What Examples of Security Theater Have You Encountered?

swillden writes "Everyone who pays any attention at all to security, both computer security and 'meatspace' security, has heard the phrase Security Theater. For years I've paid close attention to security setups that I come in contact with, and tried to evaluate their real effectiveness vs their theatrical aspects. In the process I've found many examples of pure theater, but even more cases where the security was really a cover for another motive." swillden would like to know what you've encountered along these lines; read on for the rest of his question below. swillden continues: "Recently, a neighbor uncovered a good example. He and his wife attended a local semi-pro baseball game where security guards were checking all bags for weapons. Since his wife carries a small pistol in her purse, they were concerned that there would be a problem. They decided to try anyway, and see if her concealed weapon permit satisfied the policy. The guard looked at her gun, said nothing and passed them in, then stopped the man behind them because he had beer and snacks in his bag. Park rules prohibit outside food. It's clear what the 'security' check was really about: improving park food vending revenues.

So, what examples of pure security theater have you noticed? Even more interesting, what examples of security-as-excuse have you seen?"

Comments

Passwords

[qoncept]

The DOD replaced reasonable passwords with Common Access Cards. The difference? Instead of having to find out someone's 8+ character alphanumeric password that changes every month, you need to have physical access to their card and need to know their 6 digit number that never changes. Meanwhile, everyone is forgetting their card in the reader when they go to lunch, so they can't get back on base -- but feel free to use it yourself in the meantime.

Re:On the web side of things

[Emperor Skull]

I ran into a problem authenticating through their antiquated AD system AD as in Active Directory? The oldest it could be is about 8 years since AD was first implemented in Windows 2000 and there have only been two newer versions. It can't have been that antiquated. It's also trivial to do authentication against AD in a variety of ways, especially from a web application. That hasn't changed much in Windows 2003 or 2008. Of course a customer that paid for what you describe probably didn't have their AD working right either...

Re:MIT ITS passwords, and Microsoft File Servers

[TheRealMindChild]

In a similar vein, Microsoft file server passwords were originally checked only on the client, a fact which went undiscovered until Samba came along.

It wasn't just Microsoft. NFS at one point in my life was synonymous with "no fucking security". It trusted the UserID that you transmitted with it. UserID 0 was a handy value to use...

Re:The Iraq theater

[marxmarv]

Islam was a young religion when Christians first attacked the Middle East. How are you not supposed to harbor a grudge, or at the very least distrust, with that kind of introduction, especially when (usually wrongly) self-identified Christians indiscriminately hold a gun to Muslims' heads while their hated cousins steal their land, the "Christians" steal their natural resources, and both of the robbers tell themselves fairy tales to rationalize it?

Re:The Iraq theater

[Onan]

Comparisons between Hussein and Hitler are pretty facile.

Hitler was quite openly intent upon conquering most of three continents, and was part of a functional alliance that was directly attacking the US. He was at the head of an enormously powerful and aggressive military force, and represented a huge threat to both the world in general and the United States in particular.

Hussein, on the other hand, only engaged in war with two other countries: Iran, with the US's urging and support, and Kuwait, with the US's permission. He was quite happy with his role as the US's pawn, and enjoyed only mutual opposition with the one group that had attacked America. He ruled a nation that had been so devastated by a decade of bombings and sanctions that it was mostly ineffectual even within its own borders, much less outside them. He could not have been less of a threat.

Re:The blinking red light

[Anonymous Cowpat]

well, in that it's meant to deter the casual thief by tricking them into believing that your car has an alarm, it IS an anti-theft device. Just a rather unsophisticated one which most nefarious types will see through these days.
It's just an LED, some flashing thingumy wotsit and something (probably a simple logic gate of some variety) to turn it off when the engine is running - it adds probably less than $1 to the cost of the car, which you'll more than make back if even one particularly gullible criminal decides not to break into your car because of it.

Re:Frist Posty?

[dondelelcaro]

Traffic court is now very "secure"

That's generally because it's in the same building as family court. For those who don't know, family court is way more dangerous than criminal court.

Re:The blinking red light

[Malekin]

That only works in the US and Japan, though. Most of the world has a much more diverse mix of transmissions.

Re:The Iraq theater

[1u3hr]

Iraq had a tyrant and was allied with Osama and other terrorist groups (similar to Hitler and Nazi Germany which I am comparing it to)

Sorry, you're sadly misinformed. Saddam was not an ally of al Qaeda. He was a nominal Muslim, but his policies were anathema to he fundamentalists. (He let women work and attend university, for instance.) Saddam was on al Qaeda's hit list, and he knew it. They wanted to get rid of corrupt, loose-living secularists like Saddam and install a theocracy, like the Taliban, in every Muslim country. Saddam was an evil dictator, but never, to my knowledge, took any action against the US outside the Middle East.

Re:The Iraq theater

[JasterBobaMereel]

We don't seem to run away as fast as the Yanks ...and most of these appear to be democracies (Except Burma...)?

America : 1607 - 1775 (168 years)
Turkey : ??? Not since it has been turkey?
Afghanistan : 1839 - 1919 (80)
Iraq : 1921 - 1932 (11)
Burma : 1824 - 1948 (124)
Egypt : 1882 - 1922 (40)
Palestine : 1917 - 1948 (31)
Bosnia : Not occupied except as part of UN force?
Kosovo : Not occupied except as part of UN force?
Malaysia : 1786 - 1963 (177)
Hong Kong : 1841 - 1997 (156)
India : 1856 - 1947 (91)
Pakistan : Created after we left ...
Bangladesh : Created after we left...

Re:The blinking red light

[pthisis]

No, cars with automatic transmissions are cheaper used than cars without, because no one wants a car with worse performance and worse fuel economy, when the only benefit is that you don't have to change gears. Cars with automatic transmissions are only for the stupid and lazy.

"Manual transmissions get better mileage than automatic transmissions" is one of those things that was absolutely true 20 years ago but requires more thought these days.

It depends entirely on the specifics of the transmission, vehicle, and driver. e.g. the 5-speed automatic in the Toyota Rav4 gets better mileage than the 5-speed manual, no matter how carefully you shift. But the 4-speed automatic gets worse mileage than a careful driver.

The Toyota FJ cruiser likewise gets better mileage in the automatic than the manual. I think the Mazda5 with the 5-speed auto is another.

Moreover, even in cars where the reverse is true studies show that most drivers don't optimize their shifting for fuel economy. Most people wind up getting better performance but worse fuel economy than most modern automatic transmissions (which are significantly more advanced than older versions).

Now, manuals do give more control (e.g. allowing better engine braking on snow/ice). And they almost always have better performance. You can pop-start them if the starter/battery dies. In many places they're cheaper. And if you're careful about driving for fuel economy, you can get better mileage in most models (but you'll lose the performance benefits then).