Laptops to Stay in Bags as TSA Brings New Technology to Airports
about.bgov.com
about.bgov.com
It serves the purpose of removing liability for security from airlines, which is the major reason why it was created. It also serves the purpose of getting people used to progressively more intrusive government inspection during routine situations.
> and it seems that no entity is able to stop or dismantle it.
There are entities that are able to, but they don't want to, because they like what it does.
1) A fucking racket.
2) Totally worth it!
https://www.schneier.com/news/archives/2008/11/the_things_he...
My wife was also wearing my son in a wrap at the time and just walked through a metal detector, no searching pockets or taking off the wrap or anything like that. Anyone trying to sneak contraband through could just carry it through with the baby knowing it won't be searched and then just leave after exchanging the contraband past security and walk out. You could easily sneak 10lbs worth of contraband through so long as it wouldn't set off the metal detector.
Unfortunately, the UK doesn’t have the same simple exemption for contact lens solution bottles, so they seized it while I was transiting.
There’s bit of irony from seizing something that anyone can fly in with.
But one time I was trying to bring a fish, and had a next to impossible time trying to get them to agree that water was a "life sustaining liquid" as defined by their exemptions on the 3oz rule wrt to fish.
Just because the FDA requires raw-milk cheeses to have aged for at least 60 days in order to be sold in the USA, that doesn't mean you can't bring some in with you and consume it.
A pretty good summary and a bonus foreshadowing of this article.
I have had a pretty good experience with the new scanners. I have global entry/Precheck and one remaining headache with the old scanners was remembering to take my double walked flask out and show the TSA that it was empty by removing the cap. The new scanners can see that it’s empty from inside my bag, which is very handy.
An entire new line of single use toiletry products was invented to meet this regulation.
The much more likely scenario is that the politcians, who sometimes have ownership interest in the companies that get government contracts, want to be able to sell new equipment. This is also supported by the constant equipment updates we see at TSA lines.
> The much more likely scenario is...
Why do you phrase this as an either or situation? "My conspiracy is more likely than your conspiracy" as if there can't be more than one conspiracy.
Just like you have for instance "telefonino" as the diminutive of "telefono" in Italian, literally "small telephone". And in German you add -chen or -lein to words to create the diminutive, so "Hund" becomes "Hündchen" (adding an umlaut as well, if applicable).
Generally I think it's very common for a lot of languages to add a cutesy suffix to the base word, in order to create the diminutive.
There was a terrorist plot to do this, which was caught by the security services, and then despite the terrorists being caught the liquids ban was put into place forever more to stop future attacks.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_...
It sounds like you're arguing that this regulation is not necessary any more because that particular plot was foiled. I find that line of reasoning odd, given that the 2006 attack was the last in a string of plots using liquid explosives to target airliners. The type of group which carried out attacks like this still exists, with similar goals.
Given that it's reasonably effective at deterring a technique which has actually been used (the Japan test run in the 90s) and which has been attempted multiple times, I think it's possibly the least objectionable regulation. It doesn't address all modes of attack (obviously), and it's very debatable whether the likelihood of attack makes the invasiveness of the countermeasure acceptable, but unlike body scanners it's at least effective at deterring the specific modality it's aimed at.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_...
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=563298...
Our screening is worthless
"Whoa.. whatever you just did, do it again."
or
"Can I have her give me the pat down instead?"
And you can really irritate them if you say the little spiel along with them. It rattles them.
Instead, write your congresscritters. Nearly all of them fly every week, so they feel your pain.
We really shouldn't tolerate people like that though, should we? If you don't respect TSA agents, it's your duty to remind them of that. Our ability to change the TSA through the democratic process has been on the wane for years now, but we can still force change by making it hard for the TSA to hire. If they have to double their salaries because being a TSA agent makes you a figure of mockery, they might fondle people a bit less.
As for how they take it out on the people behind me, that's their decision. They're adults, not dogs, their behavior is their responsibility, not mine.
If you really want to make a statement, stop flying and stop paying money into the TSA.
It's certainly unoptimal that we'd ever have to be rude to people to change things for the better, but we don't actually live in a wholly civil society, evidenced by the fact that my genitals get groped every time I book a flight.
>or you're an ordinary person of color, not sure which.
