Slashdot Mirror
Congressman Calls for Arrest of Security Researcher
Christopher Soghoian writes "Yesterday, I published a tool that allows you to Create your own boarding pass for Northwest flights. This was an attempt to document the fragile and broken state of identity/security for domestic flights in the US. Today, Congressman Markey (D-Mass) has called for my arrest." From the ABC article: "'I don't want to help terrorists or help bad guys do bad things on airplanes, but what we have now is what we in the industry call security theater. It's made to make you think you're secure without actually making you secure,' Soghoian said. 'As a member of the academic research community, I consider this to be a public service.' Soghoian admits that he hasn't actually tried to use one of the boarding passes yet."
Much like the guy who looks at your boarding pass, you're trusting your life to something that's just a goddamn piece of paper.
The emperor generally does not like having his nudity pointed out. Many in government know they are bit players in a pointless security theater, but react violently when told that. I suppose they like to feel that what they do is important and useful (read TSA agents, pretty much the entire DHS, etc). After all, how would you like it if your entire job consisted of going through a dance routine designed to make the clueless public feel as though the government is doing something to keep them safe?
I suppose Congress is a bit different, I have no problem believing most of the genuinely are clueless and believe wholeheartedly that keeping lighters, tweezers, and bottles of water off airlines is critical to our national security. That also seem to really believe that torture and massive surveillance is an effective way to combat terrorism, further displaying a total lack if understanding. The Republicans (at least those loyal to the Whitehouse) are in a unique position where they have to pretend all of this fluff is important, but somehow selling the ports to Middle East companies, looking the other way on illegal aliens, and ignoring Bin Laden to focus on the mess we created in Iraq are perfectly acceptable.
Finkployd
1. Arresting the messenger doesn't help security- it makes people more afraid to point out security holes.
2. Security holes don't shrink by pretending they don't exist
3. Just before elections isn't the best time to make people in Silicon Valley rethink democrats on security. Markey has usually been thoughtful on security- he should rethink his policy of calling for arresting the messenger.
Otherwise, you know, you couldn't be prosecuted for faking a bill of sale for a car, or a life insurance policy, or printing counterfeit currency, or most other forms of fraud that involve a printed document -- and you surely can.
I just created a fake bill of sale for a car. I have committed no crime, because I have not proffered it as genuine to anybody.
Fraud is a crime of intent.
KFG
There IS brilliance behind his idea. Perhaps you didn't read it... but basically, you can fly on a fake identity without any screening of your actual identity.
1) Go to 7-Eleven and buy a pre-paid credit card with cash using a fake name. This will be the name you fly under.
2) Buy a ticket with this credit card.
3) Print out an ADDITIONAL ticket for your real identity. He gives you an HTML form to do this.
Now, show up at the airport. Go through security with the fake ticket... it will match your ID, but since it's not in any computer systems, they won't check to see if you're on the no-fly list. When at the gate, provide the ticket you actually bought. Nowadays you don't need an ID at the gates anymore -- just have your ticket scanned and hop on the plane!
Now, I'm not exactly sure if you can check bags. If you have to go to the counter before security, they ask for your ID. But if you can avoid that (and you can now, as far as I know), you can fly on a fake identity.
my blog
Background: my last name starts with the letters "Host"
... so if your name was "Jim Hostenfeffer" it would appear on your boardingpass as "JIM southwest.comENFEFFER" ... I played with the site a little bit and found that it was a straight macro replacement bug of whatever domain name was used, so would say "JIM wWw.SOutHwesT.cOmENFEFFER" if that was the domain you typed into the URL bar.
When southwest first started offering online checking, i discovered a small bug, when you got the the "Print your boarding pass" screen, with my name in all caps, the letters "HOST" were replaced with "southwest.com"
The first time it happened i thought it was ammusing, I emailed their tech support, saved the HTML to a file and edited it so it had my name again and would match my ID when i checked in.
