tsaoutourpants

> But we're at the point in some place where there aren't even enough IPv4 addresses to give to ISP customers even if they're using NAT.

Er, that's a slight exaggeration. It's not uncommon to have 2,000 or more NAT clients behind a single public IP address. 2K * 4B = 8 trillion possible hosts... about 1,000 hosts per living person.

Every state has their own public records law that allows for requests similar to FOIA.

This. Your first 1,000kWh in a month are at a reduced rate. Each kWh thereafter is at a premium rate. Easy.

Article author here. Thanks for posting! Happy to answer any questions, although Microsoft's terms are perhaps self-explanatory.

Article author here. There are indeed very few shootings in Europe (excluding Turkey and Russia, of course). But there are plenty of stabbings. And occasional bombings and trucks running down crowds. And let's not forget the Bataclan.

My point is that people find a way to kill each other. We can reduce violence by addressing the root causes of violence better than by trying to take people's weapons.

It is incredible how seriously Apple takes itself.

Hi Everyone, author of post here with an update for you. The most modern x-ray systems in use by the TSA at airports to screen carry-on bags can indeed see through lithium batteries. It also differentiates densities, and it seems to me that the latest tech should therefore be able to indicate the difference between a battery and C4 in a battery-shaped box. So is it that the airports subject to the laptop ban have the older tech? Well...

Read more: https://professional-troublemaker.com/2017/05/22/update-newe...

The Israeli model requires ethnic and religious discrimination. It is not an option in the US, nor should it be.

Exactly. Imaging devices all have blind spots, which is how I was able to defeat the TSA's body scanners in 2012.

Respectfully, you are mistaken. Private airlines are "common carriers" and are required to play nice with the public, and you're conflating "whether the private carrier wouldn't want to take you" with "whether US CBP wants to see the contents of your laptop."

I actually filed suit over the former back in 2015. AA told me they wouldn't let me fly home unless I answered their "security questions." The case was resolved quickly when everyone (AA and DHS) did an about-face and said whoever told me I wouldn't be allowed to fly was mistaken.

https://professional-troublemaker.com/2015/02/23/corbett-sue...

The US may not refuse entry to its own citizens, even if they insist on remaining silent. They can detain you to be searched on arrival, but they must, after completing that search, admit you to the country.

Well, for whatever reason, they stole more equipment more recently. Could be that the new stuff is more advanced, or maybe we bombed the gear they took from Mosul. I don't have more details that would provide insight.

It is certainly correct that DHS, and to some extent our government generally, is known for over-classifying things either out of laziness, desire to avoid embarrassment, or because they believe that anything remotely security related needs to be hidden. As an intelligence analyst, you likely didn't see the misclassified things (I'd imagine roughly everything you did was classified for good reason). It's the political officials who are more likely to over-classify.

I'm certainly not arguing that DHS uses perfectly sound logic. I'm just explaining their reasoning, however flawed. I agree that this kind of "reactive" security is less than comforting.

They had puffer machines for people in 2006. They stopped using them because they required regular maintenance. Then they replaced them with the body scanners, which cost more than the puffer machine and a full time maintenance person in every airport in the country combined.

The Fifth Amendment still applies in the "constitution free zone." The name is a bit exaggerated by the ACLU to make their point.

No matter where you are, the U.S.government cannot force you to speak as a condition of flying home. Just be quiet rather than deceitful.

I will let my source know your feelings when I next speak with him or her. :)

I think the implication that he or she was trying to make is that statistically, those on the coasts travel by air more frequently. As someone with a mom who was very afraid of flying and terror related risks thereto, I know that fear largely dissipated when I finally got her to fly a few times. It's not an allegation of ignorance but that of relative inexperience (was my take, anyway).

I probably should have been more clear that they are completely opaque to the x-ray systems commonly in use in airports for carry-on screenings at their standard intensity setting(s). But that's a mouthful.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_...

Fuck Elon Musk, can you design a tool that would make airport security better? I bet in 15 minutes, most HN readers could come up with something that would be cheaper, more effective, and faster to use than the current tool set. There's indeed money to be made here (and good to be done), even if the easiest way would be to patent your idea and sell it to the military industrial complex you speak of.

