Slashdot Mirror
Major Security Vulnerabilities Uncovered At Frankfurt Airport
jones_supa writes "According to a report published in this Sunday's edition of the mass-circulation Bild am Sonntag newspaper, investigators sent by the European Commission found it surprisingly easy to smuggle banned items past security at Frankfurt Airport. It said undercover investigators posing as passengers were able to smuggle weapons or other dangerous items through security every second time they tried to do so. One of the biggest problems was improperly trained staff, who were often not able to recognize dangerous items when viewing the screens they use to look at x-ray images of baggage. The staff is sourced via a privately owned service provider. Germany's Federal Police said they introduced new measures immediately after learning of the security deficits to ensure that passenger safety was guaranteed. Fraport AG, the company that operates the Germany's biggest airport, also took the findings seriously and begun an operation to retrain a total of 2,500 workers."
OK, so according to that so called "newspaper" (I read TFA there yesterday) 50% of dangerous items were not recognized during security screening. But even with this terrible performance, no related incidents have been reported. In other words: This shows that there isn't a real danger that this security theater is protecting us from.
bickerdyke
Given the fact that security at airports is not very good and nothing really bad has happened in the last decade, what does this tell us about the real terrorist threat level in Europe?
Don't let yourself get scared by politicians who rule by using fear. Learn from the hard facts!
It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
Yes, they did. They learned that that was just an incident, that it is impossible to guarantee 100% security, that even if 100% security was possible it would make flying very unpleasant, that you should not give in to terrorist threats and that driving a car is far more dangerous than flying and everybody accepts the risk of traveling by car. The last 25 years proof that they are right.
It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
You might recall that the TSA got started by taking sackloads of private company-employed rent-a-cops and making them federal employees, thus unfirable. This ensured and still ensures a nice base level of incompetence as well as arrogance, and costs you more tax dollars than the private situation did. You also get less oversight due to all the petty secrecy, down to being forbidden from knowing which rules apply to you today, and you have less recourse since they're judge and jury too. What do you think that closed-off-from-the-world pervy scanner's peeping box is for, hm?
The real problem, however, is that it's all security theatre. It doesn't do anything worthwhile. The hassle does the same thing that comfort noise does for voip and cellular phone connections. It assures you that "something is being done" without having the slightest connection as to whether something is actually being done or not.
There is, however, very real damage to some unlucky if otherwise innocent victims. This makes the whole thing a net drain on the economy and on society. Moreover, the very few things that have happened since the theatre began and that actually have improved security turn out to be among the absolute cheapest things to happen in the space. This makes value-for-money overall very poor. Spectacularly so, in fact.
So the correct lesson to draw from this is not to do what is always being done in such cases, to "beef up security. Instead what should, nay must, happen now, finally, it's long overdue, is to review what we really want out of our "security investments" and implement just that.
This would mean that quite a lot of measures can go, and quite a lot of manpower will no longer be allowed to harass travelers, and quite a lot of amazing pervy scanning equipment will turn out to have no further purpose except maybe as a gimmick in kinky clubs. It'd mean the end of numerous databases and that we no longer need those chips in our passports, and a host of "data-sharing" peepery that really didn't bought us anything would have to be stopped too. Which all in turn means that it'll never happen before the current world order collapses under its own obesity. But that is what the correct course of action would mean.