The scary truth about TSA's PreCheck security vulnerabilities | Hacker News Reader

The scary truth about TSA's PreCheck security vulnerabilities

latimes.com

TSA precheck is working exactly as it is supposed to. The purpose of airport security in general isn't to make anyone safer. It is security theatre. Precheck allows people to opt out of the pointless security screening for a cost. It is just a racket. I'm sure a determined attacker could get around precheck, but that missed the point. TSA screenings were never intended to be secure in any meaningful way anyway.

It is a genius program, Congress gave autonomy to Homeland Security to raise or lower security thresholds. No representative could EVER roll back the Patriot Act, you can never accurately point out that any of it is security theatre in case something actually did happen. You can never actually argue for making Americans less safe. So letting Homeland Security have discretion over it with their various programs is actually pretty genius.

I'm glad this is the only comment on this article, the TSA is an inane joke. It's easy enough to slip weapons etc. through airport security. (I've brought a pack of blades for my safety razor on almost every flight I've taken since around 2010, and never been questioned about it.) Even if security were actually tight, the fact that pilots are armed and behind blast doors during flight means it would be pointless anyway.

No, that would only be "pointless" if someone wanted to hijack the plane. If they wanted to blow it up, then armed pilots behind doors wouldn't make a difference.

If they're going to blow something up, why not a bus or a train or a bridge or a cruise boat or something? There's not so many people on an airplane that it's like it's your only opportunity to kill a lot of people.

The only (rational) reason I can imagine that makes planes different is that you can use it as a missile to attack a larger target.

Not to mention it just creates another place to attack civilians. All lined up, lots of luggage and other people around to trip over, tired and bored passengers who have been on their feet for awhile.

Let's not forget it's a great 'make work' program for former military personnel.

I don't know much about Kip Hawley other than he worked at TSA and was the brain behind disallowing liquids, for whatever that is worth. This is a nonsense piece. Not sure who he's shilling for now.

> Just to be clear, unless a PreCheck passenger is randomly tagged for a more thorough check, he or she need only avoid setting off a metal detector to gain access to the secure areas of airports. In other words, these travelers could carry a pound of C-4 plastic explosive in their pockets and get onto any airplane in America.

Let him. We could hand out C-4 to everybody during boarding. Without a detonator, the terrorist would have to gag each passenger his pound of might-as-well-be Play-Doh.

Given how easily independent auditors have brought guns and knives through security, why would a detonator be difficult? It's just another wire on the x-ray scan among the normal chaos of portable electronic devices.

> "PreCheck, however, is ... a security hologram — it looks plausible, it’s pleasing to the eye, but its protective value is illusory."

...making it utterly consistent with the rest of the TSA process. Its sole function is to allow rich people to reduce their inconvenience and therefore not agitate to have the TSA procedures simplified.

Where, then, is the problem?

Rich? You can get any of the trusted traveller programs for less than $122 for 5 years. If you live near the canadian border you can get Nexus for $50.

https://www.dhs.gov/trusted-traveler-comparison-chart

Thats $23/year. You pay more than that in airport taxes on a single flight. Or like 2 meals in airport. Meals you might skip if you were pre-check :)

This is just another "Boogie, Boogie, Boogie" scare piece. Kip Hawley is the same genius who got us the full body scanners and then was unable to get them back out after the luggage scanners improved to the point they were no longer needed.

There may be valid concerns about this program. However this article smells partisan.

Starting:

> When President Trump’s nominee for Homeland Security secretary, John Kelly, takes over,

Ending:

>For everyone’s safety, however, let’s hope that with this change in leadership, PreCheck gets a hard, fresh look.

>Kip Hawley, the author of “Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security,” was TSA administrator from 2005 to 2009.

So she was leading the TSA before Obama and now claims Trump could save the day.

Bruce Schneider wrote in response to this article and that has more context and perspective: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/12/security_risk... . The current program has real problems but then what was there before was also not golden either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com