Slashdot Mirror


Lax TSA Website Exposed Travelers' Information

sjbe sends in an old story with a poetic justice ending. Almost a year ago Chris Soghoian blogged about multiple security holes exposing visitors to a TSA site to possible identity theft. Wired and others picked up the story and the TSA took down the insecure site and fixed the problems. On Friday the US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a report (PDF; HTML summary) finding that the TSA contractor, Desyne Web Services, had received a no-bid contract for the faulty site from a former employee who was then a TSA project manager. TSA has taken no action to sanction the responsible parties for the vulnerabilities. The poetic justice is that Soghoian had been investigated for 6 months by the FBI and TSA because he pointed out a vulnerability in the US air transport system; no charges were ever filed.

81 comments

  1. Like most security theater in this country ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Funny

    Lax TSA Website Exposed Travelers' Information

    "Lax" describes it pretty well.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Like most security theater in this country ... by Kelz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Did they mean "lax" as in "Loose and not easily retained or controlled." or LAX as in the airport?

    2. Re:Like most security theater in this country ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

      Did they mean "lax" as in "Loose and not easily retained or controlled." or LAX as in the airport?

      Well, I've been through Los Angeles Airport a couple of times recently. I'd say either appellation is apt.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Like most security theater in this country ... by uberCHIEFTAIN! · · Score: 1

      Did they mean "apt" as in "Unusually intelligent and able to learn quickly and easily." or APT as in the airport (Marion County Airport)?

    4. Re:Like most security theater in this country ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think they meant apt as described in the John Carter of Mars novels by Edgar Rice Burroughs. His "Apts" (e.g., giant white four-armed apes) come pretty close to describing some of the TSA security people I've encountered.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  2. Another concrete example by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Of why DHS is out front and pulling away in the "Scariest Agency" poll.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  3. What I want to know is ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why do we keep penalizing those individuals who have the fortitude to stand up and point out security issues, and then let those responsible for said flaws get away clean? Sounds like a decidedly bass-ackward approach to me, designed more to prevent public awareness of corporate and governmental malfeasance than anything else.

    Nobody wants their dirty laundry aired, I understand, but attacking people that expose such egregious errors does nothing to improve matters. I mean, if I say publicly that "your Web site has x security flaws in it" and it turns out I'm lying, fine, sue me for libel or slander or whatever else. Or better yet, just ignore me. But if I make you aware of a serious problem and you do nothing but try to intimidate me into silence, you're obviously trying to cover your ass, and should be fired for incompetence.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:What I want to know is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and should be fired for incompetence.
      So the entire US government and all of it's agencies are fired, what exactly is that going to fix :P

    2. Re:What I want to know is ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So the entire US government and all of it's agencies are fired, what exactly is that going to fix :P

      Well, at least we won't have to worry about the encroaching loss of civil liberties ... there'll be no-one left to take them.

      Of course, it would be a good idea for everyone to have a few guns and plenty of ammo: anarchy can be unpleasant.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:What I want to know is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Fairly basic psychology actually. By going to an outside agency to complain about your own organization you are betraying it. Your motives may be pure, and the outcome may be a public good (or even a good for your organization), but you can't expect to be *liked* for it.

      Nobody likes a snitch. Expecting anything else is willful ignorance.

    4. Re:What I want to know is ... by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      RE:["Why do we keep penalizing those individuals who have the fortitude to stand up and point out security issues, and then let those responsible for said flaws get away clean?"]

      this is nothing new, this has been going on for a loooonngg time, i suggest reporting it anonymously and publicly let everyone know including the IT responsible for locking down the system then just sit back and watch...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    5. Re:What I want to know is ... by loraksus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because extremely expensive, no bid, just plain dishonest contracts to incompetents is how a great deal of the US government has work done.

      If private sector employees acted like this, they'd be fired for incompetence, the relationship with the incompetent 3rd party would be terminated fairly quickly, pressure would be put on the local district attorney to file fraud and conspiracy criminal charges if there was collusion and a whole lot less money would be spent before it all went away.

      In the case of government employees, it's just status quo. Move alone, nothing to see here.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    6. Re:What I want to know is ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      True, but that's not what I mean. I'm talking about someone who is already an outsider discovering a problem. That's what this article is about: someone who found something and reported it, and was then attacked for it. This has been going on for some time. Generally speaking, if you find a problem with a corporation or government agency's Internet presence, you're better off keeping it to yourself. That's because odds are the people administering that resource don't really care about security, and are more interested in covering their asses at your expense.

