Slashdot Mirror
TSA To Allow Laptops In Approved Bags
mnovotny writes "TIME is reporting that TSA will be allowing laptops in approved bags through security checkpoints. 'The new rules, announced Tuesday and set to take effect Aug. 16, are intended to help streamline the X-ray inspection lines. To qualify as "checkpoint friendly," a bag must have a designated laptop-only section that unfolds to lie flat on the X-ray machine belt and contains no metal snaps, zippers or buckles and no pockets.'" Don't you feel safer? I wish an independent 3rd-party group could get together and see what they could get through security without being arrested for the experiment. So little of what the TSA is doing is any more than illusion.
It's all black leather covered in studs, spikes and chains.
gotta love a Vampire goth laptop bag to get you wierd looks when wearing a 3 piece suit.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It would make a point, but I fear that the reaction would be the opposite of what many of us would like. If we showed holes in the security theater that has been built, stricter measures would be put in place and all travellers would be inconvenienced even more.
I'm actually really surprised that the summary suggests that.
Yes, much of this is security theatre, but allowing me to carry my laptop on and attempting to stream-line the current cluster fuck is an improvement none the less.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
You may want to read that again. It basically says, "little of what they are doing is more than illusion", which is roughly translated to "little of what they do is useful".
Are these TSA-approved laptop bags going to protect my laptop as well as TSA-approved locks keep people out of my luggage?
I'm failing to see the downside?
But then I see the general populace being greatly inconvenienced as a good thing... as it might wake them from their current stupor.
Yes I said worthless.
I have 22 screws, couple of plates, and pins. I should light up a metal detector like a christmas tree. Yet when I fly, I often get waved right through without any apparent reaction. This has happened at multiple busy airports in larger cities. Yet when I go through my local airport (where, oddly enough, they know me) I get the beep and separate pat down.
People meekly accept this BS (along with the liquids ban, et al) as "security" when it's really BS.
Poor, false security is worse than none at all. The only explanation is that when it is busy, they turn down the sensitivity to a ridiculously low level.
People say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Why? Is there any shortage of bad ones?
Next year, TSA plans to allow people wearing clear body bags through security faster. While you do give up some privacy, think of the minutes you'll save.
To qualify as "checkpoint friendly," a bag must have a designated laptop-only section that unfolds to lie flat on the X-ray machine belt and contains no metal snaps, zippers or buckles and no pockets.
So... the only thing keeping my laptop from falling out of my bag as I carry it (or someone bump-and-grabbing it) is going to be a strip of lint-encrusted velcro?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
I haven't flown since 1999.
This isn't enough to make me even consider flying ever again.
How can I get myself put on the no-fly list? I want to make it official.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
But anyone who showed that it could be done would be arrested and spend serious jail time.
This is all theatre. It's so the TSA can justify their budget. It's all a joke. If a terrorist wanted to make a point now, he'd drive a car bomb into an airport terminal during a major holiday rush.
We could go back to the "pre-9/11" screenings IF we made sure that every plane had a flight deck door that was secured against anyone in the passenger section getting through it for long enough for the pilot to make an emergency landing.
Instead we live in fear of 4 oz of toothpaste.
Does "metal" apply to just snaps, or are plastic zippers allowed?
It's getting closer and closer to the point where I'll say a two-day drive is preferable to eight hours of dealing with the airport.
Lately democracy seems to be based on the skybox, the Happy Meal box, the X-box, and the idiot box.
It would make a point, but I fear that the reaction would be the opposite of what many of us would like. If we showed holes in the security theater that has been built, stricter measures would be put in place and all travellers would be inconvenienced even more.
I'm actually really surprised that the summary suggests that.
The result would be that most travellers would realize how ineffective and useless the current TSA security is, then things might change for the better.
Right now, you can't test them without commiting a crime, and if you do see that they have a weak spot, and speak about it, you have also probably commited a crime. If you photograph them, you have commited a crime.
Basically, criticizing the TSA - except for in the vauges of terms - or investigating it has become a crime.
What exactly can you hide behind a zipper or snap? And why can't it have a pocket? I know it's all silly, but it seems like a ton of bags would be compliant if it weren't for those three things. Is this some secret plan to advance the economy by making travelers all buy new laptop bags?
