Slashdot Mirror


Airport Security Prize Announced

Reservoir Hill writes "Verified Identity Pass, a firm that offers checkpoint services at airports, has announced a $500,000 award for any solution that will make airport security checks quicker and simpler for passengers. The cash prize will go to any individual, company or institution that can get customers through airport security 15% faster, at a cost of less than 25 cents per passenger, using technology or processes that will be approved by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Passengers must not need to remove their clothes or shoes, something that slows down processing significantly. "We're looking at moving things that are conceptual or in the lab to things that we can deploy," says company spokesman Jason Slibeck and added that over 150 individuals, start-ups, defense contractors and universities have shown an interest in the prize. One promising procedure is mass spectroscopy, which involves analyzing the mass-charge ratio of ions on a swab sample taken from a passenger's clothing or air collected from around them to spot traces of substances including explosives or drugs. The Pre-Registration Package Information Sheet is available online."

13 of 381 comments (clear)

  1. Eliminate it? by nog_lorp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The summary says nothing about maintaining security. Just abolish it, or limit it to the bare minimum and then have an air-marshal on every plain to stop people with box-cutters.

    1. Re:Eliminate it? by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hell, hand out box cutters to every passenger. Sure, some people are gonna get hurt but no planes will be hijacked ever again.

    2. Re:Eliminate it? by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Informative

      Everyone (at least here in America) seems so focused on preventing people from getting on board a plane with a weapon. I think this kinda misses the point of a big part of airport security: the airport itself. This site gives a chronological list of some major security incidents in airports; it's not pretty stuff.

    3. Re:Eliminate it? by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Funny

      And it will cut down on those annoying cell phone conversations.

    4. Re:Eliminate it? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The American political system is about getting the most votes; if planes scare Americans then that's what they're going to lock down- why would you expect anything else from a constitutional republic? Also about airports.. why not just get the national guard involved? You sure don't see many incidents in Israel that got beyond "Man pulls gun in airport, gets hand then head blasted off with 50 caliber sniper rifle"..

    5. Re:Eliminate it? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...is there any rational reason ... for the huge focus on the damned planes?

      Not really, no. While we focus on aircraft they'll focus on something else while we're distracted.

      What about an entirely different commerce disruption activity, such as threatening communications (e.g. recent undersea cable mystery) or even critical infrastructure points (e.g. the California Aqueduct)? Are we spending sufficient of our anti-terror effort on things that the enemy have not drawn our attention toward?

      Look at the Secret Service guarding the President. They don't all stare at they guy they're guarding, or the place where the last attempt was made. They're looking everywhere and they're trained to cover the zones. If we fixate on aircraft as a point of vulnerability we're in danger of ignoring the other possibilities. We need to think, not react.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  2. How about by plover · · Score: 5, Funny
    How about handing everyone in line a one-use single shot pistol? It'd take about 15 seconds to show them how to turn the safety off and shoot it -- no worse than figuring out how to use the seat belt.

    You only get one bullet. It's preloaded, can't even be unloaded, maybe small caliber, maybe fairly low velocity, and has a 75% chance of being a blank. Tag the bullets, and maybe ink-tag the gun so it sprays the user when the trigger is pulled. Maybe even a point-blank "contact trigger", kind of like a nail gun -- you'd have to put the gun directly on someone to shoot them, avoiding aim problems in a crowded plane.

    Turn them in at the end of a flight -- everyone got one while boarding, everyone better turn the same one over when leaving.

    Anybody tries anything on the plane, and *bang* -- if a dozen passengers shoot at him, at least a couple are likely to nail him.

    That's security through strength in numbers.

    Who do I go see about collecting my $500,000?

    --
    John
  3. I know! by kongit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remove all Airport security. Lots more convenient, and probably about as secure.


    Do I win?

    1. Re:I know! by danielsfca2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      someone who simply decides to take a gun on board a plane with you and shoot you.


      OMFG. How can one be so paranoid about foul play on an airplane? You know, this same guy who wants to shoot you on the plane could just as easily shoot you:
      • On a bus
      • On a commuter train
      • In the line at 7/11
      • At the gas pump
      • In the line at Comcast waiting to drop off your cable box
      • At Starbucks while you wait for your latte
      • At work! The janitor might be a terrorist!
      • The toll-taker at the bridge


      Now please explain to me why we need this bullcrap draconian security theatre to board a plane, but we don't need it at all those locations I listed above? I dare you.
  4. A large tank of water by stox · · Score: 5, Funny

    If they float, they're a witch^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hterrorist. If they sink, they're not. Seems about as valid as any other TSA methodology.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  5. The only logical solution by Dracos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...from a perspective not saturated by fear is to revert to the policies and procedures in place on September 10, 2001

  6. Re:The purpose is fear by wumingzi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The main purpose behind the security is to keep the population frightened and annoyed.

    No. That's the purpose behind the ever-popular bad security, popular with tinpot governments and nasty IT departments the world over.

    Real security is supposed to let legitimate users get on with their jobs, stopping bad guys in their tracks, and being as invisible as possible.

    If you want a good example of real security, go to London Heathrow airport. It's nice. It's pleasant. It's a giant shopping mall where airplanes land. You never see anything there but happy tourists and
    the odd lightly armed police officer.

    That's an illusion. Hundreds of people are around to make sure that nothing goes sideways there.

    I heard a FOAF story about someone who "tripped the alarm" (in this case, walking through a door plainly marked "Do Not Enter")

    The results were amazing.

  7. Already solved. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hell, hand out box cutters to every passenger. Sure, some people are gonna get hurt but no planes will be hijacked ever again.

    That's not an issue - the problem of airplanes being hijacked and used as weapons was solved at 10:03 AM on 2001-09-11 over a field in Shanksville, PA.

    'Average' Americans figured out the security equation just more than an hour after the first plane hit Tower 1.

    Everything since is a distraction.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)