U.S. Airport Pat-Downs Are About to Get More Invasive | Hacker News Reader

U.S. Airport Pat-Downs Are About to Get More Invasive

bloomberg.com

I've opted out every time I've flown in the US since June 2014.

Last Sunday when I flew out from Boston, I opted out as usual and the TSA officer mentioned that I'd be subject to a new pat down, called the universal pat down. (I was not subject to this version of the pat-down the day before, on Saturday).

Honestly, the only difference between that pat-down and all my previous pat-downs was the way they approached my groin area.

Previously they'd put one hand on each side of my leg and go up until they made contact with my genitals. Then they'd repeat with the other leg. Sometimes, but this was rare, they'd push up a bit into the area.

This time, in addition to the normal pat-down procedure, the officer interlocked his hands and then rubbed my genitals, first vertically, moving horizontally, and then horizontally, moving vertically.

This sounds like a bad handjob...

A bad one is better than none at all. I think we'll be seeing a spike in the number of opt-outs pretty soon.

I enjoy messing with the officers.

Once, an officer mentioned that my jeans were very stiff and I said that I'd just run the laundry before coming to the airport. I offered to take them off for him but he quickly declined my offer.

Anyways, I'll occasionally moan softly if I want to fuck with the officer a bit, as if I might be enjoying my pat-down a bit too much. :)

I'm flying tomorrow and next week, so I think I'm going to be moaning quite a bit more in the near future.

I opt to drive. People don't understand why, but the freedom of not being molested physically or technologically is important for my mental state.

Totally fair. And I love road trips. If I could do more, I would. However:

1. I don't own a car.

2. When I've rented cars, it's cost me ~$100 USD a day. I normally travel for anywhere from two days to a month at a time. On average, probably a week to a week and a half. So then this quickly becomes a very, very expensive trip - ~$700 to $1000 USD compared to $300 to $500 USD for a flight. On top of that, I travel an average of once or twice a month. So car rentals are simply out of the question for me for most trips.

3. I live in Boston, but places I've visited in the last year include New York, Rochester, Vancouver, Lincoln (Nebraska), Montreal, Las Vegas, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Doha, and Reykjavik. It's simply impractical (if not impossible) to drive to most of those places from Boston. The three that are manageable are New York, Rochester, and Montreal (and I did do the Boston to Rochester and back drive in a rental instead of flying twice).

I've considered purchasing a car explicitly so that I'd be able to travel without flying a little more, but leasing is impractical due to limits on miles per year and I'm not ready to outright purchase a car. Either way, a car would come with additional costs (the cost of the car, maintenance, parking, etc.) and wouldn't be able to replace even ~15% of my flights, so I think it's just impractical for me at this point of time.

At $100/day, you must be renting premium vehicles. Last week, I rented a "standard-size" car for a business trip (Saturday pick-up, Wednesday return). It was about $150 total.

Nope. That's what happens when you're under 25 (or in my case for one of the trips, under 21) and you need to purchase insurance and all the other fancy stuff and then also pay fees for convention center surcharges, airport surcharges, etc.

I've got one receipt[0] on hand for $202.98 for 1 day.

I've also reserved a car for four days (4th to the 7th) for around $130 but when I picked it up, I ended up paying $450+ after insurance and the toll device was added on. The device was required because the state I live in (Massachusetts) has removed toll booths, so you can't pay by coins/cash. I was required to pay a fixed fee per day for four days for the device, despite the fact that I actually only drove on two days. The fee includes unlimited charges, so it might have made sense if I was on the highway everyday, but I was not.

The frustrating thing is that there's a lot of rental companies where you'll make the reservation for like $130 and they don't tell you how much insurance and the other stuff costs because it's different in each location. So you don't know you're getting fucked until you're signing the paper at the pick up area and it's too late. If I'd known it was going to be $450+, I'd have just booked a flight in the first place.

[0]: http://imgur.com/a/UmkcI

Edit:

And then if you're wondering why I didn't just switch to two one-day car rentals instead of one four-day rental to avoid paying for insurance, the toll device, etc. for the two days I wasn't driving, it's because then the price goes up significantly because it's a one way car rental - see[0].

> I opt to drive.

Google Maps jokes aside ("swim across the Atlantic Ocean"), that doesn't help at all for international travel.

You could always take a boat? Similar trade-offs to flying as driving.

If you're traveling for leisure, that might be an option, though you'd better be on a long vacation and find the boat an appealing part of the experience.

