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

Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

professional-troublemaker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 124 posts

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#81

Post by cstejerean »

coredog64 wrote: post #51
jaclaz wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, but that applies (maybe) to the US. What about any other country, for the sake of the example, Wherevereristan ? Do they have the same rules?

If you fly into the US, it is more than likely that not only will you have to clear airport security provided by the host country, you will also have to go through security provided by the US. It will be US equipment and US citizens operating it. So in that sense, if Whereveristan wants to sell the airport X-ray equipment they can get, it isn't going to be useful in determining what can pass US screening.

That's highly unlikely for most places in the world. What is often required is additional screening at or near the gate to enforce US specific rules (for example liquids in carry-ons). But that's usually not US staff and US equipment but rather extra staff enforcing US specific rules (the same way the laptop ban is currently enforced in Dubai for example).

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#82

Post by cstejerean »

koenigdavidmj wrote: post #3

Hey look, a security crisis that can only be fixed by requiring that we prove our devices are functional, most likely by turning them on, logging in, and showing that there are a few documents present. And in some cases, extra manual evaluation will be required, entailing taking that logged-in laptop into a back room for further inspection. They won't copy everything onto a disk of their own---honest!

I've already had to do this on several occasions of flying into the US before the laptop ban. There were signs at the airport saying that all electronic devices being brought on board had to had sufficient power to be turned on to be checked. I've also seem similar signs at courtrooms in the US for checking cell phones when going through security. It seems like a more sensible approach than banning the entire laptop.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#83

Post by chucksmash »

jetti wrote: post #62
leggomylibro wrote: post #7

>So why was the stolen x-ray equipment kept a secret? I asked my source if there was some security reason for keeping the stolen x-ray equipment from the public, and was told, unequivocally, no. “It’s because the mom from the midwest planning to fly her kids to Disney would freak out. They are worried that people would stop flying if they knew.” Kind of ironic, because I've already stopped flying - not because I'm af…

"If I absolutely must travel, I take a train or drive. " The problem with train is it is expensive and time consuming in the States. I could take a train from Chicago to Orlando and it would take around 30 hours and cost just as much, if not more, than a plane ticket. Not only that, the 19 hour second leg of the ride has no food car.

This is exactly the thought that occurred to me, except for New York to Atlanta.

I've looked into taking the train a couple of times and balked each time at the idea of paying the same price for 10-15x the transit time. 40 hours in transit is going to be a non-starter for so many kinds of trips, unless you're specifically doing something like [1] where the transit is the whole point of the trip.

[1]: http://www.viarail.ca/en/explore-our-destinations/trains/roc...

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#84

Post by tsaoutourpants »

dvdhnt wrote: post #77
Animats wrote: post #32

The secrecy issue has gotten out of hand. The classic military view of secrecy is time-limited. "Where the ship was last week is unclassified. Where the ship was yesterday is confidential. Where the ship is now is secret. Where the ship will be tomorrow is top secret." The opposition will eventually find out what you're planning on doing. The goal is for them to find out the hard way, when incoming fire starts hittin…

This is wrong. The classification level of information is determined by confidentiality of the information's source. This is done to protect deeply embedded or highly technical means of information gathering. For example, information that could have only come from the second in command of some organization would require the highest of security classifications whereas information that could have come from any dozens o…

It is certainly correct that DHS, and to some extent our government generally, is known for over-classifying things either out of laziness, desire to avoid embarrassment, or because they believe that anything remotely security related needs to be hidden. As an intelligence analyst, you likely didn't see the misclassified things (I'd imagine roughly everything you did was classified for good reason). It's the political officials who are more likely to over-classify.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#85

Post by tsaoutourpants »

askvictor wrote: post #72
suihkulokki wrote: post #39

This article seems to miss the fact ISIS took over Mosul international airport in 2014. Surely they got luggage screening machines in hand by then already.

My guess would be that the gear at Mosul would not be as advanced as elsewhere.