Yeah, and that's fine, right? We shouldn't go out of our way to tell the TSA that's not acceptable or anything /s
This is a non-argument. Flying is a part of modern life. For a large percentage of the population, refusing to fly would lose them their job, as would refusing to use a mobile phone or insisting on being paid with cash.
It is self evident to any rational person that it is acceptable to attempt to change a system rather than opting out of it if one sees a problem with that system.
>This is a really shitty attitude to have towards your fellow human beings. Do you also shame people working at McDonalds for enabling their rich corporate overlords? Do you hate gas station attendants for contributing to global warming?
I don't see the connection to McDonalds employees. Please explain how McDonalds employees are like TSA workers.
They're unaccountable, ineffective, and completely useless. It's a modern day Work Project.
It's likely that had it detected metal it would have made a different sound / colour. What you heard was probably the RNG landing on "check them for explosives".
It appears that most people on HN feel that TSA regulations are pointless theater and should be weakened or eliminated, while the FAA is to be blamed for not exercising their regulatory power strongly enough (especially in light of the 737 MAX).
Both agencies seem to follow a similar methodology: when there's an incident, analyze the cause and enact regulations that would have prevented it, building up a system leads to fewer incidents over time. And they seem to have led to similar results -- over the past decade, there has been only one passenger fatality on commercial flights within the US due to accidents, and zero due to hijackings/bombings.
Why the difference in opinion? Is it that TSA regulations are personally annoying to travelers while FAA regulations are mostly invisible to passengers?
Because that's not actually the case? Only a small part of the FAA's activities is post hoc incident analysis. They do quite a bit of scientific studies, certification, licensing etc. And in fact the most recent outrage against the FAA has been the feeling that they have bene derelict in their duties in regards to the 737-MAX by adopting the problematic self-regulatory approach used by, say, the Department of Agriculture.
By contrast, the TSA (which is much smaller than the FAA and has, for all intents and purposes, only one responsibility) on has never demonstrated competency, clearly awards contracts based on cronyism (the millimeter wave system have no science supporting them), engage in absurd scope creep (checking bags on some train or bus stations, pretending to be law enforcement) and reducing security from where it was before the agency was created (e.g. "TSA locks" which have permitted an increase in theft from bags) etc.
Not at all the same.
Source: https://abcnews.go.com/ABCNews/exclusive-undercover-dhs-test...
I read this sign as a TSA worker shouted every 30 seconds to the shuffling line about how everyone needed to take out all laptops, "ipads", cameras, etc.
I wonder if it was a pilot program. Or more likely, just part of the constantly shifting fabric of pointless theater. I fully expect these new machines are primarily to sell machines, and not to fulfill any other purpose.
I was sure I was about to be detained for the knife, but they simply told me I could leave it there or exit the security line and mail it back to my house for a $15 fee. I took that mailer option, walked out of the line unescorted with a knife, filled out a mailing form, put the knife in the bag, and went through security again.
This most recent trip, I checked carefully for knives before heading to SFO. When I entered the line, they were low on bins. I started taking things out and asked if I needed to remove the Kindle and game system. The TSA agent said I could leave them in, so I did. By the time I got to the other end, I was pulled aside and questioned, as they checked for any suspicious residue on the devices. They eventually handed me the devices back and escorted me to the beginning of the line, where I had to go through all over again, this time with the Kindle and game system in a bin.
Once I even accidentally packed a small toolkit in my carry-on rather than my checked luggage and they let me keep it!
It bothered me a lot, to the extent that I still have vivid memories of it, and I also hate the TSA with every fiber of my being.
So I think it might just be a personality thing.
Even for frequent fliers, the TSA is pretty far down on any rational list of complaints about government. I fly almost every week, but in the past 12 months I have probably spent a lot more time at city hall on a stupid residential parking permit than I did in (non-customs) airport security lines.
In addition to personality, a lot of people project much larger political ideologies onto the TSA. You see a lot of that even in this comment section.
Only if focusing exclusively on direct interactions.
From an ideological perspective, I don't think it's projection (your wording) to observe that in their current form they align closely with both general government authoritarianism and the exercise of federal power over the states.
