Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA • Hacker News Board

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#41

Post by ims » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:20 PM UTC

dpeck wrote: post #29

ims wrote: post #27

This article makes some big leaps. It says in the fourth paragraph: "Since 9/11, the U.S. has spent more than $1.1 trillion on homeland security." It seems to imply that this is mostly because of wasteful TSA-like spending. The Department of Homeland Security's FY11 budget authority was around $56 bil. The TSA only accounted for 14% of that money. [1] Just for perspective -- top 5 slices of DHS's FY11 pie: U.S. Custo…

There have been quite a few articles over the last decade pointing out that the creation of DHS as a whole has been quite a waste of time and money with little benefit. Katrina showed many of the problems with FEMA, though it seems to have improved since then. I'm not sure why enforcement of fisheries conservation belongs under DHS, and as someone who does a good bit of offshore fishing I'm not very happy with they w…

You're probably thinking of the National Marine Fisheries Service under NOAA for recreational fishing (under Dept. of Commerce, not Homeland Security). The Coast Guard, under DHS, enforces Magnuson-Stevens and the other conservation acts farther offshore where the commercial vessels fish.

And your point is well taken about DHS (as a department), but administrative organization seems to me to be a completely different problem than sinister-sounding "security theater," which is how the article paints pretty much all efforts associated with "homeland security".

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#42

Post by siphor » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:29 PM UTC

nathanb wrote: post #22

I'm a little disappointed with the article when compared to my expectations given the title. Besides using a fraudulent boarding pass, the journo didn't "test" the TSA in any meaningful way. This wasn't like the experiment where a guy got a gun on a plane using his wheelchair, for example. While the article has great information and I agree with almost all of it, I would like to see people demonstrating the uselessne…

Like three weeks ago I was leaving vegas and accidentally left a pocket knife (4" blade) in my bag.. I opted out of the full body scan, (rumors of cancer, and the line was shorter) for a pat down... it's an intense pat down im pretty sure they definitely touched some private sensitive areas, they also left the 4" knife in my bag theres tons of stories like this too..

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#43

Post by MichaelGG » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:32 PM UTC

awj wrote: post #39

yread wrote: post #26

I don't understand. The agents at the gate always check the boarding pass validity (with the code scanner) and check the name on it against my ID. I haven't tried it but i can imagine that the system wouldn't allow two boarding passes with the same code. Is it that here in Europe we do things properly or did I misunderstood the faking of the boarding pass?

A quick how-to on bypassing the TSA no-fly list: 1. Buy a plane ticket under someone else's name. Presumably yours is blocked/flagged due to the airlines being able to check the no-fly list. 2. Use that ticket to forge a boarding pass in your name. Use this, along with your official ID, at the security checkpoint. All the TSA does is read it and validate date/time/what the know of flights off the top of their head. N…

I think the no-fly has even more issues than just circumvention [1]. Schneier calls it "a list of people so dangerous they cannot be allowed to fly under any circumstance, yet so innocent we can't arrest them even under the Patriot Act"[2].

1: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/10/nofly_list.htm...

2: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/08/conversation_w...

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#44

Post by martingordon » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:36 PM UTC

pppp wrote: post #2

I'm afraid most of what the government does is theater - meant to distract us while they line their own pockets.

You're afraid. Mission accomplished.

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#45

Post by Lagged2Death » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:48 PM UTC

nathanb wrote: post #22

I'm a little disappointed with the article when compared to my expectations given the title. Besides using a fraudulent boarding pass, the journo didn't "test" the TSA in any meaningful way. This wasn't like the experiment where a guy got a gun on a plane using his wheelchair, for example. While the article has great information and I agree with almost all of it, I would like to see people demonstrating the uselessne…

It's a demonstration that the TSA cannot actually perform the functions it's supposed to be performing. In that sense it is a test.

If getting though security with fraudulent identification is not a problem, why does the TSA bother to attempt to prevent it?

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#46

Post by ams6110 » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:54 PM UTC

pitdesi wrote: post #4

DrJ wrote: post #3

I wish we could get rid of the TSA and spend that resources somewhere else, CIA, FBI, NSA, hell send it to DoE, NSF, maybe fund (more) research in practical(?) renewable energy. But killing the TSA is never going to happen. No career politician is going to commit political harikiri to shut it down. - I do not mind the free hand rubs at the airports though.

Completely agree with you, except for one point... Ron Paul (a republican candidate for president) wants to abolish the TSA: http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/tsa/188271-ro... This is not a place for political discussion (so please don't make it one, people!), but he certainly qualifies as a career politician, having been in congress 35 years. EDIT: lots of downvotes... I'm just stating a fact in respons…

what is the cause for your downvoting

Probably people reading an endorsement of Ron Paul in your post, though none is really there.

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#47

Post by ams6110 » Wed, Dec 21, 2011, 11:56 PM UTC

spolsky wrote: post #31

yread wrote: post #26

I don't understand. The agents at the gate always check the boarding pass validity (with the code scanner) and check the name on it against my ID. I haven't tried it but i can imagine that the system wouldn't allow two boarding passes with the same code. Is it that here in Europe we do things properly or did I misunderstood the faking of the boarding pass?

In the United States two people look at your boarding pass: the TSA (at the entrance to security screening), and the airline (while boarding the plane). The TSA also checks your ID. In most airports, the TSA is NOT online and merely looks at the printed boarding pass to make sure the name matches what is on your ID, your flight is for today, etc. In most cases the airline does not bother checking ID again, assuming t…

You do need a photo ID matching your ticket, but that is probably not a very high bar for a dedicated person to surmount.

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#48

Post by tlrobinson » Thu, Dec 22, 2011, 12:03 AM UTC

bshep wrote: post #8

DevMonkey wrote: post #7

The last time I went through the airport they did the hand wipe thing. I said "You think terrorist are smart enough to wear gloves when working with chemical explosives?" She shrugged and said "All Clear!"

I'm surprised she didnt give you a more thorough screening after the comment.

You think terrorists are dumb enough to make such comments?

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#49

Post by tlrobinson » Thu, Dec 22, 2011, 12:10 AM UTC

I like to think the TSA and their ridiculous measures actually are there purely for the "security theater"... both to reassure the ignorant public, and to misdirect potential terrorists.

Of course, I also hope the TSA, DHS, etc have more effective measures in place behind the scenes. I don't know if that's the case, but it would make sense to keep them secret.

Re: Smoke Screening: Journalist tests TSA

#50

Post by ams6110 » Thu, Dec 22, 2011, 12:21 AM UTC

0003 wrote: post #35

redthrowaway wrote: post #6

The submission might attract more attention if the headline made mention of the fact that Schneier is the person doing the testing.

Who here did not think of Bruce Schneier after reading in the lead paragraph: "...that’s the conclusion of Charles C. Mann, who put the T.S.A. to the test with the help of one of America’s top security experts"?

I respect Bruce Schneier as an expert in cryptography and computer/network security. But nothing I've seen him say about physical security seems like anything more than obvious common sense, delivered in a sort of pompous, sarcastic tone.

I also don't think the people in charge at the TSA are so stupid as to not have considered that someone might alter a boarding pass.

I'm reminded of a post here a few weeks ago, I don't recall the subject exactly but I believe it quoted Henry Kissinger, who said until you are on the "inside" of these agencies, you have no idea of the things they know, and that many things that don't make any sense from an external viewpoint DO make sense once you have all the information.