Slashdot Mirror
TSA Lied About Protecting Passenger Data
wk633 writes "A report by Homeland Security Department Acting Inspector General Richard Skinner, said the agency misinformed individuals, the press and Congress in 2003 and 2004. It stopped short of saying TSA lied.
Bruce Schneier does say 'the TSA lied' on his blog." Scary stuff, and yet it's even scarier how little the general public has caught on.
Is it really that hard to write out the name of the Acronyms at least once?
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Lied about Protecting Passenger Data. Then you can talk about the TSA until you blue in the face. Is the BSA the Business Software Alliance or the Boy Scouts of America?
Sure we work with computer all the time and take Acronyms all the time and many are very complex.. CPU, RAM, ROM, GNU, etc... It is fine when you are talking about computer stuff. But when you start moving to government Acronyms or Business Acronyms, we should get a better description. Is PSC Play Station Console, Public Service Commission, or Pubic Safety Control? Please think before you start using acronyms especially in less geeky topics such as business, law, politics, governments, and non astronomy sciences. Even if it is geeky related if there is a change that a lot of people wont know what you mean please spell it out.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Conclusions:
"Although we found no evidence of harm to individual privacy, TSA could have taken more steps to protect privacy. TSA did not consistently apply privacy protections in the course of its involvement in airline passenger data transfers. This inconsistency pertained to TSA's efforts in acquisitions, contract enforcement, and internal practice."
So no evidence was leaked but they could've done a better job.
Aero News Net (ANN), a great daily news site for aviation, has been covering this as well.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
~Lake
See the following post:
d =12065580
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=143985&ci
Well, I think it is on his resume actually.
"I am participating in a working group to help evaluate the effectiveness and privacy implications of the TSA's Secure Flight program."
Hmmm, let's have a peek at the number ONE result on Google, shall we?
Yep, that was difficult.
Is PSC Play Station Console, Public Service Commission, or Pubic Safety Control?
You can't tell from the story's context?
Totally agree. Until lots of Joe Publics (Arabs don't count for most Americans - after all, "they" are part of the problem, even if it's not actually true) are carried off and disappeared, or government actions become extremely heavy handed against Aunt Julie, public apathy is more than enough to let this to continue to happen.
Apathy - it's what's for dinner.
Right on man its not a case of jealousy, Osama and co are not jealous he lives in caves and loves it ffs. Osama is the most wanted man on the planet yet i cant help but think he has more freedom than any of us.
I Predict A Riot
I'm not saying Osama hates us for our freedom. I am saying that he is using the most effective technique for weakening our country being that he cannot defeat us with military might. His motivations are immaterial to the point I'm trying to get across, please don't pollute it with your politics.
The difference between republicans and democrats is how they want to spend your money. The amount of your money they want to spend is not very different at all.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Thank god I live in eastern Minnesota!
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach him to fish and he'll wipe out the species.
Furthermore, the "Right to Privacy" is not actually present anywhere in the Constitution.
... unless the government attempts to specifically outlaw it. (Note from this that a bunch of common law assumes that we have some level of privacy.)
The US Constitution does not function as a list of ALLOWED things, and then we assume everything else is disallowed. Instead, the Constitution outlines the DISALLOWED functions of government (as well as the actual functions), and basically everything else is a right retained by states and people.
Therefore, we DO have the right to privacy. The Constitution says nothing about; hence, we have it
You need to read up on the philosophy of Constitutional law. You just don't understand the US Constitution.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
>The real truth is we are far more likely to die in a car crash than to die at the hands of a would-be terrorist. Yet, billions are being poured into Homeland Insecurity and the TSA efforts, and what do we have? High false positive rates, millions of needlessly harrased travelers, and it's hard to get a fix on the false negative rates since terrorists are so rare to begin with.
More people in the United States were killed in traffic accidents in September 2001 than were killed in terrorist attacks in the same month. That is also true of August 2001, October 2001, and all subsequent months. The difference is that the figures for terrorism deaths in all of thase other months is zero. (2001 deaths =42,900)The thing stopping airliner takeovers is the passengers willingness to take on the terrorists as in the Pennsylvania hijacking. TSA is there to comfort the rubes who fly once every five years. It also provides jobs for those who can't hack it at McDonald's.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
In short, the entire approach makes no sense.
You are presuming that the sense to be found in it has something to do with catching terrorists.
Silly boy.
KFG
Ignoring the seriousness of their respective deceptions, Bill Clinton lied under oath, as far as I know, Bush did not.
Not really. Anyone who votes for a Republican or Democrat really doesn't care government abuses. Both parties are more interested in maintaining their power than they are in following the Constitution and giving citizens what they need. As far as I'm concerned, he's a typical Republican.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
When ever one of our co-workers is required to check their laptop it never appears on the other end.
There must have been at least a dozen laptops that have gone missing after they where forced to be check.
Even after proof was given that one of the luggage handles had it in his possession they still would not do anything and refused our information. Our proof was simply one small program that ran upon boot that send messages back to our servers as to the IP and time the computer connected to the Internet. It was clear the computer was connecting consistently to one of the Airport's registered IP addresses. All they said was it was in internal matter and they would handle it themselves.
The company policy is that anything you check can be stolen - so do not check anything of value!
The airport is another world in which they seem to have their own set of laws!
here's the link about the FBI lying about shipping the Saudis out, thanks to a post deeply embedded somewhere else.
Registration, sadly, is required to read it.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Indeed. What you are describing is the Strawman Fallacy.
Then why not protect them by locking them up for 18 months without access to legal representation or due process of law? That's what happened to a bunch of middle easterners that weren't business partners with the Bush family.