Well, for whatever reason, they stole more equipment more recently. Could be that the new stuff is more advanced, or maybe we bombed the gear they took from Mosul. I don't have more details that would provide insight.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#86

Post by tsaoutourpants »

kmonsen wrote: post #50
tsaoutourpants wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fifth Amendment still applies in the "constitution free zone." The name is a bit exaggerated by the ACLU to make their point. No matter where you are, the U.S.government cannot force you to speak as a condition of flying home. Just be quiet rather than deceitful.

I don't think this is true. If some government agent tells the pilot you are a "security risk" for any reason you are not going on that plane or if you are already in it they will drag you out. The plane is a private property so you can be taken of for any reason.

Respectfully, you are mistaken. Private airlines are "common carriers" and are required to play nice with the public, and you're conflating "whether the private carrier wouldn't want to take you" with "whether US CBP wants to see the contents of your laptop."

I actually filed suit over the former back in 2015. AA told me they wouldn't let me fly home unless I answered their "security questions." The case was resolved quickly when everyone (AA and DHS) did an about-face and said whoever told me I wouldn't be allowed to fly was mistaken.

https://professional-troublemaker.com/2015/02/23/corbett-sue...

The US may not refuse entry to its own citizens, even if they insist on remaining silent. They can detain you to be searched on arrival, but they must, after completing that search, admit you to the country.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#87

Post by tsaoutourpants »

15155 wrote: post #75
tsaoutourpants wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. See my comment below to djmdjm, but also, I'll add one more thing. Take a knife out of your kitchen drawer and hold it in your hand in front of you such that the sharp side of the blade is on the left and the dull side is on the right. Easy to see. Now rotate it 90 degrees such that the sharp side is facing you and the dull side is facing away. Much harder to see, especially if you can imagine what it would look…

Angle-shifting units make this harder, but the obvious blindspot is the conveyor belt entrance/exit holes (they cannot have imaging equipment in them).

Exactly. Imaging devices all have blind spots, which is how I was able to defeat the TSA's body scanners in 2012.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#88

Post by astrodust »

zkms wrote: post #69

Read this paper as well https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurit... -- the researchers who wrote it obtained (on the surplus market) the same model of backscatter X-ray body scanner that was deployed in US airports and proceeded to evaluate and validate various schemes for undetectable concealment of firearms, knives, and explosives. Other research was done, including a software implant that would…

Ceramic, glass and plastic knives can be extremely dangerous and yet they probably don't show up on these machines at all. The utility of these machines is questionable to say the least.

Bruce Schneier observed, like you did, that the heavily secured cockpit door is one of the only real improvements made to airplane security in the last few decades.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#89

Post by tsaoutourpants »

stevenwoo wrote: post #58
tsaoutourpants wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuck Elon Musk, can you design a tool that would make airport security better? I bet in 15 minutes, most HN readers could come up with something that would be cheaper, more effective, and faster to use than the current tool set. There's indeed money to be made here (and good to be done), even if the easiest way would be to patent your idea and sell it to the military industrial complex you speak of. Fun fact: the par…

There is a model that we already know works in practice but it's not cheaper or faster and it would generate a lot of income for security/airport renovation companies at the cost of much higher ticket costs to pay for it - the Israeli model. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/01/adopting_the_...

The Israeli model requires ethnic and religious discrimination. It is not an option in the US, nor should it be.

Re: Laptop Ban a Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

#90

Post by vkou »

simonh wrote: post #78
mtgx wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then the CIA allied again with alQaeda when fighting Assad. And round and round it goes. Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker every time.

They didn't 'ally with Al Qaeda', they just both happened to be opposed to the same guy while also being opposed to each other. It's a complicated situation out there. Even at the height of the Cold War, sometimes the CIA and KGB would share information of mutual benefit. That didn't mean the CIA was allying with communism. Even Trump has learned this when his 'bombing Syria is the wrong thing to do, what Assad gets…

And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group.'

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that we are being primed for the CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists, in order to combat Russian influence in the Middle East. Again.

Post reply on HN