existance) proove that it doesn't contain hidden weapons? A smaller battery pack, designed for only a few minutes of life would provide ample space for concealing just about anything. Likewise replacing the CD or floppy bay with a false cover would provide a nice little hiding place for unpleasant things. Both would still leave the computer functional (at least long enough to get past Mr. Minimum Wage and bored).


      The short answer is that your device goes throught the X-Ray machine. You're turning it on only to provide evidence that the battery is indeed a battery.


      Big surprise here: private, for profit, "security" corprations have the same priority that all private for profit corporations have. They want to make the most money by spending the least money as goal number 1. Actually providing security is, by definition, goal number 2 at the best. This isn't to say that private, for profit, corporations are bad. Its just a recognition of reality, the way corporate law works their prime goal must be making money, everything else is secondary. Real security might involve several things, but at the minimum it must involve removing the profit motive from security. Why? Because every dollar that goes into profit isn't going into *security*. I'd be happy if they started using real police officers as airport security.


      Airport security isn't run by private corporations anymore. It's run by the TSA...they are government employees, for better or worse. And I'm happier with TSA employees providing the security service that they provide, given that they receive at least rudimentary training in the specific security issues that are relevant to travel. Police provide the locally mandated physical security for the building, TSA provides the federally madated security for the travel system.


      So, by all means, let's get busy not doing anything real to improve airport security, instead let's harrass the geek crowd.


      I travel a lot with a notebook computer, a PDA and a cell phone. Nothing much has changed between now and three years ago. I still have to turn on the computer, PDA and phone and they still have to go through the X-Ray machine. I've been pulled aside for extra checking twice. Everyone that I've dealt with, in big airports or small, has been polite and professional. Nothing that I've gone through and nothing that I've seen others go through strikes me as harrassing. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of travelers giving the TSA agents plenty of crap. Anecdotally, I'd say that the harrassees are not the travelers.


      -h-

    5. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by kaybi · · Score: 1

      Cant many types of batteries used in laptops be used as explosives themselves?

    6. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by Prong · · Score: 1

      Partially true. There is a move to re-privatize the airport screener function. The difference is that the private companies would be under contract to the TSA, as opposed to the airlines. This provides a starting point, if anyone feels like digging through the laws and regs.

      Oh, and I thought the guy's name was Dave Barry. But maybe we're talking about someone else.

    7. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      I think you mean Dave Barry. Unless you're referring to Chuck Berry's little brother.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    8. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by the+Man+in+Black · · Score: 1

      Chuck Berry's little brother.

      I thought that was Marvin?

      Marvin Berry: [on the phone, as Marty plays "Johnny B. Goode"] Chuck! Chuck! It's Marvin - your cousin, Marvin BERRY. You know that new sound you're looking for? Well, listen to this!
      [holds the receiver out]

    9. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by Filmwatcher888 · · Score: 0
      A small amount of explosive concealed in a radio cassette recorder brought down Pan Am 103
      ...that was in the luggage section the plane.

      Anything in there doesn't have to be turned on. But it might be scanned with those new bomb detector scanners, if the airport has it.

    10. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The short answer is that your device goes throught the X-Ray machine. You're turning it on only to provide evidence that the battery is indeed a battery.


      Um, the point is (as the poster you replied to made clear:

      A smaller battery pack, designed for only a few minutes of life would provide ample space for concealing just about anything.


      So, turning it on proves nothing.
    11. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      I bow to your superior knowledge of BttF (and your google bookmark). :)

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    12. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by gaijin99 · · Score: 1
      I don't think you'd even have to use super miniturized components. Some types of plastic explosive have a hardness quite similar to the plastic used to make laptop computer cases. Theoretically a person could replace the entire case of a laptop with one made out of plastic explosive... Give it a good paint job and you have a literal /dev/bomb. Which not only starts up normally, but can do anything else you'd expect a computer to.

      Hell, it might even be possible to do the job quick enough to replace the case of an innocent person's laptop without their notice (break in the day before the flight, alter laptop, leave carefully so as not to leave traces, a sleeper who doesn't even know he's asleep). Set it off with a timer program...

      None of this addresses the fact that if a person *really* wanted to take down an airplane all it takes is a surface to air missile at the end of the runway. If you can smuggle thousands of tonnes of drugs into this country annually, I'm sure a few SAMs aren't impossible.

      --
      "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
    13. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      The US government knows that explosive devices can be hidden inside radios. It would be negligent, on their part, not to check.

      The seemingly pointless question "Did you pack your own bags" stems from an actual incident in which the relatives of one of the passengers had concealed a bomb whilst packing his relative's suitcase.

      Prior t the events of 11 September, their was an assumption that aircraft hijackings would, in the worse case, result in the deaths of passengers, crew, and perhaps a few paramilitary units (making a disastrous attempt to storm the plane once it had landed.)

      If the TSA blocks only one route of entry, on the assumption that "no one would be stupid enough to say, light his own shoe", novel terrorist attacks will occur with more frequency.

    14. Re:Gotta agree with Dave Berry here... by naxi · · Score: 1

      I'm not ticked about the amount they hassle the geeks, I'm ticked that they didn't catch my needle nose pliers, soldering iron, screw driver, and biology probe that I normally carry in my front backpack pocket, forgot to take out when heading home from college, and found still there in the front pocket when I got there.

      but they found and confiscated the blunt-nosed kids safety scissors I had in the main pocket (also forgotten when I'd packed, I was rushed)

      --

      He's dead, Jim. You get his tricorder, I'll get his wallet.
  29. welcome the 21st century by penguin7of9 · · Score: 1

    Pegoraro's advice for tech-inclined vacation travelers is that less is more.

    What is wrong with taking along music, maps, cameras, something to read, and games? Isn't that what people do to relax? Well, it's the 21st century and that sort of thing is done with laptop, handhelds, digital cameras, and all that.

    And it's a whole lot better than what we needed to travel with 50 years ago. Cell phones, for example, mean that you aren't at the mercy of hotels and their exorbitant rates. Laptops are a godsent, allowing you to carry plenty of reading materials, letting you write stuff and send it, carry all the maps you might ever need, etc.

    With a little bit of planning, you can fit all those gadgets into very little space. Some good power adapters are useful (there are some universal ones that will power your cell phones and laptop).

  30. Re:join FAG the only association for the bla bla b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Step out into traffic again, young Frodo. You didn't quite do the job the first time.

  31. Lets face it.. by Ryn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There'll not be an absolute hijacker-proof security policy in the US airports. Ever.
    All that's being done right now is creating an illusion of safety, and gives people headaches.
    What.....I can't bring my 1.5" swiss army knife on board? "Sir, please don't give me an attitude, or we'll have to step aside for a search" (actually happened).
    Those who want to hijack a plane, can do so with things that CAN be brought onboard. Hell......I even think someone could simply grab a soda can from the stuardess (I don't care what they like to be called), rip it with their teeth, and voila....sharp instrument that can be put to someones' throat.
    I think nowdays even if someone does have a knife on the plane and tries to take a person hostage, they'll be tackled by passengers. Everyone's seen what happens to them if they don't do anything.
    We should still screen for bombs made deliberately, that have enough power to bring down an airplane. But please stop with the madness of searching everybody including little old ladies and 2yo kids.

    1. Re:Lets face it.. by cyberfunk2 · · Score: 1

      Remember when they scanned the '2 year old kid's' teddy bear and found a gun in it ? HMMM....

    2. Re:Lets face it.. by will_die · · Score: 1

      I always just figured get some metal shaped like a CD but in parts, so that one of the pieces was a knife. Stick thoses modified CD behind a bunch of others in a in a CD holder so that blend in. Now carry some tape with you to wrap around the other end of the CD to protect your hands, and now you have a decent size knife, with a sharp point and edges.
      The skies will not be safe until they start treating passangers like they did thoses in the movie "Con Air"

    3. Re:Lets face it.. by phillymjs · · Score: 1

      There'll not be an absolute hijacker-proof security policy in the US airports. Ever.

      And at this point, they should stop trying. After 9/11, people will never take the "be cool and let The People In Charge negotiate with these guys when we land" route ever again.

      From now on, the passengers will be tripping over each other to kick the shit out of and subdue any bastard who stands up and says "This is a hijacking" on any flight, anywhere in the world. Look at what happened to Cosmo Kramer the Shoe Bomber.

      ~Philly

    4. Re:Lets face it.. by LucidityZero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You obviously have no understanding of security at all.

      Of course there are still ways around the current security measures. And yes, you are right, there always will be. The problem with your logic is this:

      Just cause you can come up with a way to circumvent current measures, does that mean you should drop those current measures? You might think it's ridiculous to ban all knives, but as soon as we drop that policy according to your logic, suddenly we provide a very simple and very accesible way for anyone to bring a weapon on board. ANYONE can get a hold of a knife.

      It's not about stopping everything, cause that won't happen. It's about stopping as many things as you possibly can. I'd rather make the hijaker go through the effort of getting a soda can so he can hope against all chances he rips it just right so that it's actually sharp enough to do anything than let people get on board with knives.

      I'm glad you're not protecting my network, you'd bring the firewall down cause "people could in theory get around it anyways..."

      --
      Sig.i>
    5. Re:Lets face it.. by Krunch · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say the plane was safe in "Con Air".

      --
      No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
    6. Re:Lets face it.. by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Funny

      suddenly we provide a very simple and very accesible way for anyone to bring a weapon on board. ANYONE can get a hold of a knife.

      I think that would be the point. In the same way that the public used to provide police services (forming a posse, deputizing "good" citizens temporarily, etc.) a hijacker would have a harder time if everyone was a well armed as he was.

      Think of it kind of like those movies where one guy pulls out a gun, and five hundred other people around him pull out their guns and point them at him. He's got a chance in hell of taking out *one*. :-)

    7. Re:Lets face it.. by Ryn · · Score: 1

      Let me ask you this: how many airplanes have been hijacked using knives?
      What people have done in the past was strap a bomb to their chest, or get a gun of any kind that allows to depressurise the cabin. Then they made their demands.
      Knives don't depressurize cabins. Worst anyone can do with a knife is, well....put it to someones' throat, and try to make their demands now. After which they'll be lying on the ground covered by about 5 nearby passengers.
      I'm all for screening for items that CAN bring an airplane down. What I am completely against is bullshit tactics that are employed right now, that don't allow to bring a nailclipper onboard.
      Paranoid is not always a way to go.

    8. Re:Lets face it.. by KFK2 · · Score: 1

      Wanna know how easy it is to get a soda can.. all you have to do is ASK... you can even bring your own cans on.. they are allowed.. and tear in a soda can is sharp, I've not seen one that isn't.. besides.. CD's are allowed and they snap pretty easily and are sharp as well.

      Kenny

    9. Re:Lets face it.. by LucidityZero · · Score: 1
      Paranoid is not always a way to go

      I understand your logic, but that statement above sums up my point:

      I work in the security industry. In security, you are ALWAYS paranoid. Someone doing security related work who isn't being paranoid is not doing their job.

      --
      Sig.i>
  32. Industrial Equipment is Worse by RapidEye · · Score: 4, Informative

    I was traveling recently for a factory acceptance test for a peice of industrial equipment. We brought our own PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) with the power supply, CPU, and a couple of I/O cards. Because this is relatively expensive and fragile equipment, we took it carry on - BIG MISTAKE!!!
    They made us unpack everything (hassle, but understandable), then they wanted us to try and turn it on and see what it did. When we tried to explain that it required a special power supply to hook into (it is 110, but not a normal plug) and even if we turned it on, without any I/O devices hooked up to the I/O cards, they would see nothing but a couple of LED lights flashing. That made them even more mad.
    We tried to show them the manuals for the stuff, hoping that would ease some fears - hah, the techno babble irritated them more.
    Fortunately, we were at the airport with lots of time to spare, so we jumped on the cell phone, called a co-worker who then rushed over and picked up the stuff. We had him run it over to a Fed-Ex station and ship it to us at the vendors. Luckily we only lost about 6 hrs of testing time and a bunch of $$$ for shiping costs, but the agrivation and irritation suffered was significant.
    Maybe if the TSA hired people with a IQ over 50, things would run a little smoother.

    --
    "Murderer? Well, that's a harsh word. I prefer to think of myself as a Mortality Technician."
    1. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Maybe if your company hired people with an IQ of over 50, things would have gone a lot smoother for the folks in line behind of you.

      I'm sorry that this is going to sound like flamebait, but you knowingly bring complicated electronics that don't work in a normal environment, and expect them to look at the product manuals to verify that they're not a bomb? What exactly does a printed manual verify, besides the fact that you have access to a laser printer?

      Next time, try carrying on nothing besides a clue. Don't bring anything that your mother wouldn't understand after 30 seconds. They have to default on the side of caution, as they should.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    2. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sir, are an idiot.

    3. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by erroneus · · Score: 1

      You sir are a liar. The TSA did not at any time do what you say they did. I challenge you to reveal the flight information, airport and checkpoint at which this occured and prove with researchable evidence. *I* have connections into the TSA and *I* can find out exactly who, what, when, where and why concerning your case. I don't believe for a minute people at the TSA wasted their time and risked their jobs by asking you to cause potential damage to your equipment.

    4. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by swv3752 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      NO, NO, NO. You need to get a clue. Airport security has chemical sniffers.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    5. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A friend got something similar with a Tascam DA-98 (multi-track professional audio recording device). Security was not at all sure of what to make of something in a large, hard, plastic and metal case with lots of odd controls and displays on it. He had anticipated this and had a power cord, tape with audio on it, and pair of headphones. Still it tool an explosive sniffer adn some time before security was convinced that it wasn't any kind of threat.

    6. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by RapidEye · · Score: 1

      I don't really care what you think - it did happen.
      If you read the post correctly, no one asked us to do anything to damage our equipment: they wanted to see it work, which couldn't be done in that setting. When they couldn't see it operate and couldn't determine it wasn't anything dangerous, they asked if we could ship it instead of going carry on - which we did.
      The airport was Greenville-Spartenburg, SC and the date was about a year ago (don't have business receipts at home). Airline (irrelevant) was NW to Detroit, transferring to Ottowa.

      --
      "Murderer? Well, that's a harsh word. I prefer to think of myself as a Mortality Technician."
    7. Re:Industrial Equipment is Worse by garwain · · Score: 1

      To those who don't believe this, I've tried carrying a PLC unit on as well and security gave me a hard time. My boss had insisted that I carry it on, because it was a VERY expensive unit, and the airline was not responsable for lost or stolen, or dammaged items that went through baggage. My other main annoyance was when I forgot to put my pocket knife in my baggage, and was running late. When I set off the alarm, I stepped back, and handed it to the security guy asking where I could retrieve it when I returned. I even offered him $15 (more than enough to courrier it back to my house) Unfortionatly, I have not seen that knife since... and it was one of my favorits.

  33. Stupid Security by Llywelyn · · Score: 1

    This is slightly off topic, but its related and worth mentioning.

    I went to a football game about a month ago and the Superdome and, as we were going in, they were searching everyone's bags (manually). This makes some sense but more to the point gives them some legal protection is there is a problem.

    The woman in front of me had one of those stylists combs with the long pointed plastic handle. They required her to throw it away before entering. The amount of damage that she could do with that comb before being tackled by security would have been remote at best (if she had the training to be more dangerous she would be dangerous with her shoelaces, the weapon isn't nearly as much of a factor as the person is).

    Now that that's been said: I had a 3 inch folding knife (spyderco) on my jeans. Since they never searched my person, they would never know about it, had no way to know about it.

    How a middle aged woman is more dangerous with a plastic comb than a male in his twenties is with a knife I will never know.