Look for the Targus lobbyist that pretty much eliminated every existing laptop bag requiring new bags to be purchased for everyone that wants to take advantage of this rule. Right after Xmas he may be looking for a new revenue stream and TSA approved goth might be hot.
The TSA's mainly bull shit and bluster by little tin-pot tyrants.
If I was so inclined (and not crippled,) I'd high jack a FedEx or a UPS plane.
Why mess with security if you don't have to.
A fully fueled and loaded plane will go into a large federally owned building regardless of whether there are a hundred passengers plotting a coup on your ass, or a crew lying quietly dead in the back of the plane.
Private aviation is a lot more vulnerable than the cash strapped public carriers.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
And so one of the many restrictions of post-9/11 flight security goes the way of the dodo in the name of convenience. I predict that we'll see more and more of this in the coming years. Soon, we'll not be required to X-ray our shoes when people forget why we started in the first place.
This is an illustration of how a knee-jerk reaction to tightening security instead of innovating causes us to be less secure than we were before. If we had rethought airplane security from the ground up as opposed to ramping current practices up, we might have actually learned something from 9/11 in terms of air security. As it stands, I don't think we learned very much at all.
Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
It's not just you, so please don't take this personally, but being searched, patted down like a common criminal for just trying to use mass transportation is an "inconvenience" and not an assault on our civil liberties?
When we lose time, productivity, increase the stress in our busy lives, and just hassled, it's now an inconvenience. Well, I'm tired of it and I fly only once a year now, if that, and if more of us do that, then the airlines are going to be inconvenienced by loss of business and the horrible customer service folks at the airlines who are quick to apologize for the "inconvenience" when they do not tell us when a flight is delayed or canceled resulting in a loss of revenue will be inconvenienced with the loss of their jobs. Of course that won't happen because the incompetent airline execs will go to Congress and beg for bailout (taxpayer) money arguing that it's "needed" for the economy and in the meantime, they will give themselves millions of dollars in bonuses for a great job. And we wonder why the out of work bastard who's job was sent overseas is walking around saying, "Bullshit! Bullshit!" to himself.
God! I'm grumpy today!
I went through airport security (twice -- once in BOS and once in OGG) with a 90mm Schmitt-Cassegrain telescope in my carry-on. Now this thing is essentially an aluminum cylinder 4 inches in diameter and 10 inches long. It was never even questioned. This was in addition to my usual assortment of DSLR gear and electronics. And an XO-1 laptop.
:)
I was expecting a strip-search.
Ahh but you see, if they did anything to private aviation, it'd affect their own flights. So no more bush just walking up to the private jet with no security checks.
A fully fueled and loaded plane will go into a large federally owned building regardless of whether there are a hundred passengers plotting a coup on your ass, or a crew lying quietly dead in the back of the plane.
Which could easily be shot down.
When you hijack a plane with enough people on board, shooting the plane down can still give a huge image hit on the ones that did the shooting, even if it was the right thing to do.
On a plane with only terrorists onboard, it would be very easy to give order to have it shot down.
A friend of mine flew a commuter airline out of SeaTac a couple of years ago (after 9/11, well into the TSA era). He started out on a cross-state drive to a family reunion, but blew his transmission a few miles out of Seattle. After a rush to get towed back home, he booked a last minute flight, called a cab and made a dash to the airport. He caught the flight at the last minute and flew to Spokane. Upon arrival (with no other hassles) he discovered that he had overlooked the fact that he was carrying two handguns (one in his jacket and one in what ended p as carry-on luggage) plus ammo. He has a permit to carry concealed weapons and is so used to doing so that he simply didn't notice.
Neither did the TSA. There's one data point for your experiment.
Have gnu, will travel.
I can tell that it's worse to fly when you're obese than sitting next to someone who is obese.
Anybody who (like me) is feeling cynical about the whole idea of buying a new $100 laptop bag with the special TSA-approved laptop zone, the solution is pretty straightforward - just continue to put your laptop in the plastic bin.
The laptop, keys, and pocket change thing take up maybe 10 seconds of my time - 5 seconds to take out and 5 seconds to put back where they belong (but that's because I have my shit together unlike the guy in front of me who inevitably manages to spend the better part of 5 minutes putting his stuff on the conveyor belt). Laptop is no big deal, really ... it's the shoes thing that pisses me off and makes me feel like every last vestige of my dignity has been removed ...