4 or 5 flights and at least 9 months later it was still happening and I spent a good 3 hours on the phone being transfered arround to different people trying ot get them to understand what the problem was and how fucking ridiculous it was that i had to constantly "hack" my boarding pass because of a bug they'd had for months.
-- The Hoss Man
Dear Honorable Edward Markey,
I just read about your response to Christopher Soghoian's findings regarding online printable boarding passes being easily faked.
I have to say that I am appalled at what I am reading. Mr. Soghoian has found something that could allow terrorist to continue to harm Americans. This technique may have already been used, or plan to be used, but now we know about it and can do something about it.
Why? Because Mr. Soghoian was kind enough to expose this security flaw. Punishing someone that has put this much effort into giving us the knowledge to save more lives is asinine.
As a Quality Assurance Engineer, I know the importance of finding, and reporting, flaws. This man should be commended, not condemned.
I think it would be wise as a senior member of the Department for Homeland Security to withdraw your previous statements as you have gained "an insightful perspective" on this issue after responses such as mine.
Scaring others into not telling us where our security flaws are will only lead to more opportunities for our enemies. How can you not immediately see this?
Or should I put you on the list of government employees that pretend like they care, but would rather play political games instead?
Sincerely,
Quincunx (real name used in the real letter)
I encourage others to write as well. If we let him know his error, give him an "out", then maybe bullshit like this won't happen again. Here's hoping.
Here's the send-an-email part of Honorable Edward Markey's web page
I suspect very strongly that in the case of money, simply having the means to create counterfeit bills will probably land you in a whole heap of trouble.
This is why every American should immediately go visit FIJA and learn the truth about serving on a jury. Hint: you can judge the law as well as the facts, and juries ARE the "last line of defense" against oppressive government / bad laws. See Jury Nullification and/or Peter Zenger for more.
If I'm ever serving on a jury, I can guarantee you that I won't be voting to convict in any "victimless crime" situation, or anything where somebody is being charged with violating some bullshit law. Hung jury or acquittal, here we come.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
There must be some hidden reason for the seemingly obvious misjudgment.
More like a misconception. This country really needs more so-called conservative justices. By "conservative", I don't mean conservatives pushing their agendas from the bench (like O'Connor), I mean justices who follow the Constitution (like Scalia).
It's no surprise that Kelo went the way it did. You're thinking is that "liberals are for the little guys, conservatives for business". But, in reality, having the power of central planning is crucial to the liberal agenda. Kelo was exactly what the liberals needed: the power for government officials to confiscate your personal property in the name of a "greater good" by calling it a "public purpose" (not public use, however, as the 5th Amendment says).
Scalia, on the other hand, follows the Constitutional principle that the federal government can only regulate interstate commerce ("commerce among the states," as is in the Constitution). Using that principle, it would be Unconstitutional for the federal government to prohibit the growing of Marijuana on private property. States could still outlaw it, of course, but the feds couldn't do a thing. Does that sound "conservative" to you? Nope, but it is what the Constitution says.
This is not about your party, the Constitution gets in the way of BOTH parties, but it's not for the parties, it's for the PEOPLE. So back the Constitution, because it's just in the way of the Democrats and the Republicans. It's time for both parties to face the hard truths: you can't execute unwarranted searchs (too bad, GOP). And Democrats: stop trying to control guns, unless you want to try to pass an Amendment. The Constitution says these things, plain and simple. Oh, and when you get a chance, read the 10th Amendment, too.
Right now the idea that we are following the Constitution is a joke. We cling to a few scraps of the Bill of Rights, and ignore much of the rest of it. Congress "Authorized the use of force"?! What is that supposed to mean? What about a declaration of war? Meanwhile the Supreme Court passes arbitrary edicts fabricated out of thin air, like "privacy" meaning that it's Unconstitutional to ban abortions. I don't think it's a good idea to ban abortions, but why did 9 people make that decision for the entire country, when it's clearly a state issue?
Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.