    --
    Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    1. Re:Stupid Security by kruczkowski · · Score: 1

      It could have been a licencing issue. Many places will not allow you to bring things like that from the outside becouse they want you to buy the overpriced items inside.

      Same with food and drinks.

      --
      hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
    2. Re:Stupid Security by Llywelyn · · Score: 1

      "Many places will not allow you to bring things like that from the outside becouse they want you to buy the overpriced items inside."

      They won't let me bring in plastic combs and pocket knives because I'll buy one at a football game?

      I think I missed something.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
  34. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by gaijin99 · · Score: 1
    He's not doing anything. He's telling you to turn on the computer, log in and show him the files...
    Riiiggghhttt. And the bank robber didn't do anything either, he just told the teller to give him money.

    Telling you to activate a device is silly, but defensable. Telling you to open encrypted files doesn't increase security one bit, and brings up all sorts of trade secret laws, as well as simply being an inexcusable invasion of privacy.

    --
    "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
  35. Randomness by mwillems · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's mainly random idiocy. I travel 120,000 miles a year and see the same.

    - In Vancouver they want me to REMOVE batteries. In Toronto they want me to turn the equipement ON and leave the batteries connected.

    - In Toronto every first passenger boarding is searched. How long till the terrorists realise they should board as passenger 2 instead?

    - I carry at least one ham radio. Big trouble when they see it. Big antenna. So before travelling I tune the radio to a public FM broadcast station and when they ask "what is that" I say "a radio" and turn it on to that broadcast station.

    - Don't start me on the shoes.

    - No cellphones in the cabin on some flights; OK on others. Random again.

    - No cell phones while flying, I can understand. But all our PDA's and laptops with 802.11b are always on, blasting 2.4 GHz signals all across the pacific, and no-one cares.

    - The thing with the shoes.. in Orlando the security person recently told me "all those with laptop PC's must remove their shows". Huh??

    It's all very very silly but if you look respectable and smile, all is OK. I;ve never had anyone take anything and I am mr gadget: over a dozen electronics bits in my briefcase every time I travel. Actually enjoying to see the security propls sweat trying to understand what the equipment is...

    Mike

    --

    ---
    BDOS ERR ON A:>
    1. Re:Randomness by Lukey+Boy · · Score: 1
      I've made the run in the last year from Toronto to Tokyo via Vancouver about six times, and I've never had to take out batteries at the Vancouver airport. They're usually so quick at the checkpoints there that I have lots of time to run out and smoke.

      And in Toronto, this "first passenger being searched" doesn't sound right and I've never seen it myself. I personally get searched a lot since I'm young and travelling alone, but there's no specific ordering to who they search.

      Many of my devices (laptop, PDAs, etc) have 802.11 and bluetooth and only "blast" these frequencies when the convenient wireless switch is in the ON position.

      I've never had problems with my cell phones, even though one has a Japanese user interface, and the only place I've travelled that checked my shoes is Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.

      Looking respectable is a good hint, although I find it much more easy if you look all scared and naive, like you're on your first flight. They treat you a little better than. Alternatively, act like a complete asshole. That's worked sometimes :-)

    2. Re:Randomness by bug-eyed+monster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Umm, the past year, I've flown quite a few times between Vancouver and Ottawa, and I haven't run into any of the things you mention. At every security check, I simply separate my electronics and they scan it for explosive residue without turning it on. That's all.

      I've never had any hassles whatsoever, and it's always been consistent. I'm definitely not white and I look quite like a would-be terrorist, so it's not like they're being discriminating. In fact I was going to post a comment about how security checks in Canada have been nice and non-intrusive.

      I wonder, have your experiences in Canada been with internal flights or flights going to the police^WUnited States?

    3. Re:Randomness by mwillems · · Score: 1

      Good point. They have been primarily with flights to the US and Asia.

      Michael

      --

      ---
      BDOS ERR ON A:>
    4. Re:Randomness by mwillems · · Score: 1

      I have made the run to Hong Kong about the same number of times, with results as quoted. The problem is it is random. Take six more flights and it's all different.

      Cell phones: AC is ambiguous (sometimes OK until door closes, sometimes not). Shows: the other day on my way to HKG via SFO (wanted to fly Singapore airlines) I had to remove them once in Toronto, twice in San Francisco. And I wear a suit.

      Singapore Airlines do not allow ANY phone calls on board, ever, even before engine start and while boarding.

      802.11b on my laptop and PDA (palm) are both always ON, unless I go deep into the interface, right-clicking all over, to disable.

      Michael

      --

      ---
      BDOS ERR ON A:>
    5. Re:Randomness by pauljlucas · · Score: 2, Informative
      No cell phones while flying, I can understand. But all our PDA's and laptops with 802.11b are always on, blasting 2.4 GHz signals all across the pacific, and no-one cares.
      For the millionth time, the prohibition of cell phone use is an FCC rule, not an FAA rule. It has to do with cell phone "seeing" too many towers simultaneously because of the added 3rd dimension of flight, i.e., the cell phones are above multiple towers simultaneously and cause problems for the cell providers.

      The FCC doesn't care about 802.11 because (a) they don't care about 802.11 hotspot disruption and (b) said disruption can't happen anyway since 802.11 range is at best about 300 feet, not 30,000.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    6. Re:Randomness by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 1
      At every security check, I simply separate my electronics and they scan it for explosive residue without turning it on. That's all.

      This has been my experience at Vancouver too. The last flight they couldn't figure out what an star-shaped Ikea lamp was and needed to see it out of my bag.

      The flight before, however, (Vancouver to Heathrow, October) was another matter: I don't mind putting my cellphone, GPS, digital camera, etc. in the grey tray to go through the machine and be swabbed for nasty stuff. But I do mind when the Security Droids start chatting among themselves, waving the grey tub around, with my stuff bouncing around inside. I got hostile.

      Earlier in the year when they wanted to xray my shoes (Columbia, South Carolina), I thought they were joking. They weren't.

      ...laura

    7. Re:Randomness by swillden · · Score: 1

      It's mainly random idiocy.

      I agree that it's idiocy, but randomness is actually useful in security policy. Rules that change frequently mean that attackers can't effectively plan around the rules. Random searches are almost as effective as 100% searches, and much less costly. When I was a cop in the US Air Force, we used to do random vehicle searches every day at overseas bases, plus we'd randomly pick a few days a month to do 100% searches of every vehicle entering the base.

      So, the fact that the rules vary randomly doesn't mean they're worthless. It's the fact that the rules themselves are stupid and address the wrong problem entirely that makes them worthless ;-)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:Randomness by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Looking respectable is a good hint

      Yeah, because all the 9/11 hijackers looked like disheveled bums up to no good!...oh wait, no they didn't, they blended in perfectly.

      (mental note: cut off my ponytail before blowing up a plane.)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    9. Re:Randomness by Lukey+Boy · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I feel like screaming at the stupid fuckers, "What? The hijackers were white???" ;-)

    10. Re:Randomness by myov · · Score: 1

      No cell phones while flying, I can understand. But all our PDA's and laptops with 802.11b are always on, blasting 2.4 GHz signals all across the pacific, and no-one cares.


      Not on my recent flight (American, Toronto to Dallas). Cell phones, PDA's, gameboys, computers, etc in non-broadcast mode only.

      Didn't need my powerbook, so it stayed home. Cell phone stayed off.

      --
      I use Macs to up my productivity, so up yours Microsoft!
    11. Re:Randomness by transient · · Score: 1

      Good Christ, someone else mod this up. How many times does this have to be said before people get it? Once again I will link to the relevant law.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
    12. Re:Randomness by caznetworks · · Score: 1

      "all our PDA's and laptops with 802.11b are always on, blasting 2.4 GHz signals all across the pacific, and no-one cares" : As a private pilot, I often use WLAN to beam the navigation data to the passengers in the back (like that cool little Route Map thing on many newer commercial airliners). As it's only 10mW output power, the signal will barely reach the aircraft's radio equipment. Cellphones, on the other hand, can output up to 2.2W of RF power, which will still be many, many times stronger than the signals from GPS satellites and ground navigation beacons. If you're lucky, the phone signal will blank out the navigation instruments. If you're not, as happened to a friend of mine when he left his phone on during a private flight, the instruments will misread, which could have pretty nasty consequences. He also had a letter from his cellphone company complaining that he had tied up several ground stations as he was in the signal range of all of them at once during his trip. Oops!

    13. Re:Randomness by mwillems · · Score: 1

      Sure. I understand cell phones too.

      But

      a) There's more than just the FCC - the universe does NOT stop outisde the USA. In other countries it IS a ruleimposed by their equivalent of the FAA.

      b) The probition is also an AIRLINE rule. That's why you get this randomness. Singapore does not allow it; AC does (while on the ground!)

      Michael

      --

      ---
      BDOS ERR ON A:>
    14. Re:Randomness by mwillems · · Score: 1

      Agreed, you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say.

      Random searches are good!

      But random RULES are not. Either a radio needs the battery IN for safety, or it needs the battery OUT for safety - and so on.

      Michael

      --

      ---
      BDOS ERR ON A:>
    15. Re:Randomness by swillden · · Score: 1

      Agreed, you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. Random searches are good! But random RULES are not.

      No, you misunderstood what I was saying. Granted I wasn't very clear: I mentioned the general principle and illustrated it with the specific technique of random searches.

      In general, random variations in the rules are also useful, because they make it impossible for an attacker to plan around the rules effectively. If you have a large set of rules that ideally all need to be enforced, but it's infeasible to enforce them all, random changes are a good way to get close to the effect of enforcing them all without actually doing it.

      A better example from my USAF experience is that the thoroughness of the vehicle searches was also random. Sometimes it was just a quick glance through the vehicle, other times we did everything but disassemble the car.

      Another: We also varied the level of authentication required to get on base. Sometimes a simple sticker in the window was adequate, other times it required one or two forms of picture ID. Other times it required two forms of ID *and* a verification phone call to someone on base and in a position of authority.

      Either a radio needs the battery IN for safety, or it needs the battery OUT for safety - and so on.

      Or the third option: Whether the battery is in or out is irrelevant, and the rules are stupid and pointless.

      Random rule changes, properly thought-out and employed, can be a useful tool. Random *rules* that address no real threat, are not.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:Randomness by pauljlucas · · Score: 1
      In other countries it IS a ruleimposed by their equivalent of the FAA.
      But it's for the same reason: cell tower disruption, not plane disruption. Many airlines simply carry over federal rules similarly to the way county health departments carry over state health department rules. The more-specific entity, be it an individual airline or a county health department, is free to impose rules that are more strict than federal rules.

      My only nit with your post was about cell phones vs. 802.11 signals and why nobody cares about the latter.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    17. Re:Randomness by HedRat · · Score: 1

      I'd be willing to bet that they just wanted to see your bare feet. Most of those Security dicks look and act like they have a serious foot fetish.

    18. Re:Randomness by mwillems · · Score: 1

      Me: In other countries it IS a ruleimposed by their equivalent of the FAA.

      You: But it's for the same reason: cell tower disruption, not plane disruption.

      Ah, it's semantics.. I agree with you that SHOULD be the reason, for it is valid, but on fact most authorities and airlines impose the ban becuase of danger to the aircraft. For the most part this is imagined danger based on nothing (or on urban myth), but having said that, a phone can indeed upset instruments.

      (Though having said THAT, as a private pilot and radio ham I have been "aeronautical mobile" with 5W UHF and VHF handies in Cessnas without any problem. And having said THAT, whether I would do that when flying IFR is another question!)

      Cheers
      Michael (VA3MVW)

      --

      ---
      BDOS ERR ON A:>
  36. tools by spamchang · · Score: 2, Informative

    i was told to go back to the counter and check in a handful of tools i was carrying in (pliers, a bike spanner, a half inch wrench, and a couple of seven-sixteenths wrenches). small stuff really, but apparently since they haven't specified exactly how large of a tool can or can't be brought onto a plane, no wrenches or metal tools can go on board.

    1. Re:tools by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Admit it! You were going to dismantle the fusalage from within the bathroom! You scumbag!

    2. Re:tools by THEbwana · · Score: 1

      When departing (intra european flight - ARN-ZRH) a friend of mine was first told off for carrying a pair of nailclippers in the carry on luggage. The blade of the clipper was approx 0.5 inches. They made him discard it before allowing him on board.
      On his way back (ZRH-ARN)- he bought a swiss army knife with a blade of approx 5 inches. He showed it to the security staff and asked them what he should do with it (he bought it in the taxfree shop). They asked him where he was going - when he replied "Sweden" they just shrugged and said no problem! He was allowed to bring the knife onto the plane. Amazing.

  37. Uh. I Feel Safe by the_mad_poster · · Score: 2, Funny

    We've not had any incidents with bombs in laptops, but we will never let our guard down.

    I've never had an incident with a bomb in my morning coffee either, but I check it religiously every time!

    Seriously... I wouldn't expect them to stop checking laptops.. but uh.. why focus on them if they've never actually been used as a weapon before? I'd think you could swing the thing around and hit people with it like a (crappy, unbalanced) mace. That seems like a more likely use of a laptop as a weapon than it carrying a bomb. Even putting in some sort of electronic jamming equipment, as unlikely as it is to actually work, seems more likely. I do not think the $7 Rent-a-cops have gotten the hang of this whole "security" thing, yet.

    --
    Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    1. Re:Uh. I Feel Safe by Zoshnell · · Score: 1

      You mean you haven't purchased the +5 Laptop Mace of Balance from your local Weapons Shoppe, or haven't found it in the corpse of the 50th Orc King you've slain? For shame!

      --
      "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
  38. Great, just what /. needs... racist skinheads. by ifitzgerald · · Score: 0

    Why in god's name would you post anything like this? Are you really so full of hate?

  39. Wine glasses by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I travel regularly on a large American airline. I sometimes get upgraded to First because I travel so much.

    In first class they give me a plastic knife and fork. And then they hand me two _glass_ wine glasses. I've never tried smashing one, but I assume that they are not specially hardened and therefore would be breakable and usable as a weapon.

    This seems like a bad idea.

    John.

    1. Re:Wine glasses by Stradenko · · Score: 1

      I was allowed to travel last March with an unopened half-pint of everclear in my carry-on...
      I was give the extra-special checking they give to all one-way passengers, the security guy chuckled at it, but put it back in my bag and let me through.

    2. Re:Wine glasses by segvio · · Score: 1

      That's nothing. Everyone in coach on every flight I have ever been on gets a can, a metal can, of soda. The security risk is thus:

      1) Drink or drain can.
      2) Tear can apart with a twist. A five year old can do this.
      3) Instant razor blade.

      All this security we go though well never make us safe as long as their are weapons in-cabin. If terrorists can think to put bombs in their shoes they can think of this.

    3. Re:Wine glasses by dankney · · Score: 1

      That's because First Class is expensive, and in America, rich people can't be bad.

  40. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by mcbridematt · · Score: 1

    Thank god for gnupg/pgp.

    "But someone else has the password to this file, honest!"

    "Oops! I just pressed secure wipe!"

  41. I call bullshit on this: by tqbf · · Score: 1
    One security screener even asked me to log in, decrypt and look at files on my notebook's desktop

    Provide more details. What airport, what circumstances? Has this ever happened to anybody else, ever? I can't even remember the last time I had to turn on my laptop, let alone imagine the screener who knows what "decrypt" means.

    1. Re:I call bullshit on this: by ayahner · · Score: 5, Funny
      Gonna have to say, the author of this one might have been geeking it up with the screener.

      Occasionally(!?!) you meet the geek who is SO happy to decribe his devices, that when asked, he offers WAY more information than necessary.