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
The TSA is George W. Bush's patrionage mill. It does NOTHING to improve air safety. It does PLENTY to slow down air travellers. Yesterday I was at the airport in Burbank, CA. It took me TEN MINUTES to get through the ID line-and there were EIGHT of us in line! The stupid TSA person seemed to be going in slow motion. First she read the name on the ticket (taking 30 seconds to do so)-then she spent another 30 seconds looking at my driver's license...THEN she spent another 30 seconds looking over everything and stamping my boarding pass. Move another TEN FEET to the metal detector and ANOTHER TSA guy who asks for the IDs all over again Why? because you're afraid I might have changed identies in the TEN FOOT OPEN WALK from her to you?
There was a woman who had an obviously sealed bottle of commerical drinking water. They made her throw it away! WHY? All it did was make her small child cry-and her have to spend another 3 bucks when she got to the other side of the checkpoint.
Has it occurred to anyone that under today's new hijacking policies, 9/11 would not have happened? Today's rules do not allow either pilot to leave the cockpit if the plane if hijacked-instead they are to IMMEDIATELY land the aircraft! Not to mention that the cockpit doors are now heavily reinforced and today's passengers would make MINCEMEAT of anyone dumb enough to TRY hijackng an aircraft!
The TSA is an expensive joke! It needs to be abolished immediately!
IMO, the existence of the TSA is one of those "the terrorists have already won" things. Most of the changes that have taken place in the U.S. are not that bad singularly, but when taken as a whole and the magnitude of the number of people affected, it's had a serious negative impact on our society and I'd argue our productiveness as well.
I'm not saying we shouldn't be careful, but it's quite obvious to anyone here that none of these measures, the ones that merely inconvenience us at best, are disguised forms of monitoring for things besides potential acts of terrorism. How easy it is to violate the fourth amendment by just indefinitely taking away someone's laptop without cause.
The last time I traveled out of country with my wife and kids, we got the "random star" on our boarding passes... which singled us out for special scrutiny. Right. Because a family of four, including a two year old and a five year old are prime suspects. I don't think they do this anymore, but the absurdity of all the restrictions is just incredible.
And how about the recent "clear pass" article? What kind of extortion is that? We'll make you wait on line for hours unless you pay us $100/year! That's effectively how I see it, since the security measures are a joke.
Ok, rant off.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Why exactly are we not allowed to carry screwdrivers etc on board and then (I did this last week at DTW, Detroit) you receive a sharp metal knife and fork in the restaurant after security?
Timo's Audio Software http://www.esseraudio.com
Airport security will get a lot more uncomfortable when they catch somebody trying to light a bomb hidden up their ass.
If the president hijacks Air Force One and plows it into the White House, then I'm not gonna vote for him in the next election. Just sayin'.
A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
Are you sure you know what is in those packages on that FedEx or UPS plane? They could be highly valuable and/or highly dangerous, or they could have brought on board a valuable political hostage snatched earlier.
To beat the Jack Bauers in the world you need contingencies on top of contingencies nigh ad infinitum.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
I purposefully didn't mention civil liberties since we seem to have already given those up without a fight. :(
If the president hijacks Air Force One and plows it into the White House, then I'm not gonna vote for him in the next election. Just sayin'.
Well the President maybe, but Cheney would probably get away with it.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
I think the whole notion that terrorists will even try to hijack a plane again is absurd. Even if they get on board and were strapped with explosives, I think people on board would still act. They might blow up, or they might get to kick the shit out of a terrorist. Either way, I don't think we will have a repeat of 9/11. No, the next act of terror would be a car bomb or something similar. If the terrorists really want to strike fear into the heart of Americans, they would send a dozen of their people with machine guns into a shopping mall and cut loose. It's low tech and a lot easier to do than hijacking a plane.
6 buckets later (2 laptops, the laptop bag, my carryon, my shoes, and the Xbox 360) they scanned EVERY ONE of my common household items to determine that I was not a terr-o-ist, only to discover that 1. Their xray could not actually scan the laptops or 360 accurately and that 2. Due to the design of the chutes, the line was help up even more as I repacked the carryon.
Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!