Fun fact: the parent company of the company that makes the TSA body scanners (L-3) also owns the company that made "waterboarding" famous. It is, indeed, the military industrial complex.

It's hard to remove all trace, but yes, in theory you could avoid it by being really careful. Then again, if you work in a "bomb factory," there's trace everywhere, so it may be quite difficult.

Also, the "turn on your device" thing they sometimes do offers some mitigation against this. Obviously, you can think of ways that may defeat this too, but to defeat all of the security, accurately, in one small package that doesn't look sketchy, is not easy. Fortunately, most terrorists are not the brightest people in the world.

That would definitely help. Or, simply re-run bags where there is opaque stuff that the screener is unsure about, oriented in a new direction. But, that wouldn't necessarily solve all the problems, as laptop batteries are opaque in all directions, and so if you got a lead metal box and filled it with explosives, it may look much the same.

X-ray machines have to be calibrated. While you could turn up the power to see through metal, you would then be unable to see the less dense items. This makes it difficult to do a full inspection in the few seconds that the screener has.

Hi jaclaz,

> I mean are the people that operate daily these machines vetted to a level where you can totally exclude that they (in ALL airports wordwide) can be affiliated to whatever evil organization and do some tests after hours?

No, although after-hours testing may set off some alarms. I'm sure their on-hours experience would be useful, though.

> Does the same happen for all technicians that maintain/repair these devices?

No.

> Does the same happen for all designers of these devices?

Nope.

> Or if you prefer, do you believe that such a scanning machine cannot be re-built from commercial parts by someone who knows their innards?

Yes, I do believe that rebuilding a modern, advanced x-ray system from scrap components is beyond the capabilities of ISIS at the moment.

> Are ALL purchases of new scanners subject to governemnet approval (and even if yes, which government)?

The modern, advanced x-ray systems are not available to the general public. As to how exactly they are controlled, I'm not sure.

See also my comments to other users regarding the differences between modern x-rays and old school ones.

What? No, that's a wholly unnecessary solution (though more standardization of batteries would certainly be nice). Swab the outside of the laptop for bomb residue, which would be especially difficult to clean from a laptop because the stronger solvents to clean with (like acetone) would mark the plastic. Or hire more dogs. Or make a "puffer machine" for laptops (blasts with air and then samples the air for explosive trace). Or come up with another solution -- this is HN! :)

Yes. See my comment below to djmdjm, but also, I'll add one more thing. Take a knife out of your kitchen drawer and hold it in your hand in front of you such that the sharp side of the blade is on the left and the dull side is on the right. Easy to see. Now rotate it 90 degrees such that the sharp side is facing you and the dull side is facing away. Much harder to see, especially if you can imagine what it would look like on an x-ray, and how you could further conceal it by carefully placing other items between the "camera" and the item.

Well, not exactly. Very basic x-ray equipment is easy to find on eBay. The more modern equipment that the TSA uses is not available on eBay...

https://securitytoday.com/articles/2008/07/30/tsa-to-expand....

"Advantages of AT X-ray include a greatly enhanced image with the ability to target novel threat items resulting in fewer bag checks and faster throughput, and the ability to upgrade the system with enhanced algorithms."

...and that article describes the 2008 edition of the technology!

For a more technically-specific perspective, I can say that the newer machines take images from multiple angles and are closer to a medical CT scan than a old-school x-ray. Owning one would allow you to practice placing your items in a direction and location that would be least able to be seen by the operator.

VeraCrypt (f/k/a TrueCrypt) is your friend!

Hi All, author of the article here. Happy to answer any questions you may have about the laptop ban, aviation security, TSA assholery, Trump's travel-related civil rights abuses (incl. the "Muslim ban"), or other such topics of interest.

And, thanks for the support... HN is always one of the first communities to upvote my work and help me share it with the world. As a computer scientist turned almost-lawyer, I definitely appreciate!

That's a happy Sunday afternoon thought, but we are not at that point yet. The point we are at is one in which corrupt governments seek to control us not for our own safety, but because they crave power and control.

You could try reading the rest of the thread, as several users have broke it down for you.