If you're traveling professionally, neither driving nor boating would typically be an option.

Right. I suggest boat travel only for a person who is already ok with driving instead of flying (probably for leisure).

sounds funny until their homophobia causes them to arrest you.

Almost certainly offtopic, but I'm curious what happened in June 2014.

Honestly, nothing interesting :)

That was the day I moved to California for my first internship. It was the first time I was flying by myself after turning 18 and I was getting ready to queue up for the security line and I just said fuck it, I'm done.

Prior to that day, I'd mostly flown with my family, who put up with, but don't empathize with my dislike for law enforcement (not that you could call the TSA that). Even when I later told them that I'd started opt-ing out, they didn't really understand or agree with it.

In addition, I've always thought that the scanners were more security theatre than actually useful and at more than $150,000 a pop, all that money could go to so many better uses. Since I was starting my first internship, I was also going to start paying taxes. Taxes which contribute to these systems. I can't opt-out of my taxes contributing to what I consider to be useless contraptions, but I can opt-out of using said contraptions (for now at least).

It's also a simple way that I can communicate that I'm not complacent with the system.

At this point, my "airport security playbook" is pretty much:

1. Disable Touch ID on all my devices and temporarily change the passwords

2. Confirm that FileVault is enabled for all laptops

3. Turn off all electronic devices.

4. Opt-out

Unrelated, but on that flight to San Francisco, I decided to become a vegan. A lot of different stuff aligned that day. :)

As someone who is familiar with the standard patdown, this new procedure sounds gross.

Another way to think of it is that you're getting more bang for your buck ;) /s

In addition to your taxes funding this system, each passenger pays a 9/11 fee[0] of $5.60 per one-way trip.

Anyone who receives a pat-down is basically getting a little more intimate action from a handsome (wo)man in uniform. /s

But yeah, I think it's unnecessary and stupid. Having said that, I am glad that I have the option to opt-out - I'd prefer to opt-out and get my genitalia rubbed than to have no other option but to go through the scanners.

[0]: https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/security-fees

I once opted out. The only problem is it takes 10x longer to get out of the scanner.

I had to wait for a guy to come. He then explained that he'll touch my groin area. Then he proceeded to basically soft rape me. It felt very uncomfortable. Took me total of 5 minutes.

I got a feeling they want to make people so uncomfortable they don't opt-out.

I had no idea about TSA tax. America is a really weird country. It's so war and military driven it baffles me.

> I've opted out every time I've flown in the US since June 2014.

Is it optional?

Well, you can go through the scanner if you'd like (which is what most people do), but the TSA can require you to get a pat-down.

You can also opt-out of the scanner (which is what I do) and get a pat-down, but the TSA is not required to allow you to opt-out.

The best solution to all this bullshit is the simplest: Ban precheck and subject everyone to the same rough groping when they go through security.

Any by everyone, I mean EVERYONE. From able bodied adults, to 75 year old grandmas, to 3 year old toddlers. Most importantly of all, any government officials should get the maximum possible delay and most secure of gropings. That way they don't just hear about this nonsense from their constituents, they feel it first hand.

Only then will we have representatives that stand up to this crap and call it out for what it really is.

America is a lobby driven govt. Some corporation will make big bucks on Something, they'll legally bribe (donations) to pass it through.

Sometimes I think agencies like the TSA have an incentive to be a little inefficient--they can use the ineffectiveness of their process to justify requesting additional funding.

"Oh! It looks like a few weapons got through our procedure. We told you our budget was too small -- our failure is because we don't have enough money to do it right!"

That is a time honored tradition in intelligence agencies all over the world. Well that and drugs smuggling.

The TSA of course isn't a little inefficient. It is entirely ineffective.

So I think everyone realizes this won't stop anything, which means the real question is what is the motive?

Is this an attempt to nudge people to Pre-check and the other related services that are privately owned? The former seems like it would be a great recurring revenue source for the agency and the latter would be an opportunity to pad someone's wallet.

Are there any financial conflicts of interest that are known about the various privately held Pre-check type companies? I believe Pre-check itself is an official government program.

Follow the money.

Pre-check is so cheap, it probably costs more than it brings in revenue.

I remember when we had the "luxury" of pre-check security for free.

You know, back before the fascists who voted for Patriot Act wiped their collective asses with our Constitution.

Pre check is institutionalized racism. Given the criteria for qualification, it's not surpassing that predominantly white people are able to use it.