If I were president.....
given the choice between saving several thousand people in a skyscraper, ...the airplane would be shot-down. It's one of those situations where people WILL die no matter what happens, and it's better that a hundred die than several thousand. If the american people are too pussy to deal with death, well then, they can fire me as president and elect a different guy who would do nothing & let the skyscraper be destroyed.
and saving a hundred-or-so in an airplane,
I'd save the skyscraper filled with people...
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
Spent two hours and missed my flight because the idiots could not believe that i just happen to have a little horse sh%* on my boots and a little diesel fuel on them from getting fuel on the way to the airport.
They finally admitted that I was right, let me go, I had to pay $75 re-booking fee and get another flight.
Then just to show how stupid they are, they wanted to detain me again as I went through security a second time.
-- I am the NRA, enough said...
Simply put.
Most people are incapable of thinking outside their own little world. They are selfish and self centered.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
...or a breathalyser.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
I have a Canon brand backpack that I carry a DSLR and 8 lenses in.. one of which is a 300mm fixed length lens, it's metal and about 10-12" long.
I've flown with this bag as my carryon and taken it through security 40+ times. Once, on a month long trip, I accidentally left a large (4" blade) pocketknife IN THE BAG for 6 different legs of my trip. That's right. A lens that could conceal a small cannon (and looks like one on the x-ray), and a knife big enough to carve it, in my carryon.
Theatre. God help us if someone with ill intent actually does decide to purposely board a plane with a weapon.
I'd high jack a FedEx or a UPS plane.
Only if you wanted to be there overnight.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
Reminds me of when I flew from ORD to LAX about 60 days after 9/11.
After getting through security and checking out all the army guys with huge guns, I get to the ORD snack/food area for my terminal. I assume that before 9/11 they were handing out plastic utensils, because that's what they were handing out post-9/11...except for the plastic knives.
Yep, they had decided that plastic knives were a threat, but plastic forks or spoons were OK. All of which can be made into a stabby plastic weapon in a few seconds. Why were the knives singled out? Forks are probably more dangerous; their handle is certainly sturdier...
With the first link, the chain is forged.
I'm not the guy you're responding to, but I have to say that me losing weight would have no effect on my airplane seating problem.
My ass fitting between the armrests is not the problem, and I don't have fat overflowing into the next seat... I am so broad that my arms go straight down to the armrests on both sides. Losing weight isn't going to make my shoulder width any smaller. I know I'm not alone, and I've had the displeasure of sitting three across with people who were just about my size. I had the aisle seat, and was leaning to my right the entire trip - not particularly comfortable.
But the sad fact is people wanted cheap, and they got cheap. In order to meet the financial demands of customers, they had to reduce space to increase seating capacity; I don't blame the airlines, I blame us. Same thing with WalMart... complain all you want, but if people continue to shop there, they will continue to take over and close out smaller businesses. People prefer cheapness over quality.
On my last Air-Tran flight, even though it was a business trip, I paid out of my own pocket to be upgraded. But then Air Tran has reasonable upgrades, whereas most airlines charge a ridiculous amount. Regardless, I actually DID put my money where my mouth was and paid more for a better seat.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Actually the choice is "save several thousand people in a skyscraper" and "save nobody". The people in the airplane can't be saved.
Taking down a large jet aircraft... say a 747, or even a 737, 727, etc., is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT.
1) You wouldn't know it was rogue until it was already WELL on the way to it's target (if you knew at all before it got there).
2) Even when you identified it, you would still need to actually CATCH it. Scrambling planes takes time, airfields aren't everywhere and, unlike BSG, I'm afraid we don't have an "Air Cap" to guard our sorry asses ($$$$$).
3) Now you have to shoot it down. You may not realize this, but a passenger jet is FREAKING HUGE. One missile isn't going to take out a jet with 2, 3, or 4 engines. You're going to have to really go to work on that bad boy... and now it's just an out of control ball of metal and fire... braaaavoooo.
Give whatever order you want, but until you can vaporize the stupid thing in mid-flight it's all a pipe dream. Me, I'm not big on confrontation and dying. If I wanted to send a message I'd just get an old stinger, head to an international third level airport (St. Louis, Cincinnati, etc), drive to the end of the runway, and blow the wing off a plane as it took off.
The point here is that the entire concept of airline security is a joke on an American public too pathetic to face the truth by a government too ready to cede to their fears. Freedom isn't free, it's expensive, and the cost is blood and tears. If you don't like it then call Kim Jong and ask how much condo's in downtown PyongYang are going for. You can be sure you won't have to worry about terrorists in North Korea.