      It's a much better move, careerwise, for a network admin to say "some guy was trying to hack our system, and being the network guru that I am I got his name and number", rather than admit that "some guy found a major hole in our security system, and kindly reported to us."

      There have been numerous cases of Good Samaritan types reporting an insecurity on a Web site, and having the sysadmins call up the FBI and report a "hacking attempt." Over the past several years I've been on misconfigured Web sites and FTP servers that gave me access to things I should never have been allowed to see. My normal instinct would be to report the problem to the site's administrators ... but I wouldn't take the chance, not anymore. I have no interest in having the Feds knock at my door and arrest me on some bogus antiterrorism charge. If I see anything I don't think was meant to be public, I immediately get out and never go back.

      This is not the same thing as being a whistleblower, which is what you're referring to. See, someone who is truly interested in securing a system would investigate such reports, from any source internal or external, and fix them. What we've been seeing is that it's more important to simply squelch such complaints at any cost, rather take the heat for one's mistakes. Worse, given the current legal situation in the U.S. a corporation that files a false hacking report can screw somebody up for life.

      That's where I draw the line.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:What I want to know is ... by galego · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Previous poster (parent) has a point though .. and I think it is .... unless you're absolutely confident of your 'anonymity' in reporting, then you are highly likely to become suspect. Your story is at least going to be checked out. If it's not on, then someone may sick their lawyer on you for slander/libel. I sat down at a courtesy kiosk at an auto dealer once to find a guy still logged into his Yahoo mail had walked away. I sent him a mail from himself and did not put my name in it, suggesting he ensure that he had logged out before walking away. No worries there. However, anyone reports anything on my network/sites, I am going to triple-check their story and their activity (if I can relate it to them). Some people won't do that, they'll just call the person into suspicion right away. We had a guy interview for a job and make a comment about how something on our web site was insecure. Not so bad, except he gave no specifics or suggestions. Only made himself suspect and guaranteed he would not get a job with us. This is different from being helpful, but honestly ... even if he gave some details, I'd still be checking up on the veracity of it all and looking for attempts. That all said, I would seek to be the good samaritan and report it. I would also be sure to document my steps/actions and have witnesses where possible. The more you do alone, the less credible you become in this sort of instance.

      --

      Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas

      [May God give you double that which you wish for me]

    8. Re:What I want to know is ... by couchslug · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Why do we keep penalizing those individuals who have the fortitude to stand up and point out security issues, and then let those responsible for said flaws get away clean? "

      In order to teach whistleblowers that the best way to point out security issues is to post the 'sploit anonymously and watch the enemy agency get hammered. It is obvious that these government agencies resent attempts to "help" them and will attack those who try. Stop Trying.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    9. Re:What I want to know is ... by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      How do you know they are expensive or dishonest? A no bid contract doesn't imply either automatically.

    10. Re:What I want to know is ... by ardent99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, yes and no. Yes, the cynical me says lots of government contracts probably do get done this way even though they aren't supposed to. But at least the government has policies and laws that say they aren't supposed to work this way, and I bet the *majority* is still done honestly (I hope).

      But private companies are under no obligation to be fair in who they buy from. There are no laws that say a company must buy from the best, or cheapest, or whatever. They just pick who they feel like working with and that's it. If they want to buy work from their buddy then they do it. That's not fraud or conspiracy or collusion. It's not even secret or embarrassing. That's what business is all about, they just call it "networking" whereas in the government they call it "cronyism".

      Public companies at least have some obligation to shareholders to be fiscally responsible, but for the most part dealing with this kind of issue doesn't get raised to the level of the board of directors unless it dramatically affects the quarterly results, so the management is free to do whatever it wants anyway. CEOs in the private sector are cowboys and apparently as a country we like it that way, evidenced by the fact that so many people these days balk at regulation.

      So, no, this would not be better in the private sector. In fact, it is the status quo in the private sector which is why it is rarely news. It is not status quo in the government, or at least it shouldn't be, which is why we get so upset when it happens there. We expect the government to serve the people, and we want it to. We don't expect the private sector to serve the people we expect it to serve the company owners, and it does.

      The real story here is that cronyism has spread like a cancer into many areas of government, and this item in particular shows how the very forces that are claiming to enhance our national security are actually sabotaging it. The answer isn't to leave it to the private sector and let the cancer win, the answer is to kill the cancer before it kills us.

    11. Re:What I want to know is ... by WK2 · · Score: 1

      Why do we keep penalizing those individuals who have the fortitude to stand up and point out security issues, and then let those responsible for said flaws get away clean?