I didn't have time to snap the picture, but I was in the pleeb lane standing behind some very dark skinned Africans and two lanes to the right in the Lexus lane was a large group of shinning, twinkly blonde Australians. If someone wanted to fabricate a story about apartheid being instituted in America, this would have been it.

Some people are more equal than other people.

What criteria? The only requirement I'm aware of is having the free time to visit one of their offices for 5 minutes and have your thumbprint taken. I think I showed my passport and answered 1 or 2 questions about what I do for a living. I expected a much more invasive interrogation, but it was nearly nothing. Also no wait. In/out.

TSA officials didn’t immediately address whether the new universal pat-down protocol will mandate touching of passenger genitals.

Even if the TSA tried, would they really expect the public to allow it? There has to be some limit to how far they can "search".

I flew in to LAX last June and the TSA comprehensively touched my genitals when I transferred to a domestic flight =(

I don't think so. If you had told anyone 20 years ago that our current system would be as bad as it is now, people would have never believed you. But here we are. In the next few years, I only see it getting worse and nobody still caring

It's not that people don't care. But what are they going to do? Arguing with the TSA is an exercise of futility.

They say the culture of an organization comes from the top down. We all know how our current President feels about grabbing someone's genitals against their will.

"So, they gave you the comprehensive pat-down?" "Yeah, I got the full Donald!".

Anecdote; I just went though Denver TSA earlier this weeek and managed to make it though the scanners while wearing my belt with a very obvious metallic belt buckle. Was waved though with no extra screening. Incidentally I was flagged aside on my way out of Minneapolis because I had a parking reminder ticket in my back pocket.

These scanners are so inconsistent that they are useless.

So their approach is failing, and they don't change, just double down. Typical security theatre.

I full body scanner[1] they use costs about $180 k[2]. It surprises me that there is no way to figure out if you're hiding something based on those fairly expensive device. How many cases are there where the scan has shown nothing and a quick pat around the crotch has. I understand in some cases, the scan itself might indicate "area of interest." (An officer showed me an image with red areas marked and said he would have to pat me there and if I wanted to go into a room or if it was okay right there.)

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_body_scanner

[2] http://www.digitaltrends.com/home/tsa-will-finally-remove-co...

You can opt out of the scan and get a grope instead. That was the deal that was used to sell the scanners. Personally I have opted out of every single backscatter. Consider it my tiny form of protest at the corrupt system. Just think what would happen if even 10% of people opted out.

It would be spun as "Over 90% of travelers opt to use the scanner instead of the antiquated pat-down"

>> You can opt out

At least that's an option. When they first introduced the body scanners in my local airport (UK) I checked if that was a possibility. If you opt-out, you don't fly.

I think any terrorist that wanted to sneak a weapon or explosive device onboard would just smuggle it in on one of the thousands of service trucks and catering vehicles that enter the airport every day.

Shh... you'll ruin the whole show! :)

It's called "security theatre" for a reason!

There's a component of this that screams for root cause analysis. And the answer is obvious (at least I think so): Terrorism.

Before 9/11 I could fly with a beefy swiss army knife in my carry-on. Even tools like screwdrivers. No issues whatsoever. I used to do a lot of flying with equipment within the US, back and forth to Europe and within Europe selling and supporting our hardware. For example, I've flown to London with a carry-on full of tools, soldering irons, FPGA dev board, DSO's, etc. No problems.

9/11 changed all of that in an instant. Now I have to take off my shoes and carrying a screwdriver set is unthinkable.

Why? These people changed our way of life. And I am not talking about the US only. This is a mess.

The Neanderthal part of my brain wants it simple: The roles ought to be reversed. We should be able to live exactly as we did and they, the bad guys, ought to be the ones living in fear of what we might do to them.

This requires an approach to dealing with the bad guys that is, well, Neanderthal, brutal. People in fear of the consequences of their actions think twice about doing stupid things.

Bush had an opportunity to go after the right people and create that "don't you ever dare fuck with us" mental shift. Instead, well, I won't go into it. Here we are.

Not sure how this problem is solved without violence. Maybe I haven't given it enough thought. We (the world) shouldn't have to live like this. This isn't just about being inconvenienced, this is about all sorts of abuses and about every single citizen of the world being treated like criminals with no justification whatsoever other than "what if".

Does someone have any good non-cave-man ideas?