      "Uh, can you turn it on, please?"
      "Sure, buddy, but everything is 128-bit encrypted, and I need my secure session login keychain to get at all my mp3s I Kazaa-ed last week."
      With a puzzled expression, and shakily asks, "Uh, can you un-encrypt it, please?"
      "You mean DE-crypt it. In the business, we say DE-crypt. Lotta laymen say un-encrypt, but you really should say DE-crypt."
      "Uh, the business?"

      "Yeah!" With a big 34 year old pimply smile.

      "I'm in tech support."
    2. Re:I call bullshit on this: by stevel · · Score: 1

      In the time before 9/11, it was common for me to be asked to power on a laptop to show a "full screen". But since 9/11, I've never been asked to do this - they send the laptop through X-ray and sometimes do the chemical swab test.

  42. Try traveling with a CPAP by The+Llama+King · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've got sleep apnea, and so I travel with my CPAP machine. This is a device which keeps a constant air pressure flowing in my nose, which in turn keeps the tissues in my throat open while I sleep.

    The machine looks like a very small bedside humidifier, only with an LCD screen, buttons and nobs. It also comes with a six-foot-long flex tube, a reservoir for heated water and a mask not unlike the one Dennis Hopper used in Blue Velvet.

    It's become my 2nd carry-on bag, replacing my notebook computer, which now goes in my suitcase.

    Screeners' reaction to this device has been mixed, to say the least. Some have said, "Oh yeah, that's a breathing machine. We see these those all the time." Others have asked me to assemble it and power it up, and don't appear to understand what it's for even after 3 or 4 attempts at explanation.

    It's a real hassle, however, since not traveling it and using it could result in heart attack, stroke and/or death, I put up with it.

    --
    C'mon, baby, kiss The King.
    1. Re:Try traveling with a CPAP by msk · · Score: 1

      My partner keeps a copy of her doctor's order for the sleep study in the bag with her CPAP. So far it's never been a problem.

  43. glass by tuxette · · Score: 1

    You can also make lovely weapons out of tax-free booze bottles.

    --
    People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
  44. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by October_30th · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    There's a difference.

    Unlike the teller, you don't have to comply. Don't expect to get on the flight, though. p Personally, I often feel like punching people who get all upset at the security checkpoint and cause delays that could have been avoided. Just do what the friggin' Mr. Security tells you to do and we'll be safer and don't have to stand in line forever.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
  45. OT: New Delhi airport by mwillems · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Talking of the randomness of all this:

    The sign I saw a couple years ago at New Delhi airport said it was forbidden to carry on the usual supsects (weapons, bomb, poison) plus "cricketballs" and "other round objects".

    Go figure.

    --

    ---
    BDOS ERR ON A:>
    1. Re:OT: New Delhi airport by bj8rn · · Score: 1

      Isn't it obvious? What if there's a white robot with a cricket bat on the plane?

      --
      Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
    2. Re:OT: New Delhi airport by gibbsjoh · · Score: 1

      Funny you'd mention that, I _have_ been on a flight with Imran Khan...

      --
      -- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
    3. Re:OT: New Delhi airport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You, sir, have never seen a cricket ball before?

      Yup, that's right; it's a red, round ball that looks exactly like a country-made bomb.

  46. Yeah, give $2k worth of kit to baggage handlers by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2, Funny

    They'll be sure to swaddle it in cotton wool as they put it in the plane's hold.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
  47. zippos by nsfmc · · Score: 0

    you can still only carry 2 zippos on board, even if they have no fuel. I ended up going back to the gate, finding a box for ten zippos without fuel, and checking that as luggage.

    the tsa lady said "be careful to wrap them up good, or they'll get stolen."
    talk abuot peace of mind.

  48. security by Grummet · · Score: 1

    and not really tech gear, so yeah this is off topic a little, but holy sh*t last month I actually saw the ground staff for United tell a first class passenger they were sorry "but you have been randomly selected for a strict security check."
    this is just bad.

    First off, if it is random that is good. however, the positive part to the randomness disappeared when you TOLD him about it! wtf.

    assuming terrorists are stupid is sooo easy and so deadly....

    how much do you want to bet you can get on an airplane with a battery powered grinder
    (instant deadly weapons made in the first class bathroom)

    or multiple cans of shaving cream (one empty, the other three with chemical components that mix into something in the empty one and then are easily sprayed about killing others or at least putting them to sleep...)

    A diabetic with insulin shots?
    ooops, that wasn't insulin, that was CYANIDE!

    etc.

    the rest of the nonsense we all have to deal with is ridiculous when anyone with a little intelligence and a great amount of desire can bypass any of this..

    (like cracking in a microsoft world .?...)

    national security needs to be open source! (at least in the sense that the "software" running airport security is determined by a management core at the Homeland Schmorgishbord. And said software needs to be edited or re-programmed.)

    anyone know of a place to submit security related thoughts in an effort to help improve safety?

    'course, its probably a round file...

    - j -

    1. Re:security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the randomness disappeared when you TOLD him about it

      I think he might clue in when he's being strip searched.

  49. No hassles will never fly by CalsailX · · Score: 1

    Haven't flown since 1981, and until airlines start treating customers like human beings again, odds are slim to none I ever will again. Now that the feds and the airlines both get to treat us like cattle and lose/destroy and our equipment. I've made it clear at my current job... I'll quit before I'll fly period.

    --
    Great tools do only ONE thing, but do that ONE thing very, very well.
    1. Re:No hassles will never fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While the American economy has noticed your absence - we'll try to get by without you.

      They will upgrade you to human - you just need to pay for it these days - airline clubs, upgrades to first and business, etc. Without these flying in an intolerable slaughter house like experience.

  50. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sure, you don't have to do what he says. And he doesn't have to let you on the plane.

    The problem is he also doesn't have to refund your ticket if he doesn't let you on the plane. That IMHO is bullshit. If I buy a ticket now and in 2 months when I go to get on the flight, get up to the security gate and suddenly find out that new security measures require anal cavity searches for all passengers, what am I to do?

  51. They have to show, they do something by mi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... even when it is pointless. It would be tempting to blame the President and administration, which many love to hate, but they simply reflect the opinions of the electorate: "Do something!"

    So they do. Confiscating box-cutters is pointless now -- they only worked once, because for years the "paradigm" for dealing with hijacking was: "obey all orders of the hijackers until landing". Now that we know, there may be no landing, the paradigm is different and the boxcutters (and scissors, and small knives) are useless to terrorists, as they will not help against the dozens of passengers with NOTHING TO LOSE.

    The scumbags knew that -- all four attacks were timed to coincide, because such trick will only work once. Still, there are indications, the last attack failed, because the passengers have learned what they are facing.

    But allowing to bring boxcutters on-board is politicly impossible with today's electorate and hence -- praise democracy -- the elected.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  52. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

    Nope. The rent a cops have been newly rehired by the TSA.

  53. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1
    Bend over and take it?

    Sorry, couldn't resist. But seriously,yeah, I agree its BS. I'm sure there's fine print on the ticket somewhere that says they have the right to refuse to let you on the plane, without any obligation to refund your money. Their game, their rules. Only way around it is to not play.

  54. It's the lack of luggage locking that bugs me by swb · · Score: 1

    I think it got bad when they banner, er, "advised" us not to lock luggage that I think it became a nuisance. Long prior to 9/11 I used to just check everything; there was nothing more liberating than cruise through security with a book, my car keys and boarding pass. Checking luggage and waiting for it was a slight bother, but not nearly as much as the nuisance at security and the sardine-can spaces on the plane.

    Now I'm forced to actually bring my laptop on the plane (which I hate to do; unless I get a lucky upgrade to first class or an exit row, my Dell D600 is too darn big for regular coach), deal with more security, and lug more shit onto the airplane.

    I still seal my luggage -- instead of a lock, I use a tie-wrap and I keep a cheapie wire cutters stashed in a hidden pocket. It's not much, but at least I'll know that prying eyes will have to WORK to get into my luggage.

  55. my story by bobo12345 · · Score: 1

    I had to go back through security and check in my carry on because it contained (a) R45 crimper (b) 10 metres of Cat5 and (c) a cable tester.

    What was I gonna do, crimp an RJ-45 to someone's throat? Sheesh.

  56. 25 years ago... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
    Some 30 years ago, my father boarded a BOAC flight out of London. He was carrying sharp moustache scissors in his handbag.

    Since he does not look like the average englishmen (he looks like a well-groomed Saddam Hussein - which is quite funny, given that he is a member of the Royal Academy of Arts), he was singled out at security and his bag searched; they found the scissors, and while apologizing profusely (this is England, after all), they put the scissors in a enveloppe which was handed to the captain.

    He then went back into the boarding line like if nothing happenned. Now, every average englishmen in the line was looking at im with suspicion and distrust. This lasted throughout the whole flight. Whenever he got up to the loo, everyone followed him by the eyes.

    The kicker was when they were unboarding the plane, the captain was standing in the cockpit door, waiting for my father, and when he passed by, he handed my father his scissors with a cheerful "I hope you had a pleasant flight"...

    1. Re:25 years ago... by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1
      I presume the English aren't used to getting stared at, but it's a pretty common occurrence (I'm Indian) for me wherever I go, Asia, Europe... anywhere. May be I've grown too used to it all to actually bother about who's watching me and who's not.

      Okay I admit it; there was this time (while transitting through Kuala Lumpur, in case anyone's interested) when I wanted to shout something in Arabic-sounding gibberish just to piss the folks off even more. :-D

  57. And remember... by Yoda2 · · Score: 1

    If you have to travel with your AX please check it through...

  58. OH NO ITS A BOMB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I have a SIDstation which I took with me when I was visiting some other musician friends. I was sure to pack a tiny MIDI keyboard with me, but even then I had a hard time explaining that "This is a musical instrument, not a bomb, yes I know it has a keypad for data entry and an atom logo on it but believe me, it's a musical instrument, see I have a keyboard for it right here and look at how these plugs match!" and so on.

    Fortunately they decided to just do the standard chemical explosive swab (and maybe waved a Geiger counter at it, I don't know).

  59. I got your security right here by paiute · · Score: 1

    A relative works for the FAA. I thought they might flash their ID at airports to get VIP treatment, but they said there is no way they ever let the security guys see the FAA ID. If security knows you are FAA, they will demonstrate their zeal by searching your baggage in great detail while you are bent over in another room auditioning to be the goatse guy understudy.

    Meanwhile... had the fortune to fly out of Logan in October of 2001 aboard a 757 fully loaded with fuel for a long flight. Man, they had reps from every law enforcent agency there, packing heat plus. State troopers, Boston cops, National Guard. Get up in the air - not a one. Undercover agents with hidden Glocks? Maybe, but I would have felt a lot better if they had just lent me one of those Uzis they were flashing around on the ground. Sure, I felt safer in the airport, but who ever hijacked an airport?

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:I got your security right here by Prong · · Score: 1

      It's not a question of hijacking an airport. Previous terror attacks include machine gunning anybody and everybody in a couple of airports in Europe (Rome and Vienna) in the mid 1980s. Large groups of people in relatively confined places make for tempting targets.

    2. Re:I got your security right here by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      State troopers, Boston cops, National Guard. Get up in the air - not a one. Undercover agents with hidden Glocks? Maybe, but I would have felt a lot better if they had just lent me one of those Uzis they were flashing around on the ground

      Uzis? Which of those guys were carrying uzis? Nasty guard carries M-16's and cops usually go for the H&K MP5... Never heard of a US law enforcement agency issuing an uzi.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    3. Re:I got your security right here by Detritus · · Score: 1

      The U.S. Secret Service has Uzis.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    4. Re:I got your security right here by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      The U.S. Secret Service has Uzis.

      Hmmm...so they do. But they're the only ones (not even Israel uses it anymore). And even if they were guarding an airport, you'd never see an uzi, as only the stone-faced "unmarked" guys carry them, and they carry them concealed (see picture and read text here. I suspect he saw an AF Nat'l Guard SP with an M-16 (or MAYBE a cop with an MP5) and only knows the word "uzi" to describe anything that's not a pistol or a wooden-stocked hunting rifle.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  60. Tech unfriendly airports by attackc0de · · Score: 1

    I'm predict a future website that lists tech-unfriendly airports, a sort a map of airports to avoid. I can probably guess that "The Man"(tm) will try and shut it down, because of "National Security" reasons. Maybe I should make my own list....? hmmmm..

    --
    For a nice date: call strftime(3C)
  61. It's not just tech stuff... by thparker · · Score: 1

    Be wary of mishandling by TSA staff in general. I was carrying a fairly expensive fountain pen I'd received as a gift in my laptop bag. TSA fumbled while examining it and dropped it on the nib. It's now a $250 paperweight until I can send it off to be repaired.

    Try to be aware of anything that doesn't open or operate in the way that a tired, bored TSA person expects it to. (The fountain pen cap screwed on, rather than pulled on and off.) It only takes a second of inattention for something to get broken.

  62. Couple of stories... by (H)elix1 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I travel with two or three laptops, four to six laptop battery packs (total), collection of hard drives, an iPaq, blackberry, mobile, and digital camera. When they ask, "do you have any electronics?" I'll chuckle and reply most of them... for the most part, this is a none issue. A couple things did cause me some grief, however.

    I created a homemade external battery pack for my iPaq a few years back. Pulled out the soldering iron and parted it together to run off a collection of rechargeable 'd' cell batteries. Apparently, someone in the security line freaked when they saw it - but only had minimal delays.

    I occasionally go to a firing range and do a little pistol shooting. I was using a tradeshow laptop bag to hold my weapons and expended brass. My main bag broke, so I emptied the pistol bag (being very careful to not accidentally pack any ammunition) and ran to the airport. Missed the flight because my bag lit up when they swabbed it. No trouble other than talking to a bunch of people... but still, what a pain.

    One of the things that seems to trip up the security folks - especially in EMEA - is how long I keep a laptop and how many people have access to it. I usually get to trade up laptops every quarter (and schlep off the older, but now fully configured box to one of the other Sales folks). Since these laptops are really mobile dev servers (IMHO), when I respond, "do you mean physical access to the laptop, or from a remote access standpoint?" Always gets them...

  63. Avoid having anything unusual. by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    I realize that's both unfair and unhelpful, but it's still good advice. Actually I formulated notion that years ago... and not in connection with baggage inspections.

    It stems from the time when we tried to bring a sewing machine into the United States.

    I mean, at that time, Necchi sewing machines happened to be a real bargain in Curacao because Curacao was a junior member of the common market. My wife had been wanting a sewing machine that cost about $500 in the U.S. In a little window of a little fabric store way outside the tourist shopping district it was selling for the equivalent of $200, so we grabbed it. The store people were fascinated because they'd never had anyone from the U.S. buy a sewing machine before. Didn't know people in the U.S. even used sewing machines.

    And it took us an hour to get it through customs.

    It wasn't that sewing machines were contraband, or forbidden, or suspicious. It's that apparently nobody buys sewing machines on vacations. And it wasn't that it was an expensive or high-duty item; it's that they didn't know what the duty was. They weren't on the list that the inspector had at his station. So they pulled us out of line and took us to the supervisor's office. And he didn't have it in his big reference book. It took them about six phone calls and various people running around and bringing loose-leaf binders into the office before they could determine what category it belonged in. They decided that we owed them about six dollars and twenty-two cents and could proceed on our way.

    For the same reason, I've quit taking my Rocket eBook with me. Which is a big shame, as the only real use it had was on trips. I can read novels with comfort and enjoyment on it, and I can carry eight to ten full-length novels in the same weight and volume as a single trade paperback. But it always causes extra delay because the inspectors have never seen one before and don't know what it is (and there's something about it that they don't choose to share with me that shows up in X-rays and bothers them). Plus, of course, the airlines consider it a "personal electronic device" that might interfere with navigation...