-rt
But that's assuming you know what will happen, which you don't. All you know is that radio contact has been lost with a plane and it's veering off course. It could be some failure on board and the crew is trying to do find a suitable spot for an emergency landing.
Are you going to give the order to kill several hundred people? Do you still think it's such an easy decision? You know what they say about hindsight?
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
Last year I traveled over 50,000 air miles across the United States, making more than 30 trips through security before they found my Leatherman inside my briefcase. The thing is, in all that time I had forgotten it was there, next to my flashlight. It has a functional knife, cork screw and lots of other doodads that should have make someone wonder.
I was really pissed when they found it, since it was a gift from a co-worker and they confiscated it. Now I am much more careful to check - I usually clip a Swiss Army knife to my briefcase that my grandfather gave me and I would be heart-broken if I had that confiscated. Fortunately now they are more reliable about letting you go back out of the terminal to mail it to yourself (in a nice $10 package, of course, capitalism at its best).
This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
Just grab your shit and get on board. Period. No fuss. No muss. No toothpaste shampoo bullshit. No uniformed fuckers with attitudes. Polite train staff and a nice relaxing experience.
I can't speak for FedEx, but UPS security procedures are MUCH more stringent then mandated by the TSA.
FedEx is very strict with their guidelines for package contents. They pull out the rulebook for anything, especially International, and turn you away if they think it's hazardous or fails customs guidelines.
The U.S.P.S. on the other hand will take anything you give them, no questions about the contents (I guess they assume you aren't shipping chemicals or that the scanners will catch everything), and ship it off as long as it's not too large (I forget the sizing criteria).
I ran into this when trying to ship gifts for X-Mas over to my wife's family in Russia. Fedex-"Can't send because Russia isn't allowing toys from America because they are probably from China." USPS-"Fill out this form and give us ~$75."
Ok, your spouse/child/relative is on the plane. What now?
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
People who don't realize that Wal-Mart's half-price socks wear out four times faster prefer cheapness over quality, and they end up spending more in the long run. Not everyone is that foolish. Most, but not all.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
but Cheney would probably get away with it
Naw, Cheney wouldn't hijack Air Force One. Not his style. He'd shoot the White House in the face and make it apologize to him afterwards ;)
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Which could easily be shot down.
Yeah, if you knew it had been hijacked. Didn't we discover the hijackings on 9/11 because the passengers alerted authorities on the ground?
Reagan National Airport is under 7 kilometers (as the crow flies) from the White House and Capitol. That works out to just about two minutes of flying time at landing speed (approx 200km/h for a 747). Do you really think our esteemed Government could react that fast if the hijacking was successfully kept a secret up until the plane was actually scheduled to land? The same Government that couldn't even manage to locate (let alone shoot-down) Flight 93 before it crashed or defend the headquarters of our entire military from attack on that fateful day?
You have much more faith in the Government than I do.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
No idea if anyone has mentioned this, but what with all the "print at home" boarding passes and such, there is nothing to stop someone from changing a name on a print at home ticket, and thus, ANYONE can get through security, rendered 'blacklists' and such obsolete. Coupled with the fact that IDs are never checked at the gate anymore, persons flying could further be disguised by switching tickets with someone beyond the security checkpoint.
Coming soon: the Targus Burlap Sack 2000.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
When I take an important political hostage, I don't ship him via FedEx or UPS. I send him USPS book rate to save money.
The Internet is generally stupid
Of course good luck trying to convince the agent at the checkpoint that your 4 inch metal scissors or seven inch screwdriver are on their approved list. I never quite get used to it how insane, incompetent and contradictory the TSA is.
Yeah, except the whole thing happened in like 20 minutes. Not enough time for that kine of verification. Actually, barely enough time to realize that they'd lost comms and the plane was veering off it's flight path. Also, it is intriguing to note that huge airplanes hit by missiles do not simply disintegrate into vapor. Shooting down a 747 over New York might very well have caused just as much or even more damage then letting it hit the building did. Difficult to say of course, but large chunks of 747 raining down on the city would definitely have put a damper on someone's day.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
He got away with shooting a lawyer in the face.
Stop defending him!
> If I were president.....
