Bruce Schneier on airplane security

[Cogman]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/29/schneier.air.travel.security.theater/index.html

Ok, I'll tell the truth, maybe the only reason I read the article was because I saw Schneier and though "Holy crap, Bruce Schneier is talking about airplane security, this should be interesting", and it was.

For those that don't know. Schneier is considered the almighty when it comes to cryptography. I would consider him the lead in the field of computer security. (I would guess that his knowledge on computer security measures probably does translate well into other security environments)

I've felt exactly the same as what he is saying right now