    So, blend in. Don't carry items that other people don't commonly carry. (In other words, behave like a terr--no, let's not go there).

  64. Stay out of Memphis! by annielaurie · · Score: 1

    A couple of years prior to 9/11, the man standing ahead of me in line tried to walk off with my laptop at security in the Memphis airport. It was the classic--cause a delay as you're walking through and grab whatever you can on the way out. He was helped by the idiot-woman running the scanner, who picked the computer up, batted her eyes at him, and said, "Is this yours, sir?" He smiled, nodded, took the computer, and began to walk away. I made a slight disturbance by following him and saying 'THAT'S MY LAPTOP' and put my hand on it. A supervisor was called, and I was able to produce a company ID badge with my picture, the company name and logo, and my employee ID number--which happened also to be the property tag number of the computer. There was no doubt he had attempted to steal it, no chance at all it was a mixup, yet he wasn't detained at all.

    The truly bizzare end of the story was that not a half-hour later, a man got through that same security area with a weapon and they cleared the entire airport--sent us all out of gate areas to mill around in the main terminal and outside. I was five hours late getting home, but my laptop was with me. During that chapter of the fiasco, their public-address system didn't work, various officials gave conflicting instructions, and many planes took off without passengers who were still waiting to get back inside.

    I believe there's less chance of theft happening now, as at our airport (BWI) they place all your belongings in a plastic basket, and they move people through very slowly. But it can still happen, and I'll bet it still does. It might be even more difficult now to do what I did--make a fuss--as the security people are into such a rigid routine.

    My under-educated guess is that the post-9/ll security at Memphis is probably still bad, since they obviously had entrenched incompetence higher-up. I'm guessing security at Baltimore is probably pretty good, since they seemed to have an efficient culture among the security people there before 9/11.

    If I ever have to pass through Memphis again, I'll walk.

    --
    DUCT TAPE: The Election Supervisors' Secret Weapon
  65. Security or the illusion of security? by davecl · · Score: 1

    Its interesting to see what they do and don't like. For example:

    - the one item that we know has been used to try to blow up a plane in the last two years, matches, are still permitted. This is allegedly at the insistence of the tobacco lobby, who want to make sure all their addicts can light up as soon as they arrive at their destination.

    - metal forks are still provided by many airlines and airport outlets for meals. Among cutlery items, forks are arguably more dangerous than knives, especially the blunt knives you used to get on planes.

    - glass is an interesting one. I could convert my glass eye glasses into weapons in a few moments. Glass cutting edges could be more effective than boxcutters, as long as you don't mind getting too messy.

    Time and time again, from ID cards to the TSA, it seems this whole intrusive system isn't about providing real security its about providing the illusion of security, and that makes me very worried.

    Of course now I'll probably get strip searched whenever I get within a mile of an airport...

    1. Re:Security or the illusion of security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      you don't even have to go to that much trouble--nylon and carbon fiber blades have been available for years...

      personally, my strangest airport security experience involved the 'idiot wand' that the screeners wave around when they check you--i had my shoes off, and he was waving it around my feet, and it sounded like a geiger counter over a piece of uranium, even though i had NO metal anywhere on me--the guy gave me a look that suggested that the thing didn't really work, and he knew it, but he had a job to do...

      i agree that airport security is 99.9% about creating the perception of security, rather than the reality, and would even go so far as to say homeland security is the same (how well are our ports being secured?) --of course, security is an unglamorous, behind the scenes job, and much less exciting than going to war...

  66. Machines in motion.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On Discovery there was a series of the bionic man (or something),
    on which I've seen
    a man whom lost his legs and could run faster with his new pair(special desingn),
    and he was quite happy with them.

    But my favourite was not yet done;
    a "new" eye;
    equiped with zoomlens, infrared, UV, memory disk for image storage, laser distance meter, and/so/on
    (I could be exagerating, it was long time ago since I've seen the show, but I'm pretty sure X-ray is out of the question)

    I thought a long time about it and I think I could poke one of my own eyes out just to have one.

    It's an amature astronomers dream come true(too much equipment to carry around besides the scope).

    but seriously: ever thought about how the world "looks" in UV or a mix from UV/visible/infra ?

    The show gave sort of a preview....I thought it was awesome.

    1. Re:Machines in motion.. by jridley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's an amature astronomers dream come true(too much equipment to carry around besides the scope).

      I don't think so, considering that in order to reach the sensitivity of a well-trained human eye with current astronomy cameras, you need both long exposures and ideally electrically-cooled imaging chips.

      If you think you can hold your eye rock-steady for 30+ seconds per exposure, while the peltier cooler in your eye is dumping several watts of heat into your bloodstream trying to cool the imaging chip to reduce the thermal noise, then go ahead.

      I've listened to/read several interviews with people who have received the latest prosthetics. While many of them are happy with them, I've not heard one of them say it was a good trade; they'd all rather have their original equipment.

    2. Re:Machines in motion.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      point taken ,
      but I was referring to range of the spectrum one can see, see?

    3. Re:Machines in motion.. by jridley · · Score: 1

      So am I. Apparently you don't know much about astrophotography imagers. All imaging chips are subject to thermal noise no matter what range they're trying to image. With a CCD or CMOS imaging chip at room temperature, you can't do much beyond 60 seconds exposure, and even that's getting pretty noisy. You need 5 minutes or more to image most astronomy stuff very well. At 5 minutes, a room temperature imaging chip will have been totally saturated by noise; all the electron wells will be totally emptied by thermal activity and there won't be any signal left; not even dark frame subtraction will do you any good.

      In order to combat this, astronomy CCD cameras have built-in refrigeration to get the chips down to the -10*F range, optimally. At that point you can start to get decent long exposures. You still have noise but it's possible to subtract it out at that point by taking a dark frame.

      And *I* am talking about visible light as well.

  67. Flying Clocks by Detritus · · Score: 1
    I used to know some people who regularly flew around the world with atomic (cesium) clocks, powered by batteries, as their carry-on baggage. They bought an extra ticket for the atomic clock, so it could have its own seat.

    I can just imagine trying to explain it to security. Yes, it is an atomic clock. Yes, it is supposed to have all of those counting digits on the front panel. No, you can't take it apart to see how it works. No, I can't turn it off without making the whole trip pointless.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:Flying Clocks by Disco+Stu · · Score: 1

      Sweet! I wish that I were rich and that it was a few years ago, so I could try it. How well did the actual changes match up with the calculated ones?

    2. Re:Flying Clocks by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was their job. The flying clocks were used to check and adjust the atomic clocks and timing systems at remote locations. This kept all of the clocks in synchronization with a known margin of error. I don't know if they had to compensate for relativistic effects.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    3. Re:Flying Clocks by dossen · · Score: 1

      While not 100%, I'm fairly certain that atomic clocks are in fact precise enough for it to be an issue, since this link cites succesful experiments with it in 1971.

  68. Security Experiences by wrf3 · · Score: 1

    Travelling out of a former republic of the Soviet Union, I set off the metal detector. I was immediately taken to a side room where a man in full military uniform patted me down. Nothing was found, but as I was leaving, they were leading a woman into the same room. On the other hand, in India, they have separate metal detectors for men and women, and curtained off areas, also for the women. Handbags are thoroughly searched; one fellow in front of me had a pack of matches that were found and confiscated. In Germany, my laptop was vacuumed. I inquired, and the lady told me that they were checking for traces of explosives. All she got from me was a lot of dog hair from my golden retriever. I don't recall ever having to power up my PowerBook. It did give the agents in San Jose pause, however, when the "wipe-scan" caused an unknown error. A supervisor was called over said it happens sometimes, and let me go on.

    Going through metal detectors in the states, I remove my coat, watch, glasses, wallet, shoes, empty my pockets and take off my belt. At one airport, this still wasn't enough and I set of the detector (don't remember what it was). At LaGuardia, I went through the same routine and made it to the edge of the detector without setting it off, at which point I did a little victory jig -- and prompty set off the detector. The TSB agent was kind enough to show me what had happened by demonstrating how sudden motion can set those things off.

  69. Common sense & consistency by Chasqui · · Score: 1

    The items on the prohibited list make sense. Blasting caps, knives, etc.
    I have flown w/in the US and internationally since 9-11. What irritated me is not the list itself, but the subjectiveness in applying the rules.
    At one airport sewing siscors are OK, while at another they are not. In one airport inspecting shoes is all the rage. Now all laptops have to go through the x-ray machine (at least in Dallas). You never really know what you will be asked to do with electronics. Heaven forbid you bring on a piece of electronics the screener is unfamiliar with!

    --
    my cube has a window...
  70. Things I've got away with by rs79 · · Score: 1

    In 1986 I flew from LA to Toronto via Chicago with an Atari 400. You might remember they had the slot for the cartridge completely encased in Aluminum. In Chicago going north they freaked out at this and made me open it up. Ok. On the way back, at Chicago going south I was carrying a 100 year old sterling fish serving knife and fork, they REALLY freaked out over this and damn near didn't let me on the plane. Sure it looks deadly but it's ornate and not even remotely sharp. They ignored the Atari.

    The last flight I was on they xrayed my stuff then hand inspected all the crap in my pockets, including a leather keycase with a zippered compartment. The nice but really dumb lady opened the keycase, felt it through and through and handed it back to me without openeing the zipper where she would have found a sterling Tiffany Swiss army knife. Helloooooooo?

    My mother once had a pair of nail scissors confiscated. She bought a new set inside the airport at one of those cheesy airport stores once she was past security.

    The point is the secutity searches are remarkably inconsistant.

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  71. Why do you accept that? by MadMirko · · Score: 1

    I see a lot of people moaning at the idiocy of all this, and yet, why is it happening?`

    In Slashdot comments people never tire to cite famous people like Ghandi (each MS bashing article has it), but why is the one about liberty and temporary safety missing here?

  72. Simple security solution by iiioxx · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, screen for obvious threats like firearms and bombs with tools like x-ray machines, dogs, and chemical sniffers. But quit harrassing everyone by trying to find every nail file, screwdriver, pocket knife, etc.

    The simple answer is: nightsticks. Issue every adult passenger a nightstick. Anybody tries something funny, there's a hundred people with hard, heavy sticks ready to pound his ass. I also expect that it should improve the service from the stewardesses. The airline could even put their logo on it, and let the passengers keep them as souveniers. It'd be good marketing!

    1. Re:Simple security solution by annielaurie · · Score: 1

      Hee!

      I spent a lot of time traveling in and out of Louisville, home of the legendary Louisville Slugger baseball bat. Trouble is, you can't buy one and carry it home on the airplane with you. You can ship it and acquire one of the miniature airport-approved Louisville Slugger miniature baseball bats. However, on vacation in Montreal I purchased a large umbrella that read "Merde. Il pleut." No problem at all bringing it home; the airline supplied a nice, oblong cardboard box for it.

      If I'm ever on a plane with a bad guy, I'll beat him to death with my umbrella.

      --
      DUCT TAPE: The Election Supervisors' Secret Weapon
    2. Re:Simple security solution by geekoid · · Score: 1

      won't they ne surprised when someone tries to hijak your plane and you draw a sword out if your umbrella.

      not saying you have one of those...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Simple security solution by Tassach · · Score: 1

      Just carry a cane. IF you can fake a limp convincingly, I can't imagine that they'd take it away from you.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    4. Re:Simple security solution by CavemanKiwi · · Score: 1

      heavy sticks ready to pound his ass That would make a great Gay video title.

    5. Re:Simple security solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The simple answer is: nightsticks. Issue every >adult passenger a nightstick.

      Yes! And then you wait for your favourite archrival groups to hit the same plane and somebody to go:"What?! You're pro/anti-[petPeeve()]?!"

      Fun for the whole yellow press!

  73. CellPhone battery exploding... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    btw: a battery (or accumulator), can ecplode on its own

    see:
    http://www.cellular.co.za/news_2003/100603 -nokia_m obile_phones_explode.htm

  74. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, my mistake. Left the US nearly two years ago so not quite up to speed on these things...

    As an aside I realised after a vacation recently that I had a razor blade (new, sharp) in my 1st aid kit in my hand luggage. Flew Gatwick to Malta-Luqa and back on Scare 2000/JMC and not one of the security bozos saw the thing. Oh well.

  75. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +5, Hilarious

  76. If you don't mind your hard drive getting erased.. by MadAnthony02 · · Score: 1

    From the pc mag article:Marty maintains that the scanners at the security gate will not harm film, hard drives, or digital cameras. The stronger scanners for checked baggage, on the other hand, run the risk of causing damage to any of these items

    That would seem like a very good reason not to put anything that has data you don't want to be erased in your checked baggage - which would include digital camera with memory card, laptop with hard drive, and hard drive based MP3 player like iPod.

  77. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Razor blades are specifically ALLOWED both in checked as well as carry on, idiot. The "security bozos" simply didn't give a fuck that you brought your Mach III's on board.

    You're lucky _I_ am not a security bozo, or I'd be just liable to kick the living shit out of a smart talking punk-ass little faggot like you.

  78. Any other horror stories out there? by golgotha007 · · Score: 1

    not personally, but i bet Steve Mann does

  79. Re:join FAG the only association for the bla bla b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hook line and sinker.

    you took the bait faster than any fish i've ever seen.

  80. Abandon all hope yee who enter airport by smchris · · Score: 1


    Of course, Penn Gilette had the all-time best word on that in his PC Computing essay. Just write a little start-up program that fills your PC screen with "10...9...8...7...". Airport security love a passenger with a sense of humour.

    Outside of perhaps a welfare office or major metropolitan emergency room waiting area, is there any public space more repellent than an airport? Inspecting your shoes while they do a cursory glance at the _cargo_ riding with you is just added value in an already surreal experience.

    Positive suggestion: avoidance. Less than 150 miles, drive. Less than 500-600 miles: Can you arrange a Monday business meeting? Amtrak down Sunday. Amtrak back the same day.

  81. How long till..... by Ryn · · Score: 1

    some nut figures out how to screw the airport security and passengers completely by making a bomb, inserting it where sun don' shine, and getting caught at the checkup point on purpose?
    What will TSA do then?

  82. Your .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you considered changing it from "retard" to "neurotic"?

  83. Magic 8 ball by maizena · · Score: 2, Funny

    My magic 8 ball went throught X-Ray 3 times...

    Why???

    Maybe it's because it has a classic round shape bomb look...

    1. Re:Magic 8 ball by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be happy they didn't tell you to open it and drink the liquid contents...

      Actually surprised they didn't do this.

  84. They can look at files if they want. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Remember, there is no privacy when you *choose* to fly..

    You wave most all your rights to privacy at the door. ( especially now that the patriot act is fully in force which blurs the lines between privacy, rights, commercial and governmental entities... )

    Do i think they should ask, no..

    Do they have the legal right, currently... yes.

    ( actually, in theory they can deny you access just because you have long hair.. but they could loose federal funding in that case )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:They can look at files if they want. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "You wave most all your rights to privacy at the door."

      you can't really say its private when the security is run be the federal government.

      You do not loose all rights just because your o dealing with a corporation. sheesh.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  85. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Just do what the friggin' Mr. Security tells you to do and we'll be safer and don't have to stand in line forever.

    "If you could just step behind this curtain, sir? Pants around your ankles please. And bend over this table. This'll only take a few minutes."

    Point being, there are limits on what friggin' Mr. Security is allowed to ask you to do.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  86. THANK YOU MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for modding that down, and for recognizing that posts about niggers and faggots are inherently trolls.

    Keep up the good work, keep Slashdot free from niggers and faggots!

