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

United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

simpleflying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#181

Post by JumpCrisscross »

koolba wrote: post #92
xrd wrote: post #85

What's to prevent terrorists from going through TSA, waiting in the scanning line when everyone is still going through, and then planting a bluetooth device into someone else's bag? I never open my carryon once I have packed it. This reminds me of the SNL sketch where TSA employees had no answer for someone bringing two separate bottles of 3.9 ounces onto the plane. I'm sure Sean Duffy, of Real World and now Sec of T…

> What's to prevent terrorists from going through TSA, waiting in the scanning line when everyone is still going through, and then planting a bluetooth device into someone else's bag? I never open my carryon once I have packed it. I make it a point to hold up the whole line until it is my turn to go through the xray. It gets fun when they mandate a pat down in lieu of the millimeter wave scanner but refuse to have so…

> make it a point to hold up the whole line until it is my turn to go through the xray

How? I’ve seen idiots do this. I just go around and ahead of them.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#182

Post by throwaway27727 »

analogpixel wrote: post #151

I pine for the day when news is this: - Flight 767 returned to airport after seeing a bluetooth device named "BOMB" - After asking all passengers multiple times to turn off all devices and not getting the "BOMB" to go away, they flight had to return to the airport where officials were waiting to search the plane. - This was not intentional, but a product that calls it self "BOMB" https://hellottec.com/product/bomb-po…

The product website has been hugged to death.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#184

Post by hgoel »

thrownthatway wrote: post #143
hvb2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's because in the US they're handling the international flights separately. It's also the reason why even when you have a layover, you need to clear customs. Domestic flights in the US are like busses/trains elsewhere. Most people fly without a checked bag

[flagged]

Most domestic flights are short duration trips, a week's worth of clothes fit in carry-on suitcase, and the other stuff (laptop etc) can go in a backpack.

In all my domestic flights in the past year they've had to ask people at the gate to volunteer their carry-on suitcase to be checked into the hold because they didn't expect to have enough room in the overhead bins.

I usually volunteer because: it's free, I don't mind waiting at the pickup, and it's slightly more comfortable when getting off the plane.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#185

Post by ZeWaka »

umvi wrote: post #107
xrd wrote: post #85

What's to prevent terrorists from going through TSA, waiting in the scanning line when everyone is still going through, and then planting a bluetooth device into someone else's bag? I never open my carryon once I have packed it. This reminds me of the SNL sketch where TSA employees had no answer for someone bringing two separate bottles of 3.9 ounces onto the plane. I'm sure Sean Duffy, of Real World and now Sec of T…

Seems like an effective DoS attack - ground all planes in the US by sneaking cheap bluetooth speakers into people's luggage with provacative device names

Doesn't even need to be a speaker. Just a battery and transmitter.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#186

Post by NamTaf »

hvb2 wrote: post #131
bruce511 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an aside, this is something I've only seen in the US. At least in my country the domestic baggage claim area is not accessible unless from an arriving aircraft. I'm guessing that has more to do with theft though than security.

No, that's because in the US they're handling the international flights separately. It's also the reason why even when you have a layover, you need to clear customs. Domestic flights in the US are like busses/trains elsewhere. Most people fly without a checked bag

Most of the world handles international flights separately without needing to do that unless it is an international-domestic connection.

However I agree that in purely domestic airports I don't see how you'd prevent general public from accessing bags. Except India, wherein you need a booked flight to even enter the airport.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#187

Post by JumpCrisscross »

diab0lic wrote: post #134
Insanity wrote: post #130

Which bomb would advertise itself as such.. this is something I’d expect in the movie Airplane!, not something to happen in real life.

I completely agree from a logical perspective. However if the plane blew up and it came out that some passengers had posted online that there was a “bomb” blue tooth device and they didn’t turn around… the court of public opinion would be pretty harsh. This was more or less their only choice from a liability perspective.

> if the plane blew up and it came out that some passengers had posted online that there was a “bomb” blue tooth device and they didn’t turn around

This story is just stupid. If you actually think you have a bomb onboard, you divert to the nearest airport. (And if you think you discovered a bomb accidentally left discoverable, you don’t ask for it to be please turned off.)

The pilots and crew knew they were being idiots. Whether due to power tripping or CYA, who knows, but I’m not surprised this happened on United.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#188

Post by epolanski »

> During this incident, a Wi-Fi hotspot named "Free Palestine, F Zionists" prompted the pilot to issue a warning to the cabin, telling the passenger responsible that they had "30 seconds" to remove the name or the FBI would meet the aircraft.

Wtf?

I can understand a bomb, but this is just free speech.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#189

Post by Eridrus »

neilv wrote: post #178

I once consulted on some aviation-related software (not the safety work prominent on my resume), and a company announcement came through, that you must never use a few specific words commonly heard in software development. The two no-no words I recall were "crash" and "bomb". Don't write them in code or documents, don't say them on the phone or videoconf, etc. Those terms have senses that people in aviation take extr…

This is trying to sanewash totally insane levels of risk aversion.

Do you think terrorists are really going to name their Bluetooth speaker "bomb"? Do you think this behaviour has any meaningful true positives?

This is the kind of brainworms thinking that has people throwing our their 150ml liquids out at TSA and taking their shoes off.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#190

Post by rglullis »

analogpixel wrote: post #167
monkeywork wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love that as well - can we not get LLMs to summerize and give us non-click bait versions of these events.

We can, we just have to pay the $0.05 per articles to do it, and some articles aren't even worth the $0.05.

I wouldn't mind paying $20/month to https://wikinews.org to help them build a system that indexed news from different sources, threw the links at an LLM summarizer and used as a draft submission to wikinews.
Post reply on HN