From a pragmatic perspective, I think it's perfectly reasonable to be alarmed about how such security measures seem to normalize invasive government behaviors in general. Societal norms and values aren't static, so how we do things in the present can and does affect how the public views things in the future.
CMH->MCO ‘remove your belts please’
MCO->SEA ‘keep your belts on’
SEA->CMH ‘i’d recommend you take your belt off’
"Agent": Sir, I recommend you take your shoes off.
Dad: That's okay. I don't need to take my shoes off.
"Agent": Sir, I'm going to need you to take your shoes off NOW!
In addition to challenging the authority of the Memphis TSA agent, my dad is half Japanese and looks quite a bit less white than I do.
TSA has made flying for him and people like him so incredibly difficult. He's just opted out. I don't blame him, either, though it does make visits more challenging now.
I mean honestly.... Why do people like this have to take their shoes off and manage all of their carry-ons and personals into bins and onto belts and ... The entire farce of the TSA is all so callous and genuinely stupid.
When looked at like that, TSA costs more total lifetimes than have ever been taken through terrorist attacks.
The FAA website stats that 630,000,000 people fly per year. If each of them takes 10 minutes to cross the line, that's 105,000,000 man-years lost per year...
Otherwise, thanks for doing the math on how much of our lives is killed by security screening.
I'd love to see law enforcement trained in using basic, declarative sentences: "Sir, regulation X.Y.Z says you have to take your shoes off. Please step aside, do so, and rejoin the line."
I don't believe this is required (or even typical) in the US. Law enforcement is generally allowed to make non-mandatory requests and hope that you comply with them. A prime example is needing to explicitly invoke your right to remain silent (https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127352...). You might also look up videos of people refusing to cooperate with the immigration checkpoints in various states along the Mexican border.
I'm wearing a smart watch, of course, with plenty of metal in its construction.
Nowadays, I just stash anything not made from cotton in the bag to go through the X-ray well before I get into range where TSA officers can given contradicting instructions and then berate me for not following their directives.
You are describing the the usual daily cluster-fuck of life in the military, and in fact, government service in general. I don't know why it is that way, but it is. I have not experienced it in my now 20 years of life in the private sector, but back when I was in the military it's just like that, all the time.
Indeed that's the more likely. I recently had a TSA moron tell me that my iPad did not need to come out because "it's not a computer." I explained that it might not be a laptop but it was still very much a computer. You can't make this stuff up.
In Newark, I put my backpack in the plastic bin. Vegas, put the bag directly on the conveyor belt. LaGuardia, stack the bins after picking up your items. Vegas, do not stack the bins.
Pro tip: if you’re crafting aircraft security regulations for a living, get on one of those aircraft to get together to create a harmonized set of regulations.
Bought mine at BestBuy. Samsonite 5580680. The zipper goes all the way down so the bag is split in 2, a pouch holding your laptop and the other half holds the rest of your stuff. This lets TSA X-Ray equipment inspect your laptop only without cables, cellphone, and gadgets on the way.
TSA continues to fulfill its mission flawlessly.
that's an interesting thought. May be if the price of a ticket could be made cheaper by cutting out these TSA bullshit, the market could correct this problem.
I live in Harrison, AR. I can fly to Memphis or Dallas for like $40 each way if I book a couple of weeks out. There is no TSA in Harrison, and the airline operates from their own hangars, not the general terminal on the other end.
I usually travel with a handgun, which I of course declare in my checked bag. They hand me my bag back and I carry it to the plane with me, and in a couple of instances have even asked me to put it under my seat due to limited cargo space. I’ve been told multiple times that I shouldn’t even bother declaring it by airport staff but I’m not clear enough on the laws there to take that advice.
Probably a 9 minute video that hijacks your IFE about which button to press if you see a shoe bomber.
Seeing as the TSA has never caught a terrorist (and has missed several) I’d bet a statistical case could be made that their security lines are more dangerous to the public than any terrorist attacks they may have prevented.
The only time I ever made polite insistence to a TSA Agent, that day.
I suspect having had that thought was a common differentiator between the folks who were on board with the plan at least until Iraq, and those who were already going "hey can we wait a minute?" before the invasion of Afghanistan.
Thinking about it more, it occurs to me that it could also just be security theater.
The elephant deterrence strategy?