  87. A real How-To by costas · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I travelled 150k+ miles a year across the globe until recently. Here's a quick how-to on travelling with gadgets (laptop, multiple adapters/converters, a PDA and at least one cellphone):

    Stuff almost everything in a small carry-on bag. A professional-looking backpack is the best (the backpack part for ergonomic, not security reasons).

    Wear as little metal as possible. That includes shoes with metal inserts in the soles (a lot of plain-looking walking or dress shoes have those). Get a coin purse and stuff your change in the purse and that in your carry-on.

    When going thru security, do not rush, follow instructions even inane ones ("yes, I will turn on that Palm V for you sir"). Do not tell them that you got a flight to catch or attract their attention in any other way. Since you're not carrying anything dangerous (right?) it will be far faster for you to go with the flaw and accept the default process rather than try to explain your reasons for short-circuiting it.

    1. Re:A real How-To by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1
      You forgot the most important one. Don't buy one-way tickets, if you can help it. As retarded as it is, if you get two separate one ways, or are doing a three-legged trip with three one way tickets, you are going to get anal-probed at every one.


      You know, they flag you with the "XXX" or whatever on your boarding pass, and you get the full treatment. Yes, my sample size is large - I think I've done 12 such flights (mostly part of three legged trips where I was combining a business with a personal trip), and EVERY single one of the 12 had the same mindnumbing, time-wasting results. I'd almost rather just pay for more tickets, it's faster.


      Now if somebody can honestly explain how the hell THIS helps fight terrorism, I'd like to hear about it. I'm sure if Osama bin Laden is footing the bill, the 200 dollar difference between round-trip and one-way just isn't going to make a fuck-bit of a difference. If they assigned an added risk factor for one-way flight, I'd buy it, but by clogging the system by flagging EVERYBODY with a one-way, they make it incredibly obvious how to avoid getting the heavy-search treatment and thereby make it substantially easier to commit terrorist acts.

  88. I got horror stories by greywar · · Score: 1

    I travel for work on occasion. I've had some issues. The problem is I insall stuff on customers machines-both hardware and software. The problem is-the stuff I do is complicated, and the tools etc have radios in them, wires, etc. And I carry a peice of luggage full of this kind of stuff. Guard "So what do you do with this stuff?" Me "I install it on ovens" Guard "OK go over there for a second" Guard 2 "Whats this thing?" [holds up a supermole gold profiler] Me "Its a thermal profiler" Guard 2" I though you said you installed ovens?" The long and short is-they're certain I lied to them the first time when all I did was try to keep it simple, and then they're upset because the don't understand what I do. Nor can I easily and simply explain this. I was once searched 13 times in one round trp within the US. One of them said I raised red flags. I imagine it didn't help that I pay for my flights in cash. My shoes ALWAYS set off metal detectors. And they once almost refused to allow me to travel with my laptop because it was broken. Why-because at the prior security point they had dropped and broken it! Canadian customs is the worst. same scenario as above only rude and full of paperwork. Leaving your cordless drill with the battery in as it goes through things....sometimes if they're jostled/compressed they get turned on...and your baggage begins to smoke and catch fire as its going through te x-ray machine. If this happens to you-you will not be flying that day. Do not yell and scream. if you get too excited you also won't be staying at your hotel that night. LOL. Gotta love idiots-that kept me entertained just thinking on it on my flight home.

    1. Re:I got horror stories by logical1010 · · Score: 1

      Dude, there's probably metal in those butt ugly static dissapative shoes you have! Get rid of 'em and use some heel staps.

      --
      There is something wonderful in seeing a wrong-headed majority assailed by truth. ~John Kenneth Galbraith
  89. I don't feel safer by bongo_X · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure what is supposed to make us feel safer but it doesn't work for me. On the other hand I have never really felt threatened. About a year after 09.11 I went the airport with my hard drive case. The drives contained an album I was working on. Besides the obvious danger of damage if I checked them, it was material by a major artist that I couldn't let out of my sight. Picture a medium sized (18" x 12" x 8"?) Pelican case, with custom foam inserts and four Kingston SCSI removable carriers w/drives lined up in there. When I got to the security check I was thinking I couldn't imagine anything that would look more like bombs! It looked like a bomb from an old Bond movie or something, it just needed a big red LED display to be complete. I was prepared for a big explanation. I have no way to mount these, obviously! This is what I got; Pause, open case, blank stare, "what is that?" , I reply "hard drives", more blank stare, obviously not sure what a hard drive is, "OK", close case. end of security measures. I haven't had much faith in security since then. I can remember only one time that I had to turn on my notebook at security. It's not a problem because it's always just sleeping, but they never ask. Maybe they think no one would blow up an ibook?

    1. Re:I don't feel safer by FueledByRamen · · Score: 1

      I flew a Sun Ultra 2 from LAX to SEA, and it had some quite expensive drives in it, so I wrapped them in static bags and put them in my carry-on bag. The lady at the security checkout pulled out the drives, asked me what they were, so I told her "hard drives." She said, "Oh," and sent me on my way. I was expecting far worse, but I didn't get off completely; one of the drives was KIA (the less expensive of the two, which didn't have any important data on it fortunately).

      --
      Every cloud has a silver lining (except for the mushroom shaped ones, which have a lining of Iridium & Strontium 90)
  90. Don't say this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was stupid enough to have the following conversation with a security officer last year while going through the checkpoint with my notebook in hand:

    Officer: "Hello sir, may I have a look at your computer?"

    Me: "Sure, have blast"

    Officer: "Sir, would you please step over to the two gentlemen on the side over here, they would like to hafve a few words with you"

    Me: (Internal voice: WTF did you say "Have a blast" for, you could have said, "Sure, no problem") Ugh!

  91. Re:Do teddy bears count as tech stuff? - My reply by Sam+Nitzberg · · Score: 1

    I would have said:

    I would like it done professionally, and with dispatch.

    Optionally to throw in, as well:

    And with your immediate supervisor's direct supervision.

    No, I wouldn't have smiled when I said that.

    Sam

  92. Low-tech security risks by gvc · · Score: 1

    Quite inadvertently, I have made round trips from
    Toronto to Boston and from Toronto to Chicago with
    a big screwdriver (12 inch shaft) in my laptop bag.

    I was shocked to discover it at the gate on the
    last leg of my second trip. Since I'd already
    cleared security I kept it.

    That's 4/4 security checks (2 Canadian, 2 U.S.)
    that failed.

    Not that I'm so worried. I believe it no
    longer fruitful to commandeer a plane with hand
    tools. Surprise and the doctrine of "give them
    what they want" were essential components of the
    9-11 attacks. Both are now absent.

  93. What about non-PC and non-Consumer Eq? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Most people here are talking about PC equipment and consumer technology. But I still remember years ago in the mid '70's when my father (an oceanographer) would travel on commercial aircraft with current meters (meters for measuring ocean data). At the time, these where a hardened metal cylinder about 10 inches in diameter and 18 inches long with some probes and a handle on top, the lid was held on with large metal clips. They still had a lot of mechanical components (for example the tape cartridge storage device that recorded the data), and occasionally would make ticking sounds. He would carry these onboard because even back in the '70's, they cost around $100,000. These days, the are yellow plastic balls full of solid state... I can not imagine being able to show TSA that these things where not bombs. I wonder about other non-consumer, non-PC electronic equipment...

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:What about non-PC and non-Consumer Eq? by afeinberg · · Score: 1

      i have a similar piece of sports equipment that is a watertightly sealed metal cylinder. i have to check it, despite the fact that it is worth over $800 because it "looks like a bomb." idiotic.

      this ranks up there with the Aquil Abdullah, the U.S. National Rowing Team member who was detained at security because of his name, despite the fact that he a) represents the U.S. in numerous international competitions and b) is a practicing catholic.

    2. Re:What about non-PC and non-Consumer Eq? by instarx · · Score: 1

      In the late 80's and 90's I used to do air sampling with small battery-powered pumps that were electronically controlled for flow and duration. I used to carry these on planes all the time and often thought that whatever the inpectors were looking for it wasn't wires, batteries and timers. In more than 8 years I never had a single inpector even ask me what they were.

      I don't do that any more, but maybe there are some Industrial Hygienists out there who can tell us how Gilian pumps are carried these days. I suspect they have to be shipped in advance.

  94. Travel Horror Stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My sister-in-law is studying medicine in Israel. When she came home for Christmas she had her laptop "inspected". The process included putting the laptop in a padded box, mounting it in a catapult (Yep, you read that right!), heaving it across a large room at about 40mph, hitting a wall about 8 feet up, and crashing to the floor. That was to make sure it wouldn't blow up.

    She also had to have her 8 chocolate bars, that were christmas gifts, packed in a security marked box and stored in the blast-proof part of the luggage compartment. There must be something special about the way Israeli confectioners make their products.

  95. Sabers??? by emo+boy · · Score: 1

    Did you see sabers on there? Do Light Sabers count? What does that Star Wars kid do when he flies?

  96. Wires by ArmenTanzarian · · Score: 1

    It's probably late enough in the posting that this will get buried, but I have always had problems with wires. Even back in the "laxer" days of airport security, they don't like to see lots of wires in a carry-on. If you have any wires, disconnect and twist tie them so they're obviously not doing anything. Just a quick tip on how to avoid a little potential hassle.

  97. It's random - travel 'security' roulette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I have travelled with a large lock blade knife several times since 9/11, and it was found by the x-ray people once. I checked it after that.

    I used to keep a flip-blade screwdriver in my laptop bag, and on the x-ray it looks exactly like a zip gun. No one ever looked at that, but they did spend 10 minutes and two supervisors deciding whether or not to allow me to take my retractable phone cord on the plane. I guess it looks like a garrote, and the TSA manual must say that a garrote is more dangerous than a zip gun...

    I've walked through the metal detector with a pocketknife and watched the TSA monkeys grab the person behind me for the anal probe.

    Bruce Schneier says that the two things that make us more secure since 9/11 are reinforced cockpit doors, and the knowledge among passengers that we are responsible for our own safety. Unfortunately, we aren't allowed to have any tools with which to implement that safety. Except our brains, which is kind of a scary thought for most people.

  98. Export of encryption gear - trying to follow laws by Sam+Nitzberg · · Score: 1

    I remembered Matt Blaze (really sharp computer security and crypt guy)going through some fun experience that he wrote up in trying to -legally- transport some relatively basic phone-crypto device. I found the article online, and have posted the text below. Note that the article is copyright Matt Blaze, and that I have followed his guideline for reproducing the article: his copyright notice is intact, and the article is provided in its entirety. Sam Nitzberg http://www.iamsam.com - - - From: http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/blaze.h tml - - - My Life as an International Arms Courier Matt Blaze Under an obscure provision of US law, devices and computer programs that use encryption techniques to hide information from prying eyes and ears are considered ``munitions'' and subject to the same rules that govern the international arms trade. In particular, taking such items out of this country requires the approval of the State Department, which decides whether exporting something might endanger national security. In the past, these restrictions were of little concern to the average citizen; encryption found most of its application in military and diplomatic communications equipment. Today, however, growing concern over electronic fraud and privacy means that encryption techniques are starting to find their way into more conventional commercial products like laptop computers and portable phones. Mostly to find out what the process was like, I recently applied for a temporary export license for a portable telephone encryption product that I wanted to take with me on a business trip to England and Belgium. The item in question is more properly called a ``telephone security device.'' This is a little box that scrambles telephone conversations to protect them against eavesdroppers; this sort of protection is sometimes important when discussing confidential business matters from faraway places. The particular model I bought was already approved for export; it employs a cipher algorithm that the government has already decided is not a threat to national security even should it fall into the hands of some rogue government. This model is aimed primarily, I presume, at international business travelers who want to communicate in a reasonably secure manner with their home offices in the states. In other words, a typical user buys two of them, leaving one at the home office and carrying the other when traveling abroad. The options that came with my device included a James Bond-ish looking acoustic coupler and handset to facilitate its connection to the hardwired phones that are still common in European hotel rooms. It turns out that there was recently some discussion in the government about exempting products like my secure phone from the licensing paperwork requirements. Unfortunately, however, this exemption never actually took effect. So even though the device I had was already approved for sale abroad, I still needed to get a temporary export license before I could take it with me. But I was assured that ``this is an easy, routine process''. Well, sure enough, about two weeks before I was to leave I got back my official US State Department ``license for the temporary export of unclassified defense articles''. So far, so good. From what I was able to figure out by reading the license (and having a few conversations with an export lawyer), I'm required to leave from an international airport with a Customs agent present (no problem there, although Customs is geared to arriving, rather than departing, travelers). At the airport, I'm supposed to fill out a form called a ``shipper's export declaration'' (SED) on which I have to declare that ``these commodities are authorized by the US government for export only to Belgium and the United Kingdom. They may not be resold, transshipped, or otherwise disposed of in any country, either in their original form or incorporated into other end-items without the prior written approval of the US Department of State''. Then I'm to present the SED and export license

  99. Foolishness by chaoticset · · Score: 1
    I wonder if these items are being evaluated on a purely objective, scientific basis? Let's look at an excerpt of the list:
    • Guns: Yes, in checked luggage
    • Lighters: Yes, in carryon
    • Gun lighters: No, not in checked or carryon

    Gee, I guess not. They will allow actual guns in your checked luggage, but not gun lighters. Apparently there's a huge fear of people being scared by lighters after the owner of the lighter has left the airport.
    --

    -----------------------
    You are what you think.
    1. Re:Foolishness by Ashtead · · Score: 1
      Not all that strange. The guns that go into checked luggage are unloaded, and therefore inert pieces of metal, comparable to socket wrenches, knives, and other tools, as far as the operational security of the aircraft is concerned.

      Lighters, whether gun-shaped or regular, contain some kind of flammable gas or liquid, and are therefore more dangerous in the plane. Even regular lighters appear to be restricted, the problem with the gun-shaped ones is that they look sufficiently like guns to be allowed in the cabin. And since they hold a flammable liquid they can't go into the hold; so they may not be taken along at all.

      Makes sense after some analysis....

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
    2. Re:Foolishness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Or, there'd be a restriction that indicates gun-shaped lighters must be empty and in checked luggage. Inert pieces of metal are inert pieces of metal.


      Besides which, you can put ammunition in your checked luggage, and if you think that's just another hunk of inert metal, I dare you to smack a few bullets on the butt with a hammer. If you can send ammo, but not a lighter, tell me why that's logical?

    3. Re:Foolishness by Ashtead · · Score: 1

      Now that I agree is nonsensical. I was not aware that ammo was OK in checked baggage...

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
  100. Batteries or bombs? by TLouden · · Score: 1

    My family had an interesting problem returning from a vacation in mexico. The airport screeners wanted to look through our carry on bags and then our electronic toys. They desided that about half of our batteries (all 1.5V AA) were unsafe and took them. The others we were allowed to walk on with. Quite an interesting security issue.

