Slashdot Mirror
US Airport Screeners Missed 95% of Weapons, Explosives In Undercover Tests
An anonymous reader writes: An internal investigation by the TSA found that 95% of agents testing airport checkpoints were able to bring weapons through. In one case, an alarm sounded, but during the pat down, the screener failed to detect a fake plastic explosive taped to the undercover agent's back. ABC reports: "Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson was apparently so frustrated by the findings he sought a detailed briefing on them last week at TSA headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, according to sources. U.S. officials insisted changes have already been made at airports to address vulnerabilities identified by the latest tests. 'Upon learning the initial findings of the Office of Inspector General's report, Secretary Johnson immediately directed TSA to implement a series of actions, several of which are now in place, to address the issues raised in the report,' the DHS said in a written statement to ABC News."
Sometimes I think the governments are simply trying to spend themselves into the kind of debt that breaks the banking system. But that doesn't seem to be happening.
...Steve
It was about creating another welfare program.
Cheese and rice!
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
All this means is that they failed to find FAKE plastic explosives and the like, not that they wouldn't find real stuff.
Do a real test!
But they did manage to grope 8 out of 10 Grandmas and 5 out of 10 toddlers.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I've seen various comments/analysis on other sites about how unsafe this makes people feel. My response was completely the opposite: security is completely ineffective yet it's quite rare for terrorists to blow up airliners. Conclusion: terrorists don't pose a massive threat to our safety and we can do away with all the infringements of our liberties made in the name of safety from terrorists.
Although, no doubt, the government will see it as an excuse to make airport security fondle your bollocks for a minimum of 30 seconds; after all, we've got to stop all those terrorists that aren't blowing up planes from blowing up planes!
On a positive note: in 5% of the times it worked all the time.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
My point is that the methods (and level of "fake enemy") on those "friendly" security checks are very different from what most people (most "bad guys" included) will ever use.
Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
You stop terrorists by first knowing who is getting on the planes in the first place. This is how Israel secures its airports. They know who you are before you even show up at the airport. They have multiple layers of people that are trained to spot suspicious behavior and act upon it.
The second thing you do is give the plane an ability to defend itself when it is attacked. Let us just assume the terrorists get on the plane with whatever. What is the plane going to do to defend itself. I refer to the passengers, the flight attendants, the pilots, etc. What can they do to shut it down when it happens?
The funniest thing that has come out of 9/11 is that the government was actually totally useless and that people... just people are far more useful. Because what is actually stopping terrorist attacks is that you cannot take over a plane like they did on 9/11 anymore. What allowed that to happen was that passengers didn't know what the terrorists were going to do. They thought the plane was going to Cuba or something. They didn't know they were going to be murdered en mass to murder thousands of other people. If you tried to do 9/11 today... the passengers would rip the terrorists apart. No government agency required.
The TSA is at most stopping Richard Reed type attacks where someone just wants to blow the plane up. But you can't fly those planes into anything anymore because the passengers will just kill you.
Here is my solution:
1. Require a special ID to use commercial airplanes. The ID would require that you are on a list and they know who you are... transport on the system is not a right. If you're a suspicious person then the system might just say "take a bus". By all means open the system up to due process so if you think you're on a ban list then you can fight that in court. The system might also flag certain people out for more security when they show up at the security gate. So you'd still get to be on the plane but you personally would be going through extra security because the system doesn't trust you.
2. Give flight attendants and pilots some defense training. That includes possibly giving them weapons. I have no problem for example with the pilot having a gun. If he can fly the plane into a mountain then he can be have a machine gun for all I care. He's fully capable of killing everyone on the plane as well as whomever is on the ground when the plane strikes. So give him a gun. If you want it to be one of those subsonic jobs that don't penetrate very far, that is fine. But lets not pretend the pilot can't kill everyone. He can.
3. Upgrade the computer security on those planes. You shouldn't be able to control the auto pilot through the entertainment network accessed by wifi. That was fucking pathetic.
4. The actual gate security can probably go back to what it was before 9/11 with the addition of checking special IDs and subjecting people to additional security if they're on a list. The vast majority of people would have much less to worry about.
Things that would cause someone to get flagged... non-citizens might be inherently less trustworthy. Various age brackets and genders... if you're an old woman then you're just less likely to be a problem. That sort of thing. Of course this should link to the FBI and the NSA and the CIA so that if any of those groups had an issue with someone, then they could independently flag someone for the TSA.
My objective here is to keep as many people safe as possible while maintaining the effiency of the transport network. Some people might say "this will lead to profiling and profiling is wrong"... profiling is a basic aspect of criminal investigation and intelligence work. Ever see Silence of the Lambs? It was about an FBI serial killer PROFILER. Profiling is fine so long as it isn't stupid. Profiling on the basis of race for example is stupid especially when that is the only variable. It can BE a variable so long as there is a reason for it. I'm not sure what reason you could use to justify it... but I'm open
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
It's impossible to stop all terrorists. We're simply reacting to the last attack, because there's no realistic way to stop the next one.