      Why do you post your opinion as a question?

      Sounds like [it's] ... designed more to prevent public awareness of corporate and governmental malfeasance than anything else.
      --
      Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
    12. Re:What I want to know is ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Because that way other people are invited to comment upon it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    13. Re:What I want to know is ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are no laws that say a company must buy from the best, or cheapest, or whatever.
      It's often stated on this site that corporations (or the managers of them) have a legal duty to maximise shareholder value. Buying the stuff at twice the market price from the CFO's cousin's company doesn't seem to be in compliance with that.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re:What I want to know is ... by ardent99 · · Score: 1

      There is a huge difference between high level goals and the details of operating decisions. Companies make all kinds of decisions, some of which lose money and some of which make money. There is nothing that says a company can't spend too much on pencils, or pay too much for a web site from the CFO's cousin. In a typical company, how many purchase order decisions are made by putting out requests for bids? In most companies none. It is up to the management to decide what something is worth to the company. A corporation has to act in the interests of its shareholders as represented by the board of directors, and they don't particularly care about this level of detail.

      The power the shareholders have is in the actions the board takes. The board is not going to fire a CEO because he paid too much for a web site. They won't even know, and don't care. They deliberately delegate operating decisions to the CEO because that is his job.

      And in smaller companies, the shareholders often are the management. So they ARE operating in the shareholders' interests.

  4. Poetic justice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this phrase, I don't think it means what you think it does

    1. Re:Poetic justice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't get that either. Where was the poetic justice?

    2. Re:Poetic justice? by Snorpus · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Yeah.... Poetic justice would be if the contractor who did such a poor job found his own personal details posted all over the 'net, because of holes in his own system.

    3. Re:Poetic justice? by homey+of+my+owney · · Score: 1

      Poetic justice would have been that the lame contractor was being investigated by the FBI. Or that the TSA manager was.

    4. Re:Poetic justice? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1


      Summary:
      "The poetic justice is that Soghoian had been investigated for 6 months by the FBI and TSA because he pointed out a vulnerability in the US air transport system; no charges were ever filed."

      TFA:
      "I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't grinning from ear to ear with the news of this report.
      It's poetic justice, if you will, for the unpleasantness that TSA put me through."

      IN TFA it isn't really "poetic justice" either. It's just "justice", lacking any of the irony necessary to make it "poetic". But makes a bit more sense than the summary. Also TFA uses "begs the question" incorrectly, ("This begs the question: Who are these guys...") meaning just "raises the question". Why do people insist on using phrases they don't understand? Makes them look like idiots.

    5. Re:Poetic justice? by zojas · · Score: 1

      ya, poetic justice would also be if kdawson were an english major in college right now, and got kicked out of school for inappropriate use of the phrase "poetic justice".

  5. Even as we are faced with incident after incident. by riseoftheindividual · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even as we are faced with incident after incident of our government failing to safeguard information, we do nothing as they collect more of it claiming they can be trusted to safeguard it.

    Real ID is going to be a nightmare.

    --
    Patriot - A fan of expanding government power and spending while not wanting to pay higher taxes.
  6. Poetic justice? by oddaddresstrap · · Score: 2, Informative

    I do not think those words mean what you think they mean.

  7. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Real ID is going to be a nightmare.

    If that's what it takes. Remember the FBI under Hoover? Did all kinds of abusive stuff, until it finally reached the point where Congress had to rein them in and enact strict controls on their behavior, mainly because Congress itself was threatened by Hoover's activities. Hell, the bastard had dirt on all of them. However, many of those restrictions on law enforcement were undone with the Patriot Act, CALEA and other poorly-designed laws designed to strip civil liberties from us. I have the feeling that we're going to have to suffer through yet another cycle of government abuse (worse this time) until the pendulum swings back and some controls get put back in place.

    If we're that lucky. I have my doubts about this go 'round ... we may be in for the long haul.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  8. Summary misses the point entirely by SpinyNorman · · Score: 5, Informative

    The poetic justice is not that Soghoian (who exposed the vulnerability) was investigated by the FBI and TSA, but rather the exact opposite, that having been investigated by the FBI/TSA he was vindicated by the scathing congressional report agreeing with him. At least that's an accurate summary, although still a bit illogical since the FBI investigation was for a different issue altogether - him blogging about how to create fake boarding passes which doesn't seem the smartest thing to do if you are really concerned about security.

    1. Re:Summary misses the point entirely by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      I'm glad someone else mentioned that (and got modded up for it). I can't stand summaries that completely mangle the point of the story. And yet Taco et al just keep on shoveling them through...