    --
    -Tim Louden
  101. trains too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is not directly related to the subject but it recalls me a recent experience. when going to london, i took the eurostar train.
    and when i reached london, an english customs cop selected me for a few questions and to check my belongings. i had to turn my laptop on, like you would do in an airport. but it gets more complicated next.
    they had a cdrom they wanted to use on my machine to search for paedophilia and other illegal content. i said i was ok but the first problem was my laptop is a sub-laptop without cdrom nor floppy drive. so as we could not use the cdrom, i turned the machine on so they could check around.
    i use netbsd and i dont use x window so there is no graphical interface of any kind on my machine. so he asked for a mouse and i told it has no mouse but that red kind of thing, the trackpoint. but there was no graphical interface on screen, so he was quite puzzled.
    so i had to explain i use it to write programs and just check emails so i dont require a graphical interface, just a clean and simple 80x50 console.
    well the more i tried to help them check my machine, the more the customs guy looked at me like some kind of extra-terrestrial when it came to using a computer. it's fun to tell but it was not fun to go through.
    i also had my gps with me (i'm a geocacher too) and he asked me if i was using a gps to mark spots for future bombings or alike. i thought that joking might be a very bad idea so i kept serious and i just told him i used a gps to avoid getting lost, and to mark the hotel and places so i dont get lost in london.
    for people of you using macintosh machines you should be safe : the custom people told me their cdrom only worked on intel machines (for now) so if you are into sex pics, use a mac ;)
    (gilbertf (at) netbsd-fr (dot) org)

  102. TSA Redux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Researching the secret shadow government...

    <bash_code>
    wget http://www.tsa.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/Permitted _Prohibited_12_18_2003.pdf

    WORKER=$(pdfinfo Permitted_Prohibited_12_18_2003.pdf | grep Author | cut -d':' -f2 | sed -e 's/^[ ]*//g' | tr ' ' '+')

    links http://www.google.com/search?q=${WORKER}

    </bash _code>

    Got 'em. Err... Grand View College?
    Whiskey Tango Foxtrot--is that accredited?
    Must be clerical support. Time to try again.
    Or, read up on GVC's "therock" tradition,
    and use that as social engineering angle.
    ("Didn't we paint the rock together back
    at 'Grand?"...)

    The point: TSA <b>LEAKS</b> info with everything
    they do. They use M$ products. They do crappy
    work with these tools.

    1. Re:TSA Redux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      update; author appears in photo; details
      revealed.
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/articles/A60071-2003Nov19_3.html

  103. Keyloggers by Codex+The+Sloth · · Score: 1

    I'd never use a cyber cafe for anything remotely useful because it seems pretty likely the machine will have a keyboard logger on it. This advice about not taking your laptop seems pretty pie in the sky...

    --
    I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you ... oh wait, I'm #93427. Ha ha! In your face #93428!
  104. Trying to follow laws - reposted with formatting by Sam+Nitzberg · · Score: 1

    I remember years ago when Matt Blaze (A very sharp crypto and computer security guy) tried to follow the laws and properly take a phone-crypto device with him. I have the link (and the text) below.

    In accordance with his copyright usage requirements, I have the entire article and his copyright notice provided below.

    Sam Nitzberg
    http://www.iamsam.com

    http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/blaze .h tml

    My Life as an International Arms Courier
    Matt Blaze

    Under an obscure provision of US law, devices and computer programs that use encryption techniques to hide information from prying eyes and ears are considered ``munitions'' and subject to the same rules that govern the international arms trade. In particular, taking such items out of this country requires the approval of the State Department, which decides whether exporting something might endanger national security. In the past, these restrictions were of little concern to the average citizen; encryption found most of its application in military and diplomatic communications equipment. Today, however, growing concern over electronic fraud and privacy means that encryption techniques are starting to find their way into more conventional commercial products like laptop computers and portable phones.

    Mostly to find out what the process was like, I recently applied for a temporary export license for a portable telephone encryption product that I wanted to take with me on a business trip to England and Belgium.

    The item in question is more properly called a ``telephone security device.'' This is a little box that scrambles telephone conversations to protect them against eavesdroppers; this sort of protection is sometimes important when discussing confidential business matters from faraway places. The particular model I bought was already approved for export; it employs a cipher algorithm that the government has already decided is not a threat to national security even should it fall into the hands of some rogue government. This model is aimed primarily, I presume, at international business travelers who want to communicate in a reasonably secure manner with their home offices in the states. In other words, a typical user buys two of them, leaving one at the home office and carrying the other when traveling abroad. The options that came with my device included a James Bond-ish looking acoustic coupler and handset to facilitate its connection to the hardwired phones that are still common in European hotel rooms.

    It turns out that there was recently some discussion in the government about exempting products like my secure phone from the licensing paperwork requirements. Unfortunately, however, this exemption never actually took effect. So even though the device I had was already approved for sale abroad, I still needed to get a temporary export license before I could take it with me. But I was assured that ``this is an easy, routine process''. Well, sure enough, about two weeks before I was to leave I got back my official US State Department ``license for the temporary export of unclassified defense articles''. So far, so good.

    From what I was able to figure out by reading the license (and having a few conversations with an export lawyer), I'm required to leave from an international airport with a Customs agent present (no problem there, although Customs is geared to arriving, rather than departing, travelers). At the airport, I'm supposed to fill out a form called a ``shipper's export declaration'' (SED) on which I have to declare that ``these commodities are authorized by the US government for export only to Belgium and the United Kingdom. They may not be resold, transshipped, or otherwise disposed of in any country, either in their original form or incorporated into other end-items without the prior written approval of the US Department of State''. Then I'm to present the SED and export license to a Customs official at the airport before I leave. The Customs officer is suppose

  105. Sounds like a job for civil disobedience. by Inoshiro · · Score: 1

    Basically, the restrictions on carry-on beyond knives are silly, and even restricting a knife is somewhat silly because you can always make a substitute (however, if you think about just stopping random highjackings [non-premeditated], restricting knives is good).

    Since the restrictions are stupid and time wasting, and the service (air travel) is fairly essential given how it's the only way to travel to and from some areas, entire planes of people who try to smuggle on nail clippers is the only way to get things changed. The governments involved won't change it, because they don't want to look bad to all the people who are deathly afraid of more terrorism. Only people can change it.

    If the other people onboard those other planes had simply stood up to the highjackers, nothing bad would've really come from it. No one wanted to be a hero, so the highjackers were able to execute their suicide mission. At any point in the 2 years since, plenty more suicide missions could've gone off just fine -- there just haven't been any suicide missions to execute. The "security" is nothing but a smokescreen that needs to be taken away.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:Sounds like a job for civil disobedience. by arth1 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If the other people onboard those other planes had simply stood up to the highjackers, nothing bad would've really come from it. No one wanted to be a hero, so the highjackers were able to execute their suicide mission.

      In the old world, in old times, citizens were not only protected from liability if trying to save lives, but they also had the citizen's duty of always doing so, even if it meant risking one's own life. Especially at sea (which is pretty analogous to today's flying), NOT intervening when lives were at stake, or hiding behind fear of one's own life was a criminal inaction, punishable by law.
      Today, people cowering in fear and refusing to do their citizen's duty get posthumous medals and are called "heroes".

      While people who DO what they can to be good citizens get harassed in the name of security, because they happen to look like someone who blew themselves up.

      Regards,
      --
      *Art
    2. Re:Sounds like a job for civil disobedience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before 9/11 no one would have suspected that the hijacker's intent was to crash the planes into buildings. The usual scenario was to fly to Iran and demand the release of prisoners and such. Most people got out alive in those situations if they cooperated. A simple threat of exploding the whole plane if anyone tried anything kept everyone in line. I think today this same technique would not work. I know I would at least try to kill a terrorist with my own bare hands. Many other people would do so as well. Look at the shoe bomber; He was apprehended by several passengers after a stewardess noticed he was trying to light his shoes on fire.

    3. Re:Sounds like a job for civil disobedience. by EmptyHead · · Score: 1

      Hurray!! Someone who can think outside of the moment! You should not have logged in as anonymous. You are exactly right. The norm before 9/11 was to cooperate with hijackers in order not to jeopardize your own, and more importantly the safety of others, by playing hero. Now, AFTER 9/11, the world will treat airline highjackers as if they intend to kill everyone and have no value for their own lives. In this particular period of fun the murderers think they will be rewarded by Allah and given multiple virgins in heaven for their charming deeds.

      To call the people on the planes cowards for not fighting is a special kind of ignorance. - Like when we judge the actions of people in the past by todays standards.

      While I'm spewing, I'd like to note something interesting. I had to fly a few times immediately after 9/11 to Washington D.C. and noticed that the aisle seats seemed to be populated almost completely by male passengers. I wonder if the airlines tried to arrange that, if the passengers just did it on their own, or if it was a bizarre coincidence.

  106. About a year before 9/11... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was traveling to an explosives conference in Maryland. I didn't have my laptop with me, but I had the case. I was way early for my flight, and got hungry; there wasn't anywhere to eat where I was, so I went out through security, ate, and came back through. I was the only person there, other than the security guard, who asked me if it was okay to use an electronic "sniffer" on the bag.

    "Hey!" I said. "We tested that machine!" Which is true- I forget the model, but it was made up in Massachusetts. You wipe the object down with a bit of cloth stuck in a wand, and then put the cloth into the machine. I told him it was fine, but that it would probably set the machine off, which caused him to look at me like I asked for a fried weasel on a bun. "I work with explosives. I carried that bag with me to work every day for years." He sighed, rolled his eyes, and said, "Nobody's ever told me THAT before."

    He finished up, put the cloth into the machine, and I waited for it to go "bling" and have all kinds of alarms go off- or at least get a full-body cavity search. It didn't. For some reason, the machine said no explosives were detected, and the man told me I could leave.

    "No! Wait!" I held the case up and pointed to the feet. "Swab these! That'll set it off." I really wanted to see if it would work- I wasn't holding anybody up, and I had time to kill, so what the hey.

    "You can go now, sir."

    What's ironic is that my specialty used to be blowing airplanes up for the gov'munt. Now they don't even believe I can do that.

  107. Equipment Stolen by Handlers by nickdiaz · · Score: 1

    I've traveled a great deal in my life, and consider myself a "Technology Road Warrior", adept at dealing with many of the known hassles of traveling with technology. After 9/11, I'm sure we all have been frustrated by the added hassles at the airports, but also acknowledge the need for the increased security. I've been patient and tolerant of the new obstacles until now.

    Tuesday, I flew Continental from Seattle to Houston. I decided to check my bag, even though it was small enough to carry-on. I had a lot of electronic equipment in the bag that I didn't want to bother carrying with me, such as a high end digital camera, Palm handheld, assorted charging cables, nice watch, etc. I had a lock on the bag, but was politely reminded as I checked the bag that locks are not allowed so that our bag can be searched.

    After arriving at my destination, I quickly discovered that all electronics had been stolen from my bag, only to be replaced by a slip of paper from TSA that my bag had been searched. It's all just stuff, and can be replaced, but I'm pretty irritated by being stolen from, and by the situation as a whole. Customer service at Continental pretty much blew me off, even though I consider it their responsibility since the items were stolen between the time that I checked the bag into their care, and when I picked it up at baggage claim. I was brusquely told (as I'm sure several of you will be thinking) that I should have carried electronic items with me on board.

    Now I'm skittish about my flight home. My expandable bag is now too big to carry-on, and is full of expensive Christmas presents. I don't feel that I should have to incur the cost of shipping the items to myself, yet I no longer feel safe that my possessions will arrive safely at my destination if I check my baggage with the airline, as they certainly have made no assurances or apologies.

  108. You didn't get the memo? by lone_marauder · · Score: 1

    One security screener even asked me to log in, decrypt and look at files on my notebook's desktop

    You didn't get that state department memo about encrypted bombs?

    --
    who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
  109. UTTER BULL CRAP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for the TSA and I can tell you directly that we do NOT require that anyone turn any electronic devices on. The reason for this, first and foremost, is that we run the risk of blowing people (and ourselves) up in the process of testing things. Other reasons include the possibility that people are transporting damaged items for repair at a relative's home in another state (which happens) and the list goes on! If some fool suggests that he was required to turn on his laptop in order to pass security checks, then he's either lying or wasn't being screened by Federal Security Screeners. If this actually happened, then PLEASE report the fool and they will be summarily dismissed.

    I know the TSA and security procedures are a general pain in the butt but I honestly feel that most of us are doing a good, correct and consciencious job.

    And to be perfectly clear about the detection of potentially dangerous items, we have devices and procedures in place to cover such screening. We do not require anything be in working order. That'd be like testing "white powder" by sniffing at it. SUICIDE!! Even if it were "just a drug" and not anthrax, how ready are you to put an unknown substance up your nose? (and yet, thanks to Hollywood, there are many ready to lay down their lives supporting the cause of stupidity)

    Frankly, I am sick of hearing nonsensical stories about imagined hassles that never happen in airports these days... especially those handled by the TSA. I know the procedures and I know the minds of the people who write them well enough. While security procedures are constantly being updated, they haven't changed so wildly as to include such stupidity. And again, if you can document such procedures in place, PLEASE tell someone. Your rights to travel are the same as before this 9-11 mess. You can still have guns in your luggage just as before. You can still even travel without government ID if you want to. It might be a little more of a hassle in the case of flying without ID, but such situations happen to honest people on a regular basis for a variety of reasons and restricting the constitutional right to freedom of travel is never the purpose or intended result of the TSA's activities... on the contrary, our mission is to preserve such rights.

    That said, I wish I could get back into I.T.... *sigh* this economy sucks...

  110. How Knoppix saved me by a.ameri · · Score: 1

    Once in Dubai Airport, I was stopped by a security guard to open and show my notebook computer. I had no prior experience of travelling with a notebook, so I didn't know that they were a security concern. Anyway, the guy wanted to see that my notebook "worked", and unfortunate me, I had just wiped the hard disk of my shiny new Thinkpad, as it was waiting for Linux to be installed on it. Hence, I got into all sortes of troubles you can imagine, as the security guys couldn't underestand that a computer might be phisycally OK, but have no OS installed on it. luckily, I suddenly remembered that I had a Knoppix CD with me. putting it in, and showing it boot, saved my day. Yet another way of how Knoppix can save you!!

    --
    -- /* Those who don't underestand Unix, are condemned to reinvent it poorly */
    1. Re:How Knoppix saved me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, you do know what the O and the S in BIOS stand for, right?

      Boot into the BIOS.

    2. Re:How Knoppix saved me by FreakWent · · Score: 1

      Output System.
      Basic Input/Output System.

      It's the name given to the code stored in the ROM on the motherboard.

      What you are referring to is the setup utility, which is not an operating system as far as I am concerned, but might be under some strict defenition, which would apply to the software that runs a TV set's menu system.

    3. Re:How Knoppix saved me by Wilk4 · · Score: 1

      what he's saying is boot up to the BIOS setup utility and that'll show that the pc works, at least a little.

  111. Magic Floppy Porno Disk? by The+Mutant · · Score: 1

    The UK used to demand that you boot your incoming laptop from their magic floppy disk which was somehow supposed to detect pornography.

    I'm 'Merican and I've been living in the UK full time since 1997. I've also traveled to the UK - frequently! - on biz since 1996.

    I've always travelled with a PowerBook, sometimes leaving and re-entering the country as often as 30+ times a year, yet for some strange reason I've never seen the Magic Floppy Porno Disk of which you speak.

    Are we talking about the same UK?

    Or have HMS Customs Service always acknowledged the moral superiority of PowerBook users?

    1. Re:Magic Floppy Porno Disk? by Y2 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      All your questions shall be answered by ... The Beeb Excerpt:
      "There is no pornography stored on the hard drive," I stated.

      "Do you mind if I check." she says rather than asks, and begins to take the computer out of the bag.

      "I'm just going to hook it up over there and scan the hard drive..." she continues.

      And then her face turns dour. "Oh! It's an Apple," she says, dejectedly. "Our scanner doesn't work on Apples."

      A few official words were wrenched from H.M. Customs and are record on Interesting People.
      --
      "But all your emitter and collector are belong to me!"
    2. Re:Magic Floppy Porno Disk? by wheresdrew · · Score: 1
      "And then her face turns dour. "Oh! It's an Apple," she says, dejectedly. "Our scanner doesn't work on Apples."

      Yet the article uses a 100-series PowerBook for the graphic? Oops.

    3. Re:Magic Floppy Porno Disk? by JoeBaldwin · · Score: 1

      Y'know, I'd love to see what would happen if the police jack me in for something computer related.

