Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Airport Screeners Are Watching What You Read
boarder8925 writes "Be careful what you read when you fly in the United States. What you read is being monitored by airport screeners and stored in a government database for years. 'Privacy advocates obtained database records showing that the government routinely records the race of people pulled aside for extra screening as they enter the country, along with cursory answers given to U.S. border inspectors about their purpose in traveling. In one case, the records note Electronic Frontier Foundation co-founder John Gilmore's choice of reading material, and worry over the number of small flashlights he'd packed for the trip. The breadth of the information obtained by the Gilmore-funded Identity Project (using a Privacy Act request) shows the government's screening program at the border is actually a survelliance dragnet."
And here's a list to get you started.
"Oh boy! Are we going to try something dangerous?"
I would like to share a very uncomfortable moment I had related to this....
:)
I was returning from a trip abroad to England and Sweden. On the way back I was reading a copy of the Phillip K. Dick story "The Man in the High Castle". For those who aren't familiar with it, it's a story set in an alternate world where the Axis won WWII, and American is evenly divided between the Germans and Japanese, along the center of the country.
The cover art on this particular printing was an American flag where the start had been replaced with Swastikas. As I went through customs I was pulled aside for a little of the ole' extra screenin'. (Damn you again, full beard and being under 30!)
Things were going smoothly until he came across the book, at which point things became extremely hostile and many questions were repeated until I started to explain that the book was sci-fi, and about a postulated alternate universe. I think as soon as I said 'alternate universe' his eyes glazed over, and he began to loose interest in me and I was let go. So based on this article, I guess the government knows I'm a PKD fan. I hope Space Nixon doesn't get word of this, or I'm in real trouble. I'll probably just end up informing on myself to the government anyways.
"Dear Bookseller, it begins. Last week, President Bush signed into law an antiterrorism bill that gives the federal government expanded authority to search your business records, including the titles of the books purchased by your customers...There is no opportunity for you or your lawyer to object in court. You cannot object publicly either. The new law includes a gag order that prevents you from disclosing 'to any person' the fact that you have received an order to produce documents...because of the gag order...you should not tell ABFFE that you have received a court order... you can simply tell us that you need to contact ABFFE's legal counsel."
That is a letter from the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression (ABFFE) sent to its members shortly after the PATRIOT Act was signed into law. The PATRIOT Act gave the federal government powers to search records of any business selling books and any library. Then they slap a gag order which makes it illegal to tell anyone for up to a year.
It just sickens me to have to be paranoid about the things I read, or having to avoid using a credit card when paying for a book.
Any terrorist who reads on an airplane isn't going to be reading a book on bombs, explosives or how to be a terrorist. If a terrorist were dumb enough to do that, it sure as hell wouldn't be in english. This is just another example of the government amassing data on ordinary citizens all in the name of national security.
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
The problem is nobody really knows what is significant. So, they are scooping up whatever information they can find with the hope that someday there will be an important correlation.
Could this be used for other purposes? Probably not, because of the volume of the information and what it is going to take to really get down and start mining it.
The biggest single problem in the US today is there are indeed terrorists and we have had some incidents blocked. But almost no information about what has been blocked has leaked out. So everyone thinks it is all nonsense. As some people have mentioned, it would be the best thing all around if 3 or 4 indicidents were not blocked and successfully killed hundreds of people. Better yet, if a bunch of foreign nationals got blown up at the same time. Perhaps people would realize there is a problem and we're not anywhere near as isolated as we were in 1850.
So when would all this collected information be of value? After something big happens. What if it doesn't? What if everything is successfully (and secretly) blocked in the planning stages as it has been so far? Any program like this would be considered foolish and pointless, and invasion of everyone's privacy for no gain whatsoever.
But let one incident happen and the newsmedia will be all over the government for "not doing something." Today the criticism is for doing seemingly pointless things when still nobody can figure out what would be (a) acceptable and (b) useful. Would El Al style interrogations before boarding a plane produce useful results? Probably not - we're not looking for hijackers now. What we are certainly going to see is some kind of different attack vector. What would be useful to know about the (dead) perpetrators of that event? I don't think anybody knows.
The other approach that doesn't have much favor in the US government right now is to treat terrorism-related attacks like a tornado. It just happens and messes up a lot of stuff but there isn't anything that can be done about it. As far as I know, no government is taking that attitude - certainly not UK, Germany or Israel where attacks have ocurred. Would this work in the US? Sure - until the first attack. It is difficult to play the role of standing up and saying "it just happens" to a crying mother/father/brother/sister on TV. So incredibly difficult that no elected or unelected member of the government is ever going to do it.
That collection is likely to drive security people nuts, yet those are must-read books for anyone who wants to have an informed opinion on the current wars.
I was reading a 2600 article about breaking into secure and staff-only areas in an airport while waiting at the gate to board my flight. I was given no trouble with my reading materials whatsoever.
Truth be told, we were given more grief at customs regarding the wax-encased gouda in our suitcase than the bubblewrapped bong in my carry on.
If you think the Anarchist Cookbook is a danger to the public then I have a real danger for you!
I have PC support techs that travel everywhere in the country and one thing they carry is an IDE HD with the standard images of all of the different models of computers we support. This is an amazingly scary source of danger for the American public! (apparently...)
The TSA in LaGuardia confiscated one of my tech's drives because it looked suspicious: He had affixed an orange DHL "10:30 AM Urgent" sticker on the drive so he could make sure it wasn't overwritten by mistake. Apparently those orange stickers are either a powerful explosive or an extremely efficient oxidizer. (In that case we should all cringe when we see a DHL cargo plane go overhead.)
. . . or maybe the TSA's airport security is one of the stupidest things to ever be seen on this planet.
As a rule: Security is a logical exercise. If it doesn't make sense then it can't be an adequate security model!
(so there!)