So, they just agreed to $97 million worth of new technology with no proven benefit. Great.
While the CT pilot program didn’t show reduced wait times at participating airports, the agency is expecting the technology will speed up lines as passengers and staffers get used to the new processes. Pekoske said he expected more staff to be needed initially as the new machines are put in place.
> For example, TSA is working to develop new algorithms that use machine learning approaches to discriminate between threats and benign objects, making the screening process more effective and efficient. Machine learning also offers a way to screen for all prohibited items (explosives, firearms, sharp objects, etc.) automatically. It is anticipated that machine learning algorithms not only will improve security effectiveness but also will support automation in future security systems, thereby enhancing operation efficiency and improving passenger experience through increased throughput and decreased false alarm rates. More broadly, machine learning algorithms can be applied to assess security performance and provide system-level improvements beyond performance enhancements realized at individual screening operations.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/TSA%20-...
It is worth noting the limitations of such techniques: Familiarity. Back when Apple switched their Macbooks from HDDs to SSDs, a lot of early purchasers got flagged at TSA because their laptop didn't match a profile (i.e. looking for a spinning stack of platters).
With CT technology, we could see even more nuanced differences get flagged for unusual.
Good, that's more data to learn from and that would only be a minor issue for a short period of time for new devices. How often have you flown with something that other passengers hadn't likely have flown numerous times with before you? Even if the system picks out 0.1% of items for manual classification and training, that's still mountains and mountains of data for it to learn from and that would only take a tiny fraction of the time for airport security to identify compared to what they deal with now.
Just don’t get consistent with luggage and suddenly go unique!
The real fun starts when they create a social graph of people carrying similar things.
For your safety of course.
It probably could feed into an interesting friend-making system if they assigned seats based on the info.
Not in passengers but in the officials: what if somebody sneaks something in, and blows a plane? To alleviate that, a "we are doing all we can" CYA strategy should be in place.
Keep shoes, keep laptop in bag, keep jacket on, way shorter line...I’m simulateously happy that not everyone is doing it and dumbfounded why anyone who travels more than a few times a year wouldn’t have it by now.
They always end the pat down early and move on to the next person.
I’ve long believed the only solution is to mandate that Congress travel as regular citizens so they realize how slow and pointless the process has become.
Global entry only covers the line for the passport check. You still need to due the next line for luggage (hello LAX) with everyone else.
Yeah, with Global Entry it's worth paying for the priority baggage otherwise you'll just spend 45 minutes waiting by yourself in the baggage claim area as the bag belts get clogged up and stop with the bags of the passengers still stuck in the passport lines.
Also, the line I am referring to is the baggage check for customs. First comes the passport check, then you retrieve your luggage, and then you go through customs again with your luggage (which is never checked). Global Entry does not help you with that last line, which can be brutal at some airports.
Global Entry is the best part because after a long international flight the last thing you probably want to do is wait another hour or three on some long passport line.
More customers paying for pre-check incentivizes TSA to make the regular experience comparatively worse.
Minimize the costs to you and just pay them. You only get one life.
In the long run, it will make you more efficient, and hopefully provide you with greater resources to fight them.
There was a time where what you say was true, but they've broadened access.
---
[1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs/global-...
Seemed to work OK, well, until my bag got pushed into the "additional screening" line and had to open it up for the guy to look at
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/2018/03/27/tsa-might-a...
I often travel with a big Ziploc bag of stickers (life of a Developer Evangelist). Have started removing it from my bag for security because it usually triggers a search.
An MRI machine will easily run into the millions ($4M or so for a 3T, much more for the newer high field ones), and you need a steady supply of cryogens to keep the magnet cold.
If xray is damaging, this will be more damaging.
'Some of the devices came with "detector cards" which were programmed, the fraudsters claimed, to detect everything from explosives, to human beings and dollar bills through concrete, water and from great distances'
And there is more radiation in total since now there's there are multiple images, while before it was just a single one per bag.
I'd also be concerned about backscatter going out the sides, since there is more radiation in total.
All that said, the shielding should take care of it.
[0] https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2003-0206-3067.pd...
> Given the strengths and weaknesses of this study, the need for a routine radiation dosimetry program for TSA screeners can neither be justified nor refuted at this time.
I assumed above that people would read the link before responding.