Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

blipsystems.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 102 posts

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#51

Post by mikeash »

macNchz wrote: post #20
digi_owl wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if spoofed, a MAC has to be (locally) unique or else you run into all kinds of network issues. As for spoofed on phones, maybe if you have root. But i doubt it comes spoofed out of the box (at least i have never heard of such a thing).

As of last year iOS devices do randomize their MAC address when polling for nearby WiFi, specifically to foil this kind of tracking. Here's an interesting breakdown of what is actually happening: http://blog.airtightnetworks.com/ios8-mac-randomization-anal...

Nice link! From what it describes, I don't think this will be too much of a problem for a tracking system like this. The randomized MAC is only changed when the phone is put to sleep for at least 120 seconds. It stays constant while sleeping, or while active. So if you're on your phone from start to finish (as a lot of people do) or if you leave it in your pocket from start to finish, you'll be tracked fine. Only if you use your phone, put it to sleep, and leave it asleep for at least two minutes all while in the line will you defeat this. And while that's certainly something people will do, plenty of people won't, so the tracking can use those.

This all sounds pretty good to me. Short-term tracking like this is useful and not very invasive. The randomization will still defeat long-term invasive tracking, like a store recognizing you from past visits and building up a database of your individual activity from that.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#52

Post by mikeash »

digi_owl wrote: post #19
harmegido wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're concern is not foremost for the safety of the passengers. The main concern is airplanes going into buildings. Of course, this is definitely an example of fighting the last war. On a separate note, the TSA really pisses me off. Consider that UPS saves millions by not taking left turns. Removing or adding very small inefficiencies at a very large scale has tremendous cost implications. I don't think the…

IF you look at airport security, it is always about fighting the last war. The limitation on liquids comes a lone bomber bringing a liquid binary explosive onboard in the toiletry. the issue with shoes, again another bomber. matching luggage to passengers i believe is because of Lockerbie. And the list goes on and on.

If you're in a position to make these decisions, your career will be wrecked if an attack is repeated successfully, but you'll probably be just fine if a new attack gets through.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#53

Post by Thriptic »

spigoon wrote: post #31
RobotCaleb wrote: post #12

Of what use is this information to the people standing in line? "Oh, it's 30 minutes. I guess I'll hurry."

In Austin's airport there are several security lines that you can choose from. Each line shows its average wait time as well as the average wait time for the other lines. It's helpful to be able to see that the lines closest to you is 20 minutes but the line just down the terminal is only 5 minutes.

Brilliant. This should be implemented everywhere.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#54

Post by 6d0debc071 »

gorena wrote: post #2

Serious question: if there is a 16 minute queue for "security", why wouldn't a potential terrorist just wheel up a carry on sized bomb and detonate it in the middle of the "security" line? Is this something that the TSA addresses (I assume not), or do they just ignore the possibility? All they've done is move the soft target further out.

I imagine the reasoning goes somewhat to the effect of:

If a plane goes down, it's reasonable to expect that everyone on board will die. It's less reasonable to expect that the blast radius of a device that was sufficient to down an aircraft would be sufficient to encompass an equivalent number of people in the security line.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#55

Post by omouse »

forgottenpass wrote: post #45

When a device passes the beacons, its non-personal unique ID—called a MAC address—is recorded, encrypted and time-stamped. Blip, you make me laugh. You know this will raise privacy concerns and say the sweet nothings that placate the general public, but inspire no confidence in people who know what those words mean. I'm not here to say that as a JFK traveler I'm unhappy with the privacy considerations. I just want to…

Aren't MAC addresses supposed to be globally unique? That's the most personal it can get, right?

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#56

Post by Thriptic »

rayiner wrote: post #42
harmegido wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're concern is not foremost for the safety of the passengers. The main concern is airplanes going into buildings. Of course, this is definitely an example of fighting the last war. On a separate note, the TSA really pisses me off. Consider that UPS saves millions by not taking left turns. Removing or adding very small inefficiencies at a very large scale has tremendous cost implications. I don't think the…

It's not like we didn't have airport security lines before the TSA. And with the new millimeter wave machines I'm not sure if they're appreciably slower than the old metal detector setup. The bottleneck was always putting your luggage through the X-ray, and we've had that for as long as I can remember.

I don't have the data to back it up, but from what I have personally seen, the bottleneck is now predominantly the body scanner, mostly because many airports are running a setup where they have two x-ray baggage detector lines feeding into one body scanner.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#57

Post by forgottenpass »

gorena wrote: post #2

Serious question: if there is a 16 minute queue for "security", why wouldn't a potential terrorist just wheel up a carry on sized bomb and detonate it in the middle of the "security" line? Is this something that the TSA addresses (I assume not), or do they just ignore the possibility? All they've done is move the soft target further out.

When it comes to designing airport safety, instilling the feeling of safety in travelers is a more important goal than actual safety. This is a sorta-open-secret.

We can sit around and come up with thousands of possible attacks scenarios with less than 1% of the security that goes into preventing airplane hijackings. But that doesn't really matter. Airport security is primarily a political item, both responding to political pressures and fears, while generating entirely new ones.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#58

Post by Thriptic »

Another simple thing that could be done to increase efficiency is have notices upstream in the security line instructing people to remove their shoes / belts and store their personal items like phones before they get to the conveyor belt used to feed items into the x-ray baggage scanner (assuming this is still a relevant bottleneck). A lot of time is needlessly wasted by people who start this process when they first hit the front of the security line.

Re: JFK Displays Actual Wait Times Using Beacons That Monitor Mobile Phones

#59

Post by molotv »

smackfu wrote: post #37
gorena wrote: post #2

Serious question: if there is a 16 minute queue for "security", why wouldn't a potential terrorist just wheel up a carry on sized bomb and detonate it in the middle of the "security" line? Is this something that the TSA addresses (I assume not), or do they just ignore the possibility? All they've done is move the soft target further out.

At a lot of more risky countries, they do x-ray / metal detector every passenger at the airport entrance. I assume that's to prevent targeting concentrations of foreign tourists.

In Newark, past the TSA checkpoints, the Tel Aviv gate has its own secondary screening with barricades, wands & pat-downs for everyone. I suspect that is because of actual threats and a desire for real security.
Post reply on HN