Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#24 in 5 people scanned, send 5 people
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#3Relevant parts:
Paradoxically, the best terrorist strategy (as long as they have enough volunteers) under unpredictable screening may be to prepare a cadre of suicide bombers for the least rigorous screening to which they might be subjected, and not, as the strategy assumes, for the most rigorous. Sent on their way, each will either succeed at destroying a plane or be caught, but either outcome serves the terrorists' objective. ...
We might reflexively assume that any passenger screening system needs to be 100% effective at detecting all possible weapons and dangerous objects, an obviously difficult task. But, fortunately, that's not the requirement. Instead, the mechanisms need only be highly effective at detecting objects that can create actual terror under the conditions they will be subjected to in an actual flight. That is, in order to have meaningful security screening, we first must understand what it realistically takes to bring down an airplane. The security system can then be designed specifically to eliminate the preconditions for successful terrorism.
The TSA's much maligned "three ounce" liquid rule is, in fact, a nice example of good security engineering of this kind. ...
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#4It's perfectly possible that an organization headed by the government whose primary focus is the security of airline passengers is completely incompetent and ineffective.
But is it not also possible that the TSA is purposefully putting on the guise of an incompetent governmental entity? That would seem like an excellent strategy to take, as it follows the principles in Sun Tzu's Art of War to the letter. If you are strong, appear weak, if you are weak, appear strong, etc.
If these terrorists think they can easily game the system, it will likely lead them to be less cautious, exactly as stated in the article:
Paradoxically, the best terrorist strategy (as long as they have enough volunteers) under unpredictable screening may be to prepare a cadre of suicide bombers for the least rigorous screening to which they might be subjected, and not, as the strategy assumes, for the most rigorous.
That seems like a good thing to me, and if this is the TSA's actual strategy, it's a smart one. Say one thing publicly, but do another privately.
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#5This article demonstrates what I like about Matt Blaze's physical security writing that I don't like about Schneier's.
Both are computer security experts by training, but Blaze's writing has a concrete engineering-driven perspective that Schneier's lacks. Schneier's writing always "feels" right, but leaves you with the sense that's it's not based on any operational reality.
It's probably not a coincidence that Matt Blaze has done formal research on physical security topics (safecracking, wiretapping, etc) --- in addition to being a bona fide computer scientist.
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#6Relevant parts: Paradoxically, the best terrorist strategy (as long as they have enough volunteers) under unpredictable screening may be to prepare a cadre of suicide bombers for the least rigorous screening to which they might be subjected, and not, as the strategy assumes, for the most rigorous. Sent on their way, each will either succeed at destroying a plane or be caught, but either outcome serves the terrorists'…
The idea that Matt Blaze thinks the three-ounce rule is sensible was surprising to me; I hit it, jumped back to the top, and re-read the whole article. What's the flaw in his reasoning? The three-ounce rule always seemed like one of the more ridiculous TSA measures.
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#74 in 5 people scanned, send 5 people
Those still aren't very good odds.
Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#8Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#9Re: Matt Blaze: How unpredictable screening helps terrorists
#10It's perfectly possible that an organization headed by the government whose primary focus is the security of airline passengers is completely incompetent and ineffective. But is it not also possible that the TSA is purposefully putting on the guise of an incompetent governmental entity? That would seem like an excellent strategy to take, as it follows the principles in Sun Tzu's Art of War to the letter. If you are s…
Whoa. You must blew my mind. I really want this to be true :D