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:Summary misses the point entirely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how to create fake boarding passes which doesn't seem the smartest thing to do if you are really concerned about security.

      The check for boarding passes at airports has absolutely nothing to do with security ... it's so that you cannot re-sell your airline ticket.

    3. Re:Summary misses the point entirely by pipoca · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd not consider the whole fake boarding pass thing a threat to security (or rather, Soghoian's blogging about it) because anyone with an average IQ and a bit of time could think up of it (they check the veracity of the boarding pass and the fact that you have ID and a boarding pass separately. Is making a fake pass to go along with your ID that difficult an idea?!?). Posting about it is good because it forces the TSA to close a rather obvious exploit. Given that they ostensibly want security, the intelligent thing to do is plug said holes (which, so far as I can tell, has not yet been done), not persecute the person willing to point out the fact that they're being a bunch of idiots and leaving glaringly obvious exploits availible. Oh wait, I forgot. The TSA couldn't give a rat's ass about security - they only care about giving people the illusion of security.

    4. Re:Summary misses the point entirely by dr_d_19 · · Score: 1

      him blogging about how to create fake boarding passes which doesn't seem the smartest thing to do if you are really concerned about security.

      So first you praise him for exposing one security vulnerability, but damn him from exposing another? Why should he keep quiet when it's obvious how to create a fake boarding card?

  9. I can see your bits. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Lax TSA Website Exposed Travelers' Information"

    *wolf whistle*

    Hey look everybody! Naked information. Woo Hoo!

  10. Well. by xx01dk · · Score: 1

    That's the last time I fly through Los Angeles then.

    --
    There is simply too much glass..
  11. ..."no charges were ever filed." by iminplaya · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yet. Doesn't mean they can't be some time in the future. And this investigation...or scathing congressional report? What will come of it? Will fines be paid? Jail time served? I've seen very little come from "scathing congressional reports" in the past. Will this one be any different? I would think not. Will any of this bring about a demand for freedom of movement without undue harassment? Will we finally vote for politicians who mention the word "freedom" at all? All the numbers indicate otherwise.

    Nixon's the one.

    --
    What?
    1. Re:..."no charges were ever filed." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you see? Being scathed by congress is the punishment!

      I was scathed once.. I certainly learned my lesson.

    2. Re:..."no charges were ever filed." by The_Wilschon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Too bad they aren't being scythed by Congress instead...

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
  12. Wait what? by Damocles+the+Elder · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So...he pointed out a vulnerability, ended up with the FBI on his ass for 6 months (with them probably keeping an eye on him for the rest of his life), and that's poetic justice?

    You keep using those words. I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

  13. I agree.. by Newer+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A couple of years ago I was in San Francisco. I needed to check my email and there was an open access point. After checking mail, I checked "My Network Places". Their ENTIRE network was a big file share and it was WIDE OPEN! This was a medical facility and there were hundreds of patient records right there. I got out of there as fast as I couod and never went near there again! With the "shoot the messinger" attitude out there these days, who in their right mind wants to be the messinger?

    1. Re:I agree.. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Scary all right. I know that I went in for a checkup last week, and my doctor and the other personnel carried compact notebook machines with wireless links, so they could conveniently access their records database. Very cool, very efficient ... but I had to wonder just whether they'd taken the right steps to secure that network. Kinda made me want to take my own machine and do a little checking up on their WAP configuration, but I decided it wasn't worth the risk. That's even scarier, when you get right down to it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:I agree.. by The_Laughing_God · · Score: 1
      HIPAA is very strict about medical information, compared to the rest of IT. I've seen people fired for "three strikes" -- three emails were sent to patients with excessive/disallowed information. I don't recall the exact details, but the release was "excessive" because it contained a combination of common identifiers, such as the patient's full name, not because of the info itself.


      It's one area where you can report the problem directly to an enforcing agency and heads will roll, rather than reporting it to the offender, so they can cry foul.

  14. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

    I think you *precisely* correct in referring to the whole system as a pendulum. And, as you said, it's swinging further each time. What I fear--and, honestly, look forward to--is when that pendulum begins to swing so wildly and out of control that the entire system tears itself apart. Anyone who believes deep down that we can fix this system without a revolution is living in a fantasy world. There will come a time in the very near future when our country will undergo an actual, honest-to-god revolution, possibly even a civil war. Hopefully what we get out of it will be better than we we went into it with.

    Yeah, saying crap like that probably puts me on some watch list or another, but pretty soon, we'll *all* be on those lists, and then they'll start using those lists against us. And that's when the whole revolution starts.