Those of us without private planes are the ones getting the cave man treatment..think about that.

deal with the systemic inequality and lack of opportunity that make terrorism an attractive option?

That's a false narrative. Terrorism isn't a natural consequence of inequality. It's deviant behavior that can only exist in the context of life-long indoctrination by twisted minds who dedicate their lives to creating even more twisted minds.

Notice I have not mentioned a religion. Terrorism, in general terms, exists and has existed in many cultures both with and without a religious foundation.

Terrorism is also about power, the quest for it by people far smarter than the pawns strapping on suicide vests.

If inequality were a true root cause the poor of the world would be engaging in terrorist acts in every single country.

Inequality is a natural phenomenon.

I would love to be a better dancer, but I suck at it. I would probably enjoy to be able to swim faster, but my body doesn't have --and will never have-- the right shape to challenge those who do.

Beyond that, while I've done very well in life, I would love to launch and run a company at the Apple/Google/Facebook/Tesla/etc. scale but that hasn't happened for me yet. And it might never happen. Not because of some grandiose conspiracy to oppress me but because of a range of reasons, including the possibility that I am simply not good enough to do make that happen.

Utopia does not exist. Equality is utopia.

Inequality is not a root cause for terrorism. Sure, it can be used to convince weak minds that they've been wronged and as one of many ingredients to convince them to strap on a suicide vest, but, no, on it's own it isn't the problem.

I am fortunate that neither work, family, nor leisure compel me to fly to (or through) the USA at any point. I intend to keep it that way.

At least we can opt out in the U.S. Well, maybe.[0]

Australia doesn't let you opt out last I checked, and I don't think Canada does either. Unsure about European countries.

There should really be a site with a list of available opt-out policies worldwide.

EDIT: Canada appears to allow opt-out.[1]

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/23/tsa-electronic...

[1] http://www.catsa.gc.ca/full-body-scanner

I'm not entirely sure about Canada. I found some news/posts/comments on the Interwebs that lead me to believe that you can opt-out, but I'm struggling to find anything from the last 3-4 years or anything on the CATSA website.

I'm flying out of Vancouver tomorrow morning, so I'll try and report back.

Chances are unlikely that you will be subjected to anything beyond a normal metal detector. I've never seen the full body scanners used as a primary screening step in Canada.

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/mediaroom/infosheets-menu-7669.html

> The agency doesn’t track how many passengers are subject to pat-down searches after they pass through an imaging scanner.

This is the most basic data thay they would collect if any of this were actually about effectiveness.

Were these weapons getting through the less-invasive pat-downs? Or were they getting through the non-pat-down flow?

This question only matters if effectiveness of the procedures is what the TSA is measured on. However, if that were the case, the entire thing would likely be thrown out.

I'm not going to pretend to really understand the TSA's game. But if items were getting through, and those items were doing no harm, isn't the entire thing worthless if you're adding more security or less?

Article says there was a report that showed weapons could get past the TSA, and the TSA is responding by checking the groin more carefully.

Missing from the article: did the report say that the TSA was only failing to detect weapons smuggled in the groin area?

Cancelling the policy of allowing non-Precheck into the precheck lanes will be, personally, beneficial in the short term.

I wish there was actually a comparison of effectiveness of DHS agents vs private contractors like those at SFO.

Two flights in a row returning to SFO, I had knives (~1 inch blade) found and had to check my bag, after passing through SFO with no problem. So I guess if that's your metric of effective, they don't do so well in my anecdotes.

However, I like my security theatre to be fast, and that's definitely something I've found to be strong at SFO. So I'd say the contractors are very effective.

Oh, I've had the same. And return trip finding and complaining about wine opener.

Which is cheaper / effective DHS or private contractors?

At all the Indian Airports, Malls, Train Stations, and Subway stations, they use a metal detector wand all over you despite of the Metal Detector gate. It's kinda weird.

Can i request for the officer to be female and good looking at least? And if im a evil-doer stupid enough to engage with security symbolism acts, can i escape this procedure, by pretending to enjoy it too much? Search me, do it- oh, yeah Baby, that's the spot, dont stop, that could be everything.

Sometimes i wonder why there is no "Border guards for dignity at the working place" Movement. What a job. Might even save a live or two, by getting that oncology feeling for tumors.

I don't know about you guys, but I feel safer already!

TSA: "Reach out and Grope Someone"

Just wait until someone intentionally or not puts their quadcopter through a jet engine on takeoff, I'm sure they'll know us better than our proctologists for that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com