Profiling might be somewhat useful, but it's doubtful. Disallowing large/serious weapons on a plane is a good thing simply because, without some amplification of strength, the numbers are wildly against any single attacker. Simple security is sufficient.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The testers also are just devising the hardest tests they can, ...
Hmm... Hardest tests? From TFS:
In one case, an alarm sounded, but during the pat down, the screener failed to detect a fake plastic explosive taped to the undercover agent's back.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Easy, because too many people in the general population thing it is a good thing that they are "At least trying to do something", and "What ever it takes to keep us safe". There is also a running theme where if a politician speak out about these things they get questioned in the media about how would they feel if a terror attack happened and it is implied that the blame would be placed on them. Love Rand Paul or hate him at least he has had the spine to provide a retort to these kind of accusations when they were leveled at him after his actions on Sunday over the PATRIOT act.
The solution is to make it so that the politicians know that this is unacceptable. This can be done by contacting them by mail, e-mail, and phone, writing letters to the editor, talking to their campaign people and letting them know when they are out glad handing for votes, but all of this requires effort. Also even if the majority of people don't hold the position most are still apathetic so all that is needed is to give the impression that the majority (a very vocal minority) is against this and things will change, probably slower than we want. It helps if a few get bounced out of office in very public ways like getting primaried out in a safe seat. This requires more effort as one has to get enough people to show up a a prescient level to get a candidate on the ballot, and then get enough people out in the primary to get rid of the incumbent. The TEA Party did this with a number of republicans so it could be done again, but should be done in both parties so they both get the picture.
Time to offend someone
What you're saying is that most criminals are dumb, and that's why security manages to catch them. Smart criminals are unlikely to get caught.
If we accept that as true, and if we are willing to accept that life is never totally risk free, then all of TSA and Homeland Security could be abolished. Then the rest of the world could also stop complying with the idiotic restrictions (liquids, etc.) initiated by the US.
Anyway, there is absolutely no evidence that security today is any better than it was pre-9/11. Without the security theater, we would save such huge amounts of time. I still remember fondly being able to show up at the airport 30 minutes before flight departure, show my ticket, walk onto the airplane. That's the way is was, and the way it should be again.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
According to this poll http://www.harrisinteractive.c..., about 57% of frequent flyers believe the current TSA procedures are making it safer to fly. The other 43% recognize them for the theatrics that they are.
Sure, they find their fair share of fake novelty hand grenades and medieval weaponry in checked baggage. They even once saved a plane from the pudding cup my daughter left in her backpack (which naturally earned her a pat-down). But what the TSA was really doing was keeping a major mode of transportation operational for a brief time of uncertainty. As with all things government, the project's scope began to creep and pockets got lined while we stood in a line to have our pockets felt by a creep.
57% think the TSA is money well spent. That is the metric by which the TSA measures itself.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
In billions. Total=$61B
Departmental Operations 748,024
Analysis and Operations(A&O) 302,268
Office of the Inspector General (OIG) 145,457
U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) 12,764,835
U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) 5,359,065
Transportation Security Administration(TSA) 7,305,098
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) 9,796,995
U.S. Secret Service (USSS) 1,895,905
National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) 2,857,666
Office of Health Affairs (OHA) 125,767
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 12,496,517
FEMA: Grant Programs 2,225,469
U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) 3,259,885
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) 259,595
Science &Technology Directorate (S&T) 1,071,818
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) 304,423
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/defa...
If a terrorist wants to blow up a plane, they use a Surface to Air Missile from just outside the airport.
If they want to hijack a plane, it won't work anymore because the doors are heavily locked - any explosive capable of opening the cockpit door will crash the plane.
The routinely miss liquids - water, suntan lotion, etc. I traveled with someone that packed suntan lotion in a carry on bag and they missed it. They found and took the blade out of his safety razor, but missed the suntan lotion.
Even their own original studies claim that any benefit is far exceeded by the cost. The basic rule for MOST government agencies is if the cost exceeds $1 million per life saved, don't bother - smoke detectors cost $210,000 per life saved. http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Courses/UCSBpf/readings/interventions.pdf
But the TSA argues they should be allowed to spend $10 million per life saved - and admit they actually cost $180 million per life saved. https://www.schneier.com/blog/...
Their budget should be cut to 1% of what it currently is, that way we will only be spending twice what we spend on other industries to save lives.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
..which is NOT to detect weapons.
They're trained to detect common tools, water bottles, and other harmless items to harass people. This performance is what is incentivized and reinforced, so that's what is optimized.
Security theatre doesn't work. Security that works offends people.
C'est la vie. Shoes off!
..don't panic
So do CEOs and politicians.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.