    The short version of this entire message is that our nation is beyond the point of no return. Of that I have absolutely no doubt.

    -G

    --
    Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
  15. Government Internet security a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just another instance on a lengthy list of government funded projects that have completely inadequate security for the information they contain. Just the other day I was browsing through images on Google image search when I stumbled upon this gem: http://www.ticic.state.tn.us/sorsql?sql=sp_SOR_IMAGE+'SO001290' See that bit at the end? Any /. user worth his salt recognizes that as a SQL stored procedure at the end of that URL. What happens when you pass it a select statement to display all the table names in the database? http://www.ticic.state.tn.us/sorsql?sql=select%20TABLE_NAME%20%2B%20'|'%20from%20information_schema.tables It helpfully gives them to you. What about some interesting information? How about the first and last name of every sex offender in the state of Tennessee? http://www.ticic.state.tn.us/sorsql?sql=select%20'%5B'%2BFirstName%2B'|'%2bLastName%2B']'%20from%20SOR_Internet And we trust our personal and financial information to these people?

  16. Where is a good place to complain about the TSA by dbc001 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know a phone number, an office, etc that we can call to complain about the TSA?

  17. TSA = Toothpaste Security Agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why did the terrorists succeed on September 11, 2001? Conventional wisdom says the terrorists exploited a weakness in airport security by smuggling aboard box-cutters. What they actually exploited was a weakness in our mindset -- Crews were for years trained in the concept of "passive resistance." Everyone acted calm, and the crisis resolved with no loss of life. All of that changed when the first plane hit the north tower. What weapons the 19 men possessed mattered little, but it would never work again: Anyone pulling out a box cuter today would be dragged down by passengers.

    Yet today the DHS and TSA are still focused on the box cuters. Patrick Smith of the New York Times points out just how pointless the TSA searches have become. Why for example do they confiscate tubes of toothpaste or shampoo bottles potentially containing explosive materials, only to throw them out in the trash unchecked? Why do cleaners and garbage workers handle these supposedly dangerous contraband unprotected? The ban on fluids itself flies in the face of scientific opinion: "The notion that deadly explosives can be cooked up in an airplane lavatory is pure fiction."

    http://jetlagged.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/the-airport-security-follies/index.html

    1. Re:TSA = Toothpaste Security Agency by WK2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why for example do they confiscate tubes of toothpaste or shampoo bottles potentially containing explosive materials, only to throw them out in the trash unchecked? Why do cleaners and garbage workers handle these supposedly dangerous contraband unprotected?

      Every promotion at the TSA requires that you get beaten in the head. The people who you see on the floor doing menial labor have not yet been beaten in the head. They know that there is nothing to fear from toothpaste.

      --
      Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
    2. Re:TSA = Toothpaste Security Agency by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1

      Why for example do they confiscate tubes of toothpaste or shampoo bottles potentially containing explosive materials, only to throw them out in the trash unchecked? Why do cleaners and garbage workers handle these supposedly dangerous contraband unprotected?
      Remember the story they made up for that one: the tubes contain components of liquid explosives, which would have been mixed in the lavatory to make the explosives. The tubes don't contain explosives themselves.

      Of course, the story's bogus, because the components of liquid explosives are dangerous too. I'm just saying they could justify it if necessary.
      --
      ResidntGeek
    3. Re:TSA = Toothpaste Security Agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      During the cold war I traveled quite often on the eastern side of the iron curtain. Their security checks were nowhere as ridiculous as the ones Americans have these days. Also, the security personnel was much more polite.

      Of course, once you had crossed the border, there were spies following you. Just like they followed their own citizens. But that's probably the same in the U.S.A. these days.

    4. Re:TSA = Toothpaste Security Agency by ookabooka · · Score: 1

      Why for example do they confiscate tubes of toothpaste or shampoo bottles potentially containing explosive materials, only to throw them out in the trash unchecked?
      OK, I here this meme all the time and it's finally annoyed me to post something. It's a preventative measure. A terrorist going to an airport wouldn't be able to easily take in liquid explosives (or otherwise nasty liquid chemicals) by stuffing them into toothpaste tube or shampoo bottle. Checking ALL the confiscated items would be prohibitively expensive and would almost definitely be entirely fruitless. As a terrorist, why would you take a shampoo bottle filled with napalm if you know it will just be confiscated? So long as we are looking for explosives in shampoo bottles we won't find any there. A terrorist will have to figure out another (probably less effective yet clever) way to smuggle such material in. IMO, it's to make it more challenging to take hazardous chemicals onboard a plane. Personally I agree with your first statement that a simple mindset and procedural change (along with a weapon or two for the pilots perhaps) would have been enough to prevent another 9-11 like disaster. I just hate the way you fail to acknowledge that the TSA isn't entirely stupid. Reminds me of all those anti-drug campaigns talking about how marijuana forces you to commit crimes.
      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
    5. Re:TSA = Toothpaste Security Agency by mpe · · Score: 1