> given the choice between saving several thousand people in a skyscraper,
> and saving a hundred-or-so in an airplane,
Politicians don't think like us. For example, what if they see it as a choice between killing a planeload of people and not getting re-elected, or gaining unprecedented political power after the terrorists kill several thousand people in a skyscaper?
c.
Log in or piss off.
Reagan National Airport is under 7 kilometers (as the crow flies) from the White House and Capitol. That works out to just about two minutes of flying time at landing speed (approx 200km/h for a 747). Do you really think our esteemed Government could react that fast if the hijacking was successfully kept a secret up until the plane was actually scheduled to land?
There are now specific areas around DC which are manned by ground-to-air missile batteries during "high risk" periods, in position that I think they could shoot down a plane flying over the Potomac towards the Capitol, but it would end up crashing on innocent people in Foggy Bottom office buildings or the State Department. I'll leave it to the readers discretion to determine the relative worth of "innocent people", "State Department workers", and "Members of Congress".
SO .. in a recent trip to a caribian island this past week I managed to carry the following through TSA and onto a plane :
10 Cuban Cigars
1 Torch Lighter
1 'regular' lighter
1 cigar cutter
My bag was opened and searched. my cigar case (which contained everything) was opened, the lighters were examined (but not lit .. the torch was a zippo with a torch insert ..) and then re-closed.
On the trip BACK from the same caribian island, I managed to bring four of the above cigars and the normal lighter into the plane and through customs. [The torch lighter was either lost or stolen on our trip]
On previous trips, we have brought both cigars, and bottles of absinthe back with us, occasionally being searched.
Personally, I'm grateful that the TSA is so fixated on electronic equipment now, as it lets me :P
support my exotic cigar habit
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
Just take the laptop out ahead of getting in line. I have a Targus backpack, but for my 17" laptop (Gateway). Just attach a lanyard to the bag and laptop to prevent separation on the conveyor.
If you need to, attach a proximity alarm to it and to your wrist to keep the the laptop from getting separated. If they make you remove the alarm from your wrist, tell them they better put distance between you, the pax ahead, and those behind you long enough for you to retrieve your items. That way, the alarm doesn't sound if you're separated by 6+ feet. Surely, they can comply with this.
Lots of people here are mis-reading the goddamn-misleading story line. It's abusive, sensationalistic, mis-written, and Slashdot should reign in these tags. As should newspapers, when it comes to security-related stories affecting people's wallets.
If Targus PAID to have the tags displayed that way, and if they influenced the TSA to word the regulations confusingly, then THEY TOO should be bitch-slapped for this. Besides, with one-piece carry-on for "free", these days of high fuel pricing means that if your other stuff is checked, and you carry your laptop, then put it in a Mac-like sleeve with Velcro flapping and remove it from the laptop backpack. Hell, put in a rubber cord (not one that can hang or restrain people, but just strong enough to keep your stuff in sight of both YOU and the screeners...) and lash your stuff together for the screening.
This damned tag gives readers the angering impression that they MUST go and buy a new bag. The case/bag is good for reducing damage to your laptop, but if yours is rugged or already scratched like hell, you don't need to care too much as long as it's NOT DROPPED or dropped upon by sharp & heavy carry-on items.
Jeez.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
I'm in email security, and I have a little sympathy for the TSA and believe that the level of criticism they are receiving WRT what they screen is at least somewhat unwarranted.
Is much of what they are doing fighting yesterday's battle? Sure it is. So is much of what we do in anti-spam/anti-virus. The trouble is that if we didn't close yesterday's holes and keep checking for those techniques, even if they are not so commonly used or attempted anymore, the attackers *would* keep using them.
Example from email security: using fixed netblocks to send spam doesn't work nearly as well as it used to, because they quickly wind up on the major public RBLs as well as the private ones maintained by anti-spam vendors. However, if we stopped the practice of RBLing those netblocks known to belong to spammers, we would quickly see a shift back to using them because it would make the current most popular technique (botnets) more trouble than just getting a netblock at some spam-friendly provider.
Another example from email security: anti-botnet efforts have been effective enough that some spammers, particularly phishers have for some months been targeting .edu (and some ISP) accounts for phishing, primarily for the purpose of obtaining those account credentials and using them to send spam through legit, real accounts using mail servers with good reputations. But if we stopped working so hard to counter botnets and counter abuse of free email services, they probably wouldn't bother with this attack vector because, again, it would be more trouble than using a botnet.