      I use Linux, and have no FAT32/NTFS partitions. Considering how enamoured the British govt are with Bill, they'd probably be unable to do anything except wipe it.

  112. Rare problems by KC7GR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except for the more intensive laptop examinations, and the longer lines, I've not noticed any real changes at the checkpoints.

    The biggest issues I had were...

    --Coming through Seatac to meet my wife as she returned from Florida. Had my Motorola portable radio (an MT2000) with me, as I was keeping in touch with some (amateur radio) friends of ours while I waited for the flight. By odd chance, it happens that the security screeners also use MT2000's, but not the VHF model that I had. Red flag! I got asked twice if it could work on "their" frequency, and told them (twice) "No, it's not even in the same band as yours." I know this to be true, because the security guys work on the Port of Seattle's 800MHz trunked system. They let me through, but I could tell that you could whack them over the head with the facts, and they still wouldn't "get it."

    --On a change-of-planes at Atlanta, while traveling from Seattle to Orlando. I had already been thoroughly screened, and there was no additional X-ray type security checkpoint when simply changing gates to get to the next flight. Despite this, and for reasons still unknown to me, I got all but strip-searched by the morons at a specially set-up secondary checkpoint at the gate. I was wearing open-type sandals (the all-terrain type) with no socks, and I still got asked to take 'em off. Go figure.

    I would agree with another poster: Dress well, keep a cool head, and be prepared to explain anything you're carrying, electronics-wise, in full.

    --

    Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

    Blue Feather Technologies

  113. Thank Apple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple did away with the floopy... No floopy, no boot. :)

  114. Try these shoes (no metal) and check out this site by Hollinger · · Score: 1

    I fly roughly every three weeks, and have yet to have any trouble! In fact, it seems to me that the TSA screeners are getting better about tech, not worse. You just have to tell them you have X laptop(s) and that you'd like to let the guys at the other end of the line finish up first before you send them through -- they'll understand, if they're nice people. As far as having to pack and unpack and whatnot, all you have to remove is your laptop. You can cram whatever else into your carryon (cell, iPod, PDA, whatever) and run that through, rather than emptying your bag out into a bin.

    A very useful hint: If you are tired of having your shoes scanned, or being wanded down because of your shoes, try Ecco shoes. They're incredibly comfortable and well-made, and don't have any metal in them at all (at least the suede ones I have don't -- bug your local shoe salesman about it to be sure).

    Also, for some insight into travel security (or to post a story) about it, check out www.StupidSecurity.com -- "Exposing Fake Security since 2003."

  115. This is not about the captain. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

    This is about the TSA.

    Further, asking to read FILES is equivalent to reading documents.. if I have a briefcase, do I have to allow the security personel to read all my confidential documents before deciding I'm allowed on the aircraft? No, and if that were the case, you can bet the business travelling public would revolt.

    Asking me to prove my equipment is real by performing some tasks, that's just fine.

    Asking me to decrypt and view personal documents is not going to happen, ever.

  116. Try a carry on hard disk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a few years before 9/11 I had the pleasure of rebuilding a customer's system (PDP-11) from an old tape and hand carrying their new o/s from California to New Jersey. Same day ticket with a funny hard disk. "what is that, I want to unscrew it." I was able to get a manager to understand what I was doing, I don't think that would work today.

  117. Not loose, but give. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Like it or not, you agreed via contract when you purchased the ticket, to sign most of your rights to privacy away.

    If you don't agree to their requirements ( as I don't, just for the record ) you don't have to become one of their customers. Its called 'choice'.

    You dont 'loose' the rights beacuse its a corporation, you signed them away willingly.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  118. Nary a problem by R_Harrold · · Score: 1

    I have recently flown out of Houston Hobby, Houston Bush and St. Louis with two laptops, a pocket pc phone and a Shuttle PC without encountering any problems at all. I had to send all of the computer devices through seperate from their carying cases, but I was not asked to 'prove' that they were functional. Course on the trip out of Houston Bush my belt buckel set off the alarm, but they still didn't require me to turn anything on to 'prove it operates'

  119. They have won. by FurryFeet · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our new terrorist overlords.

    Not Flamebait. I wish it was Funny, but I'm afraid it may actually be Insightful...

  120. ammunition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so I can check in ammunition but not explosives?!

    How about a handgranade?
    ammo or explosive?

  121. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by mabinogi · · Score: 1

    Why would he have a saftey razor in his first aid kit?

    Sounds to me more like he'd have a tool for cutting...

    --
    Advanced users are users too!
  122. Nice Freudian Slip by L10N · · Score: 1

    " Since you're not carrying anything dangerous (right?) it will be far faster for you to go with the flaw and accept the default process rather than try to explain your reasons for short-circuiting it." Indeed.

    --
    "What we do in life echoes in eternity." Maximus Decimus Meridius
  123. Video splitter by seadd · · Score: 1

    Once I had a 250MHz RGB video splitter in my backpack - I had to show it to the security guys and explain them for five minutes what it does.:)

  124. horror story by luigi6699 · · Score: 1

    I was travelling from the US to Canada last year, carrying (among other things) my dead-battery iBook, and digital camera. Of course, you have to show them that your laptop works. The security agents would not let me plug the iBook in in order to show them; instead, they had the luggage people find my bags, so I could re-pack with the iBook in my checked luggage. Then the search continued, and it was discovered that i was carrying AA batteries for my digicam! Well, that was completely out of the question. I don't understand why batteries are not allowed as carryon items ("I've got a 9v, and I can make you put your tongue on the contacts!" what a threat!), but apparently they aren't. So my luggage was opened yet again, and I ended up with an empty carryon.

    --
    **** You never REALLY learn to swear until you own a computer. ****
  125. Modern Times More Complext Than You Think by appleLaserWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    n the old world, in old times, citizens were not only protected from liability if trying to save lives, but they also had the citizen's duty of always doing so, even if it meant risking one's own life.

    While true, in "old times," citizenship was severely limited to those who could provide some useful service to the local feudal lord. This service typically was typically military in nature.

    Given that your average medieval town had a small number of citizens hanging around with military skills, it is no surprise that they were tasked with the town's defense.

    Now, fast forward to 2003:

    (1) You experience some chest pain, would you like some random person to break your ribs while attempting some misguided chest thumping maneuver?

    (2) You are on an airplane, terrorists attack. Should you whip out your fully automatic hand gun and start blasting at them? Recall that airplanes are made of aluminum which is almost as soft as butter, and ignites at only a slightly higher temperature.

    (3) Your linux laptop crashes. Before you can react, the guy sitting next to you declares that he is an MCSE and can fix the problem right away. Before you can do anything, he has WinXP installed and all your data has turned into a nice empty NTFS partition.

  126. Just use the xray machine. by Cow007 · · Score: 1

    Putting your computer through an xray will not damage it and will reduce the number of questions your are asked. I also reccomend using PGP DISK to store any sensitive information and putting the associated keys on a USB drive or cd. That way you cannot access the sensitive data without being in physical posession of your key and knowing the password.

    --
    411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
  127. Check your Assumptions... by appleLaserWriter · · Score: 1

    Just stick the goatse.cx guy as the background on your laptop...after seeing that a couple times, these security bozos will learn not to ask.

    What if Goatse turns him on?

    1. Re:Check your Assumptions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I'll ask if he (or she - not all security bozos are male) is available after his/her shift ends for a little...fun :)

    2. Re:Check your Assumptions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you'll know the security bozo moonlights as a Slashdot editor.

  128. Computer Toolset when Traveling by kmilani2134 · · Score: 1
    I was traveling to Lake Tahoe over the Thanksgiving holiday and had my laptop in my laptop backpack. The backpack was scanned and then a person took it to a table and hand searched it. It turned out that I had left my computer toolset in my backpack and they must have felt the screwdrivers were too dangerous in my hands. I had a choice to check it in...but instead I checked in my whole bag and just pulled out a couple magazines.

    BIG Mistake. My laptop ended up cracked and I was lucky it was still working.

    --
    Those who trade freedom for security will lose both, and deserve neither" -- Ben Franklin
  129. Given his job by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    That image might evoke the phrase "cavity search" which is the last thing you want him to be thinking.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  130. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Smart talking punk ass little faggot? Nice words coming from someone too young to think of the old school razor blades that don't have lubricating strips or safety features to keep their metro-sexual babies-bottom skin silky smooth.

  131. What about next year? by dwillden · · Score: 1
    My question is what is going to happen in the next year or so when Hydrogen Fuel Cells begin replacing batteries in large numbers of computers and other gadgets? How is the TSA going to handle that?

    Also I don't travel alot but after returning from my last deployment to Bosnia last march, I was cleaning out my laptop case and found a 25.06 bullet I had picked up a year before while Archery hunting. (I had planned on showing it to the local game warden if I had run into him because it was in suspiciously good condition for when and where I found it.)

    Anyway that bullet had traveled to and from Ft. Benning and Utah with me, (the actual travel overseas and back was all military transport so no annying security checks) with not a blink from the TSA Nazi's. I had to turn on the laptop once but nothing else.

    --
    I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
  132. Feeling secure? by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

    Honestly, this whole security thing wouldn't bother me too much if it was done with any common sense - and if it actually made me feel a little more secure.

    It's not about making anyone feel secure. It's about making anyone wanting to try anything feel uncomfortable. It's a psychological tactic as much as anything. That's why the security monkeys are generally assholes - they're trained to be, because it helps freak potential nutters out.

    Personally, I think they're wasting their time (any everyone elses). All it'll do is force real terrorists to get better trained and use more hidable devices. Or they'll simply use methods that don't involve going through the boarding proceedure. Ground staff and baggage handlers, anyone?

    --
    Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    1. Re:Feeling secure? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      It's not about making anyone feel secure. It's about making anyone wanting to try anything feel uncomfortable. It's a psychological tactic as much as anything. That's why the security monkeys are generally assholes - they're trained to be, because it helps freak potential nutters out.

      Very true. The experienced security people are behind CTV monitors in an office somewhere. They relay messages to the grunts of anyone suspicious and worthy of further search. You are being watched closely from the moment you step into the system.

      As someone who's...returned from Amsterdam with local "delicacies" many times, beating airport security is unbelievably easy. In fact, the terror stuff makes my holiday shopping easier, as it shifts security from incoming to outgoing. ;-)

      Personally, I think they're wasting their time (any everyone elses). All it'll do is force real terrorists to get better trained and use more hidable devices.

      Tin-foil hat time: The real reasons for increaced security could be:

      1. Reassure the public that flying is safe
      2. Scare the public to back the war on "terror" (i.e. unprofitable regimes)
      3. Appear to be "doing something about it"

      Let's face it...they would only catch idiotic terrorists with the current methods. Given the number of ways to beat passenger security, the alternates to that (e.g. baggage handlers), and the plethora of other targets out there for terrorists other than airtraffic, it's fairly clear that providing a real increase in security isn't possible without putting everyone in the goatse position.

  133. "Proof" isn't the point by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    It's obvious to everyone that there are no guaruntees. At the end of the day we aren't and never will be 100% safe.

    That doesn't mean we can't take some reasonable precautions in an attempt to make those who wish us harm have a more difficult job of it.

    Ensuring that a laptop is bootable doesn't prove it's safe but does make things more difficult for people wishing to make one unsafe.

    Your point about the drive bay is probably moot. Mine is removable and has an alternate face plate but you would stand no more chance of smuggling anything in there than in your toiletry bag, that's what they have x-ray machines for and they could manually examine that part if they needed to. The boot test is just one of the ways they can try and check something they can't manually examine, the innards of your computer.

    Is it a guaruntee? No. But it would be foolish not to be doing it.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  134. Better solution, more restrictions! by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    Ban all carry on baggage! Anything you want to bring on board you have to carry in your hands. A book, a couple of magazines or whatever but that's it. If you have special requirements (medicines etc) then they have to be in a clear pouch.

    The problem is not so much that the current restrictions are stupid and time-wasting it's that people are bringing on board an enormous amount of shit they don't need. This simply means security has a larger haystack than necessary to look for the needle in.

    Flying offers people enormous amounts of convenience (ie the ability to travel places in hours that would otherwise take days). It isn't unreasonable that this enormous convenience is part of a trade off for some other minor inconveniences.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  135. I've never seen more LAX security than in the USA by mad_ian · · Score: 1
    I've been to China, South Africa, England and Scotland by plane, and several locations in the USA.

    I've never seen any security in the US that came close to comparing to the rest of the world.

    In China and hong Kong (1994) many of us hand checked all our rolls of film, one at a time, with an inspector.. why? because the Xray mahcienes were turned on so high, those lead film bags wouldn't protect the film.

    All other countries I've been to... armed guards everywhere. Even better, if you go up and ask the armed guards for some assistance, they are pleasant and cordial.

    Buisness Travelers? First Class customers? Same line as everyone else... Same searches, If your belt buckle or shoe buckles set off the alarms, belt and shoes go thru the xray.

    So no, I don't feel safer at all... never felt remotely safe in a US airport. ~Marchie

    --
    ~Donald / Just RTFM
  136. Funny by 101percent · · Score: 1

    I just think it's funny how this site always posts news articles which contain laments about the "computerized policing" of America, and how american's are so paranoid now-a-days Than you have this story, which proves those who make these prediction share the same degree of "paranoia". Maybe, Slashdot, it's because people care about their families as much as you care about your hardware. -1 TROLL

  137. pointless by Xkill_ · · Score: 1

    the TSA is a huge waste of money. they solved the terrorsit threat to the airlines when they put the bulletproof doors on the cockpits. everytime I fly and I watch the TSA hassle people over nail clippers, swiss army knives, knitting needles I laugh at the poor bastards because they are preemptively preventing nothing. if anyone ever has the chance to go to any prison museum I highly recommend it. the killing tools on display in any prison museum will make you realise that the TSA's job is impossible (unless they strip search every passenger). plastic puncturing weapons, polycarbonate knives, oh my.

    and my personal favorite, the TSA took my swiss army knift on my keychain (a knife with a 1 inch blade). then i make my way into the airport restaurant and am served with a metal fork (bend all tines down except one, and bend handle into a loop, you have a perfect puncturing weapon to stab into a stuartess).

    we would all be better off spending the TSA budget in other ways!

    --

  138. RE" LiIon batteries and explosions by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    It's all relative, really. Every dry cell battery I've ever seen says someplace on it (or on the bubble-pack container it comes in) that it could explode if tossed into an open flame/incinerated.

    Shorting out any battery creates large amounts of heat, and you're dealing with the core of it being encased in some type of metal or plastic lining ... so sure, the expansion from the heat and boiling chemicals inside might burst said container and "explode".

    How big an issue is it? Well, not enough of one that anybody I know feels unsafe having batteries lying around in their house, car, or devices.

  139. Nightsticks? by turkmenistani · · Score: 1
    As funny as it may be in theory, all it would take is a large amount of determined individuals with malicious intent to seize the plane.

    rtc

    1. Re:Nightsticks? by iiioxx · · Score: 1

      As funny as it may be in theory, all it would take is a large amount of determined individuals with malicious intent to seize the plane.

      A 747 can carry 400 passengers. Just how many terrorists have you got in mind? Even 50 hijackers would be outnumbered 7 to 1 in a nightstick fight.

    2. Re:Nightsticks? by turkmenistani · · Score: 1
      You're serious? You really think arming people with nightsticks is a good idea? Lets not forget that Boeing's 747 is not the only plane in the sky. Boeing's 717 carries about 100. Take those 50 hijackers from your 747 scenario and you have a pretty nasty situation on your hand. There's no point in defending this "arm the passengers" theory, it will never happen as it's both ludicrous and risky.