      Patrick Smith of the New York Times points out just how pointless the TSA searches have become. Why for example do they confiscate tubes of toothpaste or shampoo bottles potentially containing explosive materials, only to throw them out in the trash unchecked? Why do cleaners and garbage workers handle these supposedly dangerous contraband unprotected? The ban on fluids itself flies in the face of scientific opinion: "The notion that deadly explosives can be cooked up in an airplane lavatory is pure fiction."

      Especially if you can buy bottles of liquid at shops after the "security check".
      What appears to be ignored is that a bottle (especially one full of water) makes a quite effective club. (A glass bottle being likely to be transformed into a knife after being used as a club...)

  18. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

    Remember the FBI under Hoover?

    No. And that's a big problem.
    The generation which experienced stuff like that is rapidly passing into senility or worse.
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  19. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by pete6677 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If we have a true revolution, you should be hoping you'll be lucky enough to live through it. Be careful what you wish for. There really could be worse governments than the U.S. led by Republicans. If you doubt me, just ask anyone who grew up as a subject under Stalin.

  20. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you *precisely* correct in referring to the whole system as a pendulum.

    As an engineer, upon further reflection I think that a more apt description would be "running open loop". If you look at the U.S. Constitution, you'll realize that the so-called "checks-and-balances" put in place by the Founders, indeed the underpinnings of our entire Republic, are nothing but a series of carefully crafted negative feedback loops. The intent of those mechanisms was, of course, to prevent the government from going too far in one direction. The most basic of those is the fact that we can elect our leaders: the governments actions are processed by the population and fed back to the input as votes. Another loop was the original tariff system. It is complicated, but it worked for a long, long time, and had our elected leaders not fiddled with it continuously, would still be working now.

    The problem is that Congress, with its fundamental incompetence and endless quest for votes, has opened most of those loops and the proper amount of negative feedback is no longer being applied to the system inputs. In fact, there's generally no negative feedback whatsoever: it's all going the other way. That's placed us in a swell of uncontrolled positive feedback which will eventually reach the maximum tolerance of the system.

    In electronic terms, that usually means your output is locked to within a few millivolts of your positive supply voltage. In civil terms, it means a revolution is about to start.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  21. Nothing new to see here, move along... by xZoomerZx · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Does anyone remember the story of "The Emperor's New Clothes"? This is a story as old as time, only the names have changed. More of a continuing observation on human (mis)behavior, than anything else.

    DHS and the TSA were never meant to actually prevent harm to any citizen, but rather as a transfer of power from the citizen to the government. In that context, the ineptitude, mismanagement, harassment, failures, and the 'kill the messenger' attitude, begin to make a kind of sense. Much as any despotic entity throughout history, exposure of any kind is met with intimidation or violence, and a monolithic facade is presented.

    At least until control is absolute, then it no longer matters. Read the sig.

    --
    Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
  22. representatives by nguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Complain to your elected representatives with a short, politely worded letter. That's the most likely to get these practices stopped.

    1. Re:representatives by NixonTurf · · Score: 1

      I'm a DC resident and don't have an elected representative, you insensitive clod!

  23. Incompetence Pays! by sciop101 · · Score: 1
    USA is a controlled state.

    Privacy is myth!

    All information is available SOMEWHERE.

    --
    The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
  24. Desyne ? what brillance in naming a company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow what a unique name, kinda like naming a site after a command prompt. oh.....

  25. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by symbolic · · Score: 1

    The problem is that Congress is so damned spineless to begin with. The REAL ID act was passed in 2005, not after any discussion, debate, or vote, but only because it was slipped into a major spending bill by some self-serving Republican coward from Wisconsin. There wasn't even an effort to nullify it once it was discovered that it had passed - EVEN AFTER 17 states and a majority of Americans have voiced their opposition to it. It's about time Congress did its job already.

  26. Fire the FBI & TSA individuals by ancient_kings · · Score: 0

    that started an investigation on Soghoian. This is utterly stupid and a complete waste of the American Tax Payer's money. The agents who started the investigation are nothing more than perps. who deserve to be made a clear example by firing their arses and droping their pensions. Trust me, that will be heard VERY CLEARLY by other agents not to perform such stupid and arrogant abuse of power. It's that simple. Man oh man, do I wish I were their bosses or bosses' boss...