Examples from TSA practices: if they didn't check electronics for explosives, terrorists would certainly try getting explosives onto planes. They might still succeed if they tried, at least sometimes, but the odds of being caught are high enough that they are less likely to try that approach. If they didn't check shoes, someone else would try the Richard Reid approach. If box cutters and small knives were allowed, someone might try that one again (although after 9/11, I suspect trying to hijack a plane with a box cutter would just end with the would-be hijacker having the box cutter shoved up his ass by angry passengers). Etc.
That is, it's about raising the bar of success/lowering the odds of being able to use any given attack vector and successfully got on a plane and carry out the attack. Is much of what TSA has done so far consisted of picking the low-hanging fruit? Yes, I think it's fair to say that. Email security companies pick low-hanging fruit, too. Most spam is ridiculously easy to block. However, that doesn't mean the low-hanging fruit shouldn't be picked. If we didn't block the easy attack vectors, they'd keep using them. Spammers and terrorists are both no more ambitious than they have to be; if easy achieves they're goals, they aren't going to bother with hard.
Could TSA improve? Sure. Some of their procedures - liquids, for example - are aimed at techniques that (at least, based on what some experts have said) would be pretty hard to carry out, even with all the necessary components on board. I think the blanket ban on liquids not in tiny containers is aimed at keeping the lines moving. If they tried to actually inspect them all, the lines would crawl. It's not a great solution and I think in the longer term they could find some technology to speed that up, but I appreciate the problem they face: speed matters in message filtering, too, and we're always looking for ways to improve both performance and efficacy, while reducing false positives. It's not easy. Are we in the email security better at it than TSA? Sure, but we also have at least one tool available to us that they don't: profiling. Email security companies look at where a message is coming from and what reputation that source has in deciding whether to accept it, and, having accepted it, how to classify it thereafter.
If TSA were to even suggest profiling based on national origin or appearance, people would be all over them. Whether it
Just a couple months ago I was traveling cross country. I had returned home and couldn't find my Leatherman tool in my luggage. A week later I found my Leatherman- in my laptop bag, my carry-on... they didn't see it when it was in the whiz bang x-ray machine?
...it's the other people. I've been flying rather regularly the last years and I got the routine down to a pat. My laptop goes on top of the bag, in the line I put all the junk in my pockets in my jacket and remove my belt so I got it in my hand. So when I'm at the checkpoint, I put the suitcase on, take out the laptop, put my jacket, belt and shoes (you don't have to take them off here but mine have metal that beep) and head on through. Then slip the laptop back on top of my bag, put on belt, shoes and jacket. The whole operation takes me just a few seconds and getting everything out of my jacket I can do at the next queue, usually waiting for the plane to board.
Whatever goes on the conveyor belt I've never or extremely rarely been stopped for. The downtime is due to the people that inevitably seem to take 2-5 minutes each to get their act together and get everything on the belt, beep so they have to pass through again or be manually scanned. Or they still haven't figured out the limitation on liquids and that airport security just got told the rules, don't bother arguing with them. Some of you are IT admins - would you let people have access in direct violation of company security policy on the spot because they're sweet talkers? Didn't think so. Even when I have all my electronics like laptop, external disk, video camera, wii and accessories and whatnot on the belt it'll pass through. To be honest, I'd like my own line - not with less security controls but a frequent flyer line - it'd take so much less time.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I don't need the inconvenience heaped on me by all the crap forced upon air travelers, so I don't fly. No one else needs it either, although most are convinced they do. If they really did, civilization would have collapsed early on by our inability to satisfy our instant gratification needs. How in the world anything got accomplished in history without air travel is beyond me. It's amazing we even learned to walk upright, without having some authority to pack us into lines, inspect and invade us. Perhaps if we had, as a species, a single moment of clarity, we might discover that the whole game is rigged, that those in power are stripping us of all our common sense rights, and that we don't need to sacrifice our liberty so some company can make a profit. Here's an idea. . .let's rid the entire planet of the asshats, and then we won't NEED airport security. . .or homeland security. . .or any of those carefully constructed euphemisms that all equal 'we're fucking you, because we can, and because you allow us to. . .'