      And on a side note, yes a 747 can carry 400 passengers. But how many of them are able to use this theoretical nightstick? There's children, senior citizens, etc. onboard. If the aforementioned determined individuals were to train themselves properly, it could be accomplished. Worse odds have been diminished on the battegrounds of World War I and II.

    3. Re:Nightsticks? by iiioxx · · Score: 2, Funny

      But how many of them are able to use this theoretical nightstick? There's children, senior citizens, etc. onboard.

      You've obviously never had to deal with a 5 year-old on a sugar high, armed with a whiffleball bat. Trust me, with a nightstick, they'd be deadly. And as for the senior citizens, my Grandma could beat a man to death with her handbag. Armed with a nightstick, she'd be like a ninja with a walker and a beehive hairdo.

    4. Re:Nightsticks? by identity0 · · Score: 1

      I don't know if the original poster was serious, but yes, there is merit to arming the passengers with hand-to-hand weapons. If there are 50 terrorists in a 400-passenger flight, the passengers will fight back. If there are 50 terrorists in a 100-passenger flight, the passengers will fight back. There is simply no alternative to fighting now that we know what terrorists will do.

      You say that "There's no point in defending this "arm the passengers" theory, it will never happen as it's both ludicrous and risky". Well, the worst that could happen from fighting back is that you end up like the people on United flight 93 - crashing the plane, killing everyone onboard. The worst that could happen from *not* fighting back, tooth and nail, is that you end up like those in the other three 9/11 flights - crashing the plane into targets, killing everyone onboard *and* lots of people on the ground.

      The fact is, we can expect that terrorists will be in the minority(probobly by a large margin) of any flight they try to hijack, and that we shoulkd do whatever we can to help the passengers fight back.

  140. Easy to get through by EvilStein · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just saunter up to the screening station almost butt naked.
    Last time I flew, I put *everything* in the plastic bucket and was wearing nothing but my Teva sandals, some sweatshorts, and a really cruddy wife-beater tank top. I looked like I was nearly homeless.
    They barely gave me a second look. Fortunately, I had packed *nice* clothes in my carry-on and changed as soon as I could.

  141. Suspicious Power Amp by ayjay29 · · Score: 1

    I once took a Linn power amp in my hand luggage. Two security guards spent about 10 minutes looking at the X-Ray picture of the inside. I saw the screen and there was a big 6 inch ferite core for the power supply that did look rather like a chunk of high explosive, with lots of wires around it. I was lucky they didn't take the whole thing appart.

    --
    Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
  142. One funny and one horror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hastle: I fly out of Oakland International US once a year. I have a ibook, and a cellphone and a PDA (PDA needs some juice though.) I used to beable to take my traning EQ to (Aluminum swords). Then asskrock farted, now I'll be lucky to take my PDA some idjut at Oak never saw a white laptop or computer cord before, thought it was an explosive and hastled me over it.

    The funy: I know a urban legened about a man that did a social hack to get a chartered flight at 75% off and was able to take all his gear, pot, acid, some peote and a wiches brew of involving exotic plants on a plane.

    So I think the real trick is to instead of all these security mesures how about NO security mesures and we all learn martial arts, cary two guns, two swords and tazer. No problem stoping them suspicous terrorists

  143. OT: Re:Booting a laptop by Bandman · · Score: 1

    No Way! I just left there. Great place! Their airport rocks. It's all open air, friendly staff. Be warned, lots of people try port your luggage for money. Do it yourself.

  144. Proof..... by Tmack · · Score: 1
    The Proof rating on the bottle, if you have noticed, is 2x the alcohol content in %. This is because 100proof is the content necessary for self-sustained combustion. Try it yourself, 80 proof (as most are) rum/vodka/taquila/whiskey etc will light up as long as a flame is held to it, but wont keep burning on its own once the flame is removed. Try it with anything over 100proof, it will keep a flame going, hence the FLAMABLE warnings on any such bottle.

    TM

    --
    Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
    1. Re:Proof..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the informative entry. I don't drink much and never knew this. MM

    2. Re:Proof..... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      I met a guy who used whiskey (Thai Mekhong) in his Zippo lighter. Seemed to work, so I suppose that means it's over 100 proof, unless he was cheating by adding some lighter fluid.

  145. Flew from Newark-Amsterdam on Dec 23rd, no probs by germanbirdman · · Score: 1

    I had my dell laptop, 2 cell phones, my digital camera and had no problems.

    They just asked me to remove the laptop and digital camera from my laptop carrying bag and x-rayed them seperately.

    It was the first time that I was flying though that I had to take my shoes off to get them xrayed.

    Wonder if they'll also do the same thing in Amsterdam when I fly back in several days.

  146. How to look like a terrorist by ScottSpeaks! · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Several years ago (pre-War On Terror[TM]), one of the wires supplying battery power in my PDA (Psion Series3) came loose while I was travelling. I was waiting at the gate in O'Hare for a flight to London when it happened, and I would have been quite lost on my trip without the data in the device. The button cell that maintains memory when the main battery is dead had a limited life, and wouldn't last the flight. And what if someone demanded that I turn it on for them? So I spent my layover attempting repairs using my Swiss Army knife and a travel sewing kit from an airport newsstand... all the while thinking of the scene in a then-recent movie in which the bad guy uses a Psion Series3 as the detonator for a bomb on the plane. I half-expected to be hustled away by airport security (heck, I would've detained me, if I were them), but no one questioned me, and I managed to restore power to my PDA before they announced boarding for my flight.

  147. Film Industry Clapboard by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    My friend is a film production guy and he was flying back from Bulgaria with his digital clapboard. The thing they slap down in front of the camera each take to sync. Anyway, the young guys at security were confused by this slate and were gathering around to examine it. Then my buddy reached over to turn it on and the red lights began to countdown numerically(like a bomb in some Hwd movie). The security guys jumped and grabbed their machine guns and started screaming at him. He froze and soon a supervisor came over to set things straight. He said he nearly pissed himsef.

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  148. airport laptop theft scam by v1 · · Score: 1

    Kansas City had problems a few years ago with a string of laptop robberies. The theives were working in pairs around the metal detectors. Basically, one would distract you right after you put your laptop bag on the conveyor, while the other was standing at the other end of the conveyor waiting for it, and would take it and run. The guards at the detectors were under orders to stay at the gate, so they would not give chase to the thief - so if you wanted your laptop back you'd have to chase them yourself.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  149. The solution is: FLY NAKED!!! by Wargames · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    Warning, the following site is for mature over 21 audiences...
    www.Naked-air.com

    --
    -- Each tock of the Planck clock is a new world and here we are still life. --
  150. Why stop there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make people fly naked! And handcuff them to their seats! That'll make security easier.

  151. Re:The solution is: FLY NAKED!!! by Wargames · · Score: 1

    This is a terrific solution however it does seem to invade our right to privacy. Is Peace of mind is worth seeing naked bodies of various proportions?

    This wreaks of stepping on our unalienable rights. Why should our God Given rights to privacy be so unalienable? Liberty Essay

    Why should we fight for our freedom?
    Dred Scott's fought
    The advance of freedom is the calling of our time.
    Because if we don't fight we will continue lose it. Like the frog in the pot, it will slowly heat up and we will boil in your loss of freedom. Like the Nazi's took away the rights then more rights then until they finally found it convenient to take away the right to live. You would think we would have learned something. But no. We are sheep.

    The terrorists caused more harm to us by causing a societal Auto Immune Disease than by their attacks. The lymphatic system of our society over- reacted to the threat to the point where the true threat is fear which for some reason, our society has propagated. The true problem was the sheep.

    We need to teach our citizens to defend themselves from terrorists. We should all learn Krav Maga in grade school. But we would rather be sheep. Fat fast food eating, non-exercizing Sheep that watch too much TV.

    It starts with fear. Fear is the mind killer. is the mind-killer.
    Terrorists work to create fear. These terrorist succeeded in stirring up a lot of fear. Now we have to fly naked.

    America used to be the Home of the Brave . We did not have fear. We were the land of the "NoFear bumper stickers"
    But now we fear our fellow americans. We fear anybody we don't know who rides on the airplane with us. We fear men in turbans. We are afraid to lose our valuable sheep lives.

    This is why we should be able to bear arms. An American with a machete, a machine gun, a nuke, and nifty ice9 nano particals is a Free american afraid of no one. The interesting aspect of this is that if one bears arms he is afraid of something otherwise why carry the extra weight? We should be able to bear arms but we should not because bearing arms shows that we are afraid. What arms we decide to bear is irrelevant.

    Q. What are we afraid of?
    A. Death, loss of life, loss of loved ones.

    Q. Why are we afraid?
    A. We are afraid of where we go when we die.
    1. heaven? if we are going here,
    what are we afraid of? cool gardens streamside with plenty of fruit? Spending eternity with our God?
    2. hell? if we are afraid of going to hell we are already in hell.
    3. nowhere? Ceasing to exist is like total loss of freedom. We are afraid of losing our freedom. Why give it up without a fight now. Why die the little death?

    Sheep.
    We are sheep.
    We go where they say to go.
    When they say submit to the search, we submit.
    When they say bend over, we bend over.
    When they say no nail clippers, no baby swiss army knife, no pointy things, do we say "We are free!!! We are CITIZENS!!! WE HAVE UNALIENABLE GOD GIVEN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO BEAR ARMS/FINGER NAIL CLIPPERS!!!!!

    When they say "fly naked", we will submit.
    When they say take this tattoo on our hand or forehead, we will submit.
    Why?

    Because we are sheep.

    When they say we will implant rice chips in all our kiddos when they are born and we will track their GPS coordinates and purchases for their lives, we will submit. We won't just submit, we will want it. We will demand it. Why?
    Because we are sheep.

    Be brave and be free. Remember the Su

    --
    -- Each tock of the Planck clock is a new world and here we are still life. --
  152. Re:Nope. DMCA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're lucky _I_ am not a security bozo, or ...

    You _are_ a dumb piece of american shit.

  153. "kill" left on screen by MrChuck · · Score: 1
    I went through, they asked for the usual "please turn it on" and I kicked it out of sleep.

    Unfortunately, the last thing on the screen was a terminal window filled with stuff, but the bottom lines saying
    beastie 51% ps ax| grep something
    beastie 52% sudo kill 1514

    Pause "What's that KILL thing there mean?"
    I was stopping a program. Do you really want me to explain BSD in detail?

    PauseUm, I guess you can go.

    I bump my WM (fvwm) over to an innocuous desktop when I go through now.

  154. Apple power adapters by transient · · Score: 1

    I had major problems with my Apple power adapter. It's the square one with the little legs that flip out, around which you can wrap the wire. The result is a square with a coil of wire on top. Airport security ran my bag three times, and I was told that the power adapter looks exactly like something very bad. The lady was mumbling and I didn't hear what she said it looked like, but I can imagine that a little square with a coil on top is suspicious on the monitor. Meanwhile, my Dad (who also owns an Apple laptop) has had no problems -- because he doesn't wrap up the wire. He just tosses it into his bag in a big jumble.

    --

    irb(main):001:0>
  155. Re:What the? - Relax by securitas · · Score: 1


    You allowed someone to look at secure FILES on your system?

    No. Kindly read more closely before leaping to the conclusion that I let anyone look at files, let alone highly sensitive ones that required serious encryption.

  156. Via CPUs... by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm looking forward to when Via comes out with a new CPU, and I can get a laptop that uses it.

    I'll put a big sticker on it that says "C4 Inside!!!"

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  157. Re:What the? - Reading Comprehension by securitas · · Score: 1


    My whole point is that the person who started this topic said he decrypted company confidential files.

    1. Read more closely. I said no such thing. You said I decrypted confidential corporate files.
    2. Refer to the following: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=90570&cid=7816 476
    3. ???
    4. $ PROFIT!!!

    Relax - you're less likely to blow a gasket. You're getting worked up over something you misread.

  158. Horror? No.. but. by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think if the guy wanted to see secure files, it was a misunderstanding.. they are not allowed to ask to look at confidential documents. They ARE allowed to make you prove to their satisfaction the computer is real. That's their job.

    Now, yeah, they aren't geeks, how could they be qualified to determine if i'ts real? We could fake one easily? True enough.. but the fact remains: if they think it's not real, it's your problem to prove otherwise. Being calm, and explaining the situation rather than saying "you are trying to look at my confidential documents!" is likely to get you where you need to go.. often they may not realize the implications of what they are asking.

    Second... the best advice I have for travelling is pack light. EIther put most of your stuff in your checked bags, or if it's a short trip and you just have carryon, don't bring every toy you have. Look as normal as possible when travelling, not like some geek freak. A laptop and an mp3 player is normal enough, and not likely to cause you problems.

    Pack light, don't be that guy in line who holds up the plane, and don't be that guy who gets on the aircraft and makes everyone wait behind him as he tries to stuff his overpacked bags into the overhead bins.

    1. Re:Horror? No.. but. by cmpalmer · · Score: 1

      I am so glad someone else said this. I get so pissed at other people (including some of my co-workers) when the fly with everything they need for a three day business trip in their carry-on luggage -- two bags, bulging over their limit, and then trying to cram them on a commuter flight.

      Last week, I saw a guy with a broken arm, a briefcase, and a duffle bag that was way over the maximum size. He actually got into a big argument with the boarding agent about the duffle, even though it was two times too big and there was no way he could deal with his two bags with his arm in an above the elbow cast.

      If I didn't have to carry a laptop and, ocassionally, film, I would never carry on anything but a book and maybe an MP3 player.

      --
      -- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
  159. Only yourself to blame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've traveled a great deal in my life, and consider myself a "Technology Road Warrior", adept at dealing with many of the known hassles of traveling with technology.

    Funny how you lead off with this and then you go on to enumerate some really stupid stuff that would indicate just the opposite.

    First, you let your own laziness overrule your good sense and checked an unlocked bag full of small, expensive technology items.

    Second, even pre-9/11 the airlines were plagued by theft by baggage handlers-- there have been numerous news reports about it. Then as now, despite the press attention, there is practically zero accountability-- the scope of the thefts has only gotten worse since the 'no locking of bags' rule came down. And the airline claims process is designed to frustrate you and make you give up and just buy replacement stuff out of your own pocket.

    Third, in light of your experience on the outgoing flight, there should be no question about whether or not you should ship your Christmas gifts home or check them in your baggage on your return flight. You can either pay to ship them, or pay to replace them when they get stolen-- but either way, it's going to cost you some money.

    I've only flown three times in my life, and only one of those was post-9/11, but I've never lost anything. Why? Because all of my tech items get carried on or shipped separately and and the carry-on stuff never leaves my sight. If the baggage handlers want my jeans, underwear or toothpaste, fine, they can have it-- only way they're getting my laptop, digicam, or iPod is if they kill me in the concourse and take my backpack.

  160. Tips for traveling with tits by hurtstotouchfire · · Score: 1
    I haven't heard of anyone being strip-searched, but on the trip I took at Christmas, they ran a wand over me and felt up all the areas that make noise.

    Note to any females on slash:
    Do not wear an underwire bra

  161. Limits? Yeah, right. What year do you think it is? by lelnet · · Score: 1

    >"If you could just step behind this curtain, sir? Pants around your ankles please. And bend over this table. This'll only take a few minutes." Point being, there are limits on what friggin' Mr. Security is allowed to ask you to do.

    Except not. (Well, they use a room with a door instead of a curtain, and I suppose that does make a qualitative difference, but to me a body cavity search is a body cavity search regardless.)

    My only advice? Don't buy your tickets with cash, don't buy one-way tickets, and don't buy tickets the same day you're going to fly. I once made the mistake of doing all three for the same flight...which is how I know what the room where they do body cavity searches looks like. (And my PDA and laptop went missing while this was going on...which is the sort of thing I _thought_ this topic was going to be about.)