  27. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by lysergic.acid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    while i don't disagree that our government leadership is incompetent, i think that the blame isn't solely on politicians. we did at one point live in a free and democratic society. a large part of the blame therefor rests on the the public. we have developed a culture of apathy, and as such no revolution could ever take place.

    the reason for public apathy is two folds. firstly, the bipartisan system that our democracy has evolved into is inherently broken. but more importantly the 4th estate has failed to uphold its duty to the public. the reason why freedom of press is so important to a free society is because the press plays a crucial role in the democratic process. democracy only works when the citizenry is well informed and educated. and when the press neglects its duty to report government/political corruption, voters can not make informed votes to provide the negative feedback you mentioned.

    so unless the nature of our press changes fundamentally, i don't see any desperately needed widespread reforms taking place. perhaps the internet is the key. i don't know. but maybe one day we'll see direct participatory democracy being realized in the U.S. with the advent of the the internet and the information age, perhaps government records could be placed directly online so that the public can stay informed about government without the press. likewise, with internet access being near ubiquitous today, i don't see why we even need legislative representatives to pass legislation and form public policy. why couldn't we just conduct mass referendums over the web and bypass congress altogether?

    i mean, if poor illiterate Venezuelans can draft their own constitution via referendum, why can't Americans pass legislation the same way? with today's communications technology, we don't have logistical problems getting in the way of direct democracy.

  28. this actually shows the opposite by nguy · · Score: 1

    Real ID is going to be a nightmare.

    I think the opposite is true. This TSA site is needed at all because right now it's hard to prove that you're not on the list of bad guys. If you carry biometrically secure identification and have a unique identifier, that becomes much easier. A lot of the intrusions into our civil liberties and the lack of privacy are a result of not having good identifiers.

    In any case, the private sector is already going this route anyway with identification like the Clear card.

    1. Re:this actually shows the opposite by mpe · · Score: 1

      I think the opposite is true. This TSA site is needed at all because right now it's hard to prove that you're not on the list of bad guys. If you carry biometrically secure identification and have a unique identifier, that becomes much easier.

      Thing is that outside of fiction such things simply do not exist. Any actual ID card scheme will at best be only as secure as current systems.

      A lot of the intrusions into our civil liberties and the lack of privacy are a result of not having good identifiers.

      Actually what you need to know is intent knowing identity isn't actually of much use.

      In any case, the private sector is already going this route anyway with identification like the Clear card.

      Thus you can be sure that all future airline terrorists are likely to have one of these :)

    2. Re:this actually shows the opposite by nguy · · Score: 1

      Thing is that outside of fiction such things simply do not exist. Any actual ID card scheme will at best be only as secure as current systems.

      Lots of countries have physical id cards that are nearly impossible to forge. Many of those have no electronic components at all, are fully human readable, and are excellent from a privacy point of view.

      Actually what you need to know is intent knowing identity isn't actually of much use.

      Identity tells you a great deal about intent. Countries like Israel, for example, base much of their airline security on deriving intent from identity, and their airlines seem to be doing pretty well.

      Thus you can be sure that all future airline terrorists are likely to have one of these :)

      So what? What would it matter even if 100% of all terrorists had Clear cards? What matters is the probability that a terrorist passes screening, and the cost and inconvenience screening imposes on passengers.

      I'm sorry, but overall I have to say: you simply don't know what you're talking about.

    3. Re:this actually shows the opposite by mpe · · Score: 1

      Lots of countries have physical id cards that are nearly impossible to forge. Many of those have no electronic components at all, are fully human readable, and are excellent from a privacy point of view.

      In which case the other likelyhood is infiltration of wherever these are issued or bribary/blackmail of those already working there. A more likely reason for a low level of id cards being forged is that (unlike those proposed in the US and UK) they are "low value".

      Identity tells you a great deal about intent. Countries like Israel, for example, base much of their airline security on deriving intent from identity, and their airlines seem to be doing pretty well.

      Israel is in a state of war where the sides can reasonably easily identified by ethnic origin. It's also the case that part of El Al's security involves interviewing people by a highly trained interviewer, something which has very little to do with checking IDs.

  29. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by freedom_india · · Score: 1

    Congress is doing its job already: Crating jobs and boosting the economy.

    After all you and i don't pay the cost of re-election campaigning.
    It is done by corporates, who will stand to benefit from Real ID act.

