41–50 of 88 posts
Laptop bans are such a horrible idea. Yes, entrust a $2000+ dollar piece of hardware (with important software and files) to someone who is barely paid enough to care what happens to it.
>"The department of Homeland Security initiated the ban in March. It came into effect covering all flights to U.S. destinations from 10 airports in the Middle East, including major travel hubs like Dubai, Abu Dabi and Dohar." So how would a ban at flights originating at these airports prevent someone from exploiting this on a flight with a layover in this airport i.e while the plane was in route to one of these 10 ai…
The government has made pretty clear over the last few months that the reason for the ban was intelligence that jihadist groups had made progress towards developing a laptop bomb. It is pretty reasonable for them to withhold details in order to protect sources and intelligence-gathering techniques.
"Evaluated intelligence indicates that terrorist groups continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks"[1]
It says nothing about them making progress. Also that's a pretty nebulous statement. "Evaluated intelligence indicates"? Why not share the details with the public in the form of a redacted report?
Could you imagine the Surgeon General in the US issuing a statement that some food causes cancer and then not releasing any of the details? Of course not.
Withholding details that allow your citizens to make their own informed decisions regarding their safety and welfare is unacceptable.
Also did anyone ever assume that terrorists had stopped being interested in damaging aircraft? We are reminded of that every time we fly in the US and are berated and abused by TSA personal. So this isn't really a new development is it?
[1] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/03/21/fact-sheet-aviation-secu...
I'm not sure if this has hit the US news, but from a few days go in Argentina news, the US is going to require special scanners in the airports in other countries (Spanish article, English translation below): http://www.iprofesional.com/notas/252113-computadoras-tecnol... "The United States government will strengthen security measures for people traveling to that country with computers and tablets. Official sources f…
This is making me worried. When i was a student at mit, we had trips to boeing facilities in seattle. One time, i was again selected randomly for explosive trace sample collection from hands. I dont know what it was, but when they put the tissue in the machine, the machine showed a blinking text saying explosive detected. The tsa agent(iirc) paniced, tried to call out his supervisor while trying to keep an eye on me.…
>"The department of Homeland Security initiated the ban in March. It came into effect covering all flights to U.S. destinations from 10 airports in the Middle East, including major travel hubs like Dubai, Abu Dabi and Dohar." So how would a ban at flights originating at these airports prevent someone from exploiting this on a flight with a layover in this airport i.e while the plane was in route to one of these 10 ai…
The reason why that information is not disclosed is not because they don't want their citizens to know. They don't want others to know; that's when it would actually compromise the security.
Please provide one single example where communication and sharing of information with one's fellow citizens made them less safe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, lets put those laptop bombs in the hold.
The amount of explosive you can fit into a laptop (and have it not be obvious) isn't a lot. So it works best if you can place the laptop directly against the hull of the aircraft. Putting it in the hold makes that less likely to happen. So while not optimal, putting them in the hold is an improvement.
That said I'm not advocating this ban at all, I think it's yet another in a long series of overreactions. But to imply that it couldn't be done is asinine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The amount of explosive you can fit into a laptop (and have it not be obvious) isn't a lot. So it works best if you can place the laptop directly against the hull of the aircraft. Putting it in the hold makes that less likely to happen. So while not optimal, putting them in the hold is an improvement.
Hah, have you seen the "gaming" laptops out there, if you even replaces half of the battery with something like c4 it could easily blow a hole in a plane. That said I'm not advocating this ban at all, I think it's yet another in a long series of overreactions. But to imply that it couldn't be done is asinine.
That isn't called for. Clearly you disagree, which is fine, but there's no need for a personal attack.
Here's what happened with a laptop bomb that was placed against the hull on a Somali flight: http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160203180228-plane-... As it happens, it only killed the bomber.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government has made pretty clear over the last few months that the reason for the ban was intelligence that jihadist groups had made progress towards developing a laptop bomb. It is pretty reasonable for them to withhold details in order to protect sources and intelligence-gathering techniques.
No they haven' made it pretty clear that "jihadist groups had made progress." Please provide a citation for that. The official TSA website states: "Evaluated intelligence indicates that terrorist groups continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks"[1] It says nothing about them making progress. Also that's a pretty nebulous statement. "Evaluated in…
I think the ban is stupid, but they actually have had significant intelligence that (a) they have stolen scanning equipment they are using in the development of explosives so they can avoid detection and (b) they have developed newer laptop bombs that are more dangerous and harder to detect. It took me literally 30 seconds on Google to find an article detailing it with links: http://heavy.com/news/2017/05/isis-laptop-bomb-threat-planes...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, lets put those laptop bombs in the hold.
The amount of explosive you can fit into a laptop (and have it not be obvious) isn't a lot. So it works best if you can place the laptop directly against the hull of the aircraft. Putting it in the hold makes that less likely to happen. So while not optimal, putting them in the hold is an improvement.
Yes, putting laptops in the hold it is an improvement, assuming your attack vector is intentionally placed small explosives. Randomly placed large explosives, or large explosives placed intentionally by an insider, might be as effective or more so. But I know jack shit about the design of airplanes so I have no idea if this is the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So how would a ban at flights originating at these airports prevent someone from exploiting this on a flight with a layover in this airport i.e while the plane was in route to one of these 10 airports? Have you been to a middle east hub? There's a specific security section you have to go through to get to the US bound flights - it's a completely different screening process and would be quite easy easy for them to c…
Yes, I have flow though Doha many times. The fact that their might be special facilities there doesn't stop someone from damaging a flight en route to that airport with extra security equipment.
