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

Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 839 posts

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#481

Post by angry_octet »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #195
closewith wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> TATP you could synthesize on a plane is entirely inadequate to bring down a plane Even a small fire can down a plane, especially when distant from diversion airports.

No, you can’t bring down a plane with a small fire. If that was possible terrorists would use a newspaper and a lighter.

A small fire in the right place (like a wiring loom) can definitely bring down a plane, but generally attackers don't have the specialist knowledge to achieve that, and those places are not easily accessible between meal services.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#482

Post by fernandotakai »

flambeerpeer wrote: post #304
5d41402abc4b wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can this X Ray bit flip memory or damage NAND?

Super Mario 64 airport security speedrun strat

for people that don't get the reference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj8DzA9y8ls

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#483

Post by angry_octet »

maxerickson wrote: post #436
jandrewrogers wrote: post #71

This just adds confusion as to the purpose of all this. The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids. Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. There has never been an industrial or military use, solids are simpler. Nonetheless, these explosives are easily accessible to a knowledgeable chemist like me. The…

2 part liquid explosives featured heavily in Die Hard with a Vengeance.

That was just strawberry jam.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#484

Post by fernandotakai »

matwood wrote: post #306
Fervicus wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've traveled all over Europe and North America and have taken a lot of trains. Not once did I have to remove my shoe, scan my baggage, or had any kind of liquid restrictions.

Concerts and things like sporting events in the US typically require any bags to be clear and only be of a certain size. They may also be checked. No outside liquids are typically allowed (mainly to avoid alcohol). Usually people are at least wanded to prevent weapons, but sometimes metal detectors are setup.

i've been to a bunch of concerts here in the netherlands and they do the most basic checks.

last time, they checked my wife's purse without a torch (so she could've hidden anything inside) and didn't check anything on me so i got in with two 1g edibles.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#485

Post by adrian_b »

grumbelbart2 wrote: post #346
KingMob wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of thinking is as legitimate as believing lie detectors work, i.e., not at all.

Israel is using those methods in their airport security, quite successfully given their threat level. The problem is that it does not scale well and requires very well trained and attentive personnel.

I have not been recently to Israel, so I do not know if there have been any changes in their system.

However, some time ago, for a few years I had been a frequent flyer into Israel.

In my opinion their system of airport security seemed far more efficient than what is now typical in Europe and immensely better than the circus that seems typical for USA.

The disadvantage is as you said, that their system requires numerous well trained personnel.

At least at that time, their system had very little emphasis on physical searching and luggage scanning, but it was based mainly on interviewing the traveler, normally by 2 different agents.

During a great number of security checks, my luggage has been searched only once, and it was definitely my fault. That flight was at the end of an extremely busy day and I was very tired, so I just wished for the security check to end as quickly as possible, to be able to finally rest in the plane. My impatience was transparent, which made me suspicious, leading to this singular case of physical searching, instead of just psychological assessment.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#486

Post by masfuerte »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #250
edm0nd wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. In the US, the TSA is just a government jobs program for the lowly skilled or unskilled. It's all security theater. TSA Chief Out After Agents Fail 95 Percent of Airport Breach Tests "In one case, an alarm sounded, but even during a pat-down, the screening officer failed to detect a fake plastic explosive taped to an undercover agent's back. In all, so-called "Red Teams" of Homeland Security agents posing as…

I find it interesting to contrast this with my experience flying out of China. I was taken to a private room and shown the digital colored X-ray of my bag on which a box had been drawn around an empty lighter, I was asked to remove it myself and hand it over, and I went on my way. All in under 5 minutes, no pat down, no fuss, and no one physically rifled through my belongings. (Granted I was a tourist so that might w…

I had exactly the same experience in 2008, the year of the Beijing olympics. It seemed futuristic then and I can only assume their technology is even better now.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#487

Post by dxdm »

nottorp wrote: post #453
dxdm wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, that's a bummer. Here's a silly idea that is probably not new to you, but just in case: have you looked into refillable deodorant dispensers?

Eh, I use another product that's bearable to me when I go on plane trips. But I want mine!

Then my original advice applies. Don't worry, be happy! Can't recommend it enough.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#488

Post by jfengel »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #396
matwood wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't stop hijackings (locking the cockpit door does that) 9/11 also stopped all future hijackings. Up to that point passengers were trained that if they stayed calm they would likely survive. Now? Short of the hijackers getting guns on the plane, passengers will absolutely fight back. > they don't stop bombings (there are much better targets for that, which don't involve killing the bomber) Suicide bombers ar…

> Suicide bombers are probably the main vector that TSA helps avoid even if they miss some items sometimes. Not really, but this is because there are pretty much no suicide bombers anywhere in airports. They are incredibly rare. But if you're a suicide bomber, by the time you get to the TSA checkpoint you can do a ton of damage inside a terminal during a holiday season when all airports are packed. Until then no one…

Why are they rare?

There used to be suicide bombings in the news all the time. Hijackings were the reason they instituted the metal detectors at airports.

Improved security seems unlikely as a reason, given how many tests they fail. Was it just a fad? Did they decide it wasn't getting them what they wanted at a high personal cost? Did they find something more effective?

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#489

Post by Scoundreller »

rusk wrote: post #447
Reefersleep wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how many actual terrorists they pick up for saying "I'm here for terrorism"

Believe it or not it’s a question on the pre-clearance form for travel to the US: ”are you or have you ever been a member of a terrorist organisation” - I always wondered what the rationale for that was

I liked the “have you been in contact with someone with Ebola” questions the kiosk used to ask people entering Canada.

I’m like, uhhhh, I dunno, maybe? A little late to inform me that I was supposed to be asking/testing everyone.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#490

Post by account42 »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #252
kleiba wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never done that yet I've never had any trouble finding water past security or even on a plane?!

When people say "water" here I have to assume they mean "vodka". Otherwise you can just bring an empty bottle and fill it on the other side. It's the toiletries that pose a problem.

Depending on the airport and terminal (e.g. shitholes like Frankfurt, especially terminal 2), filling it on the other side might mean a washbasin in a stinky toilet because they'd rather you buy overpriced bottled water. And many airports that do have at least water fountains only have some that seem deliberately designed to prevent you from using them to fill any reasonably sized bottle.

Also, don't count on security not throwing away your empty water bottle anyway just because they can.

Post reply on HN