    Imagine the cost of contracting out large quantities of safeboard, ink, printing presses, plastic, computer systems to maintain, training, emergency services (someone enters his hand into a press), laser printers, etc.

    And now imagine how much employment is generated when these people are needed for above mentioned products.

    Now, tell me, how is congress supposed to do its job? Shrinking the economy by pulling back Real ID?

    The nuts at NH are clueless m0r0ns who don't even levy state income taxes and hence have bad roads.

    The gods in WA and MA do levy income taxes heavily and hence provide better services to people.

    -:)))

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  30. Pay the piper... by hol · · Score: 1

    Of course officials will blame the guy pointing out their failures rather than fix them. The DHS is second in power only to the IRS to act outside of the 5th amendment.

    My bet is anyone with a permutation of Chris Soghoian's name already has a 'SSSSS' on his boarding pass.

    --
    - - - Non Caffeine Drink or Drink Error
  31. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by mpe · · Score: 1

    If that's what it takes. Remember the FBI under Hoover? Did all kinds of abusive stuff, until it finally reached the point where Congress had to rein them in and enact strict controls on their behavior, mainly because Congress itself was threatened by Hoover's activities. Hell, the bastard had dirt on all of them. However, many of those restrictions on law enforcement were undone with the Patriot Act, CALEA and other poorly-designed laws designed to strip civil liberties from us. I have the feeling that we're going to have to suffer through yet another cycle of government abuse (worse this time) until the pendulum swings back and some controls get put back in place.

    A very fundermental problem is the idea that increasing official power (and reducing "civil liberties") somehow increases security. Something which never appears to have actually happened in recorded history. Indeed it appears more likely that giving law enforcement too much power is that they are too busy harrassing innocent people to have much time for dealing with criminals. With a real risk of establishing a positive feedback loop. Especially since law enforcement always claims to need more power and the idea that reducing law enforcement powers might actually result in them doing a better job is just too radical for many people.

  32. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes. That's all I can say this this: yes.

    -G

    --
    Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
  33. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but the only valid response to this is: "What the FUCK?"

    I'm sorry, since when did the existence of a worse system make this system okay? There is *always* a worse system. That does not justify this one. I don't want to be personal, but your statement is pitiful, apologetic garbage. I don't care who runs the US government. Republicans, Democrats, it doesn't matter. THEY ARE ALL OUT OF CONTROL.

    I *do* want a revolution. It is absolutely necessary at this point. Yes, a lot of us may not live through it. But golly, have you ever read any history at all? There's not even any need to go abroad, as you touted out Stalin. Hell, look at our own nation's history! We became an independent nation because the current system was unacceptable. Do you think that our colonial status was the worst system in the world? I would hope not. And yet, still, it was necessary. Or how about the Civil War? Should we have stayed with the system of slavery that was in place, simply because there are worse possible systems out there? What's that you say? No? Well, holy shit...it's beginning to sound like sometimes, revolutions and civil wars are necessary, even if people *do* end up dead.

    If you are afraid to fight for change simply because it might inconvenience you, you ABSOLUTELY DO NOT DESERVE ANYTHING BETTER. I would be PROUD to die for my beliefs rather than giving them up for convenience and comfort, and eventually being taken off to some shadowed, non-existent prison and executed for crimes I may or may not have committed.

    This nation was founded on those willing to die for their beliefs, and you squander their good will with your passive, apologetic bullshit. You, sir, deserve exactly the treatment you get from this government, as well as whatever treatment they determine you need in the future.

    -G

    --
    Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
  34. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Also, apparently I can't even form a coherent sentence today. That should have read: "That's all I can say to this: yes." If only there were some sort of "preview" functionality!

    -G

    --
    Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
  35. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Congress is doing its job already: Crating jobs and boosting the economy. [boldface mine]

    Indeed. Congress is "crating" all of our jobs ... boxing them up and shipping them overseas. How that is supposed to boost the United States' economy is a mystery to me. Conversely, it is readily apparent how all those jobs have boosted the respective economies of India and China.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  36. Re:Even as we are faced with incident after incide by freedom_india · · Score: 1

    According to Reaganomics, if the rich get richer, the poor *can* get richer too, provided the richer trickle down the money in the form of pennies to the guy begging outside.

    Economics is a zero sum game. For me to win, you have to lose.

    Crating jobs to india does not mean if the jobs were not crated would be available in USA. It is more likely the cost of living would have increased a lot, but so too would have salaries.

    Now by crating jobs, we enable the rich to earn more via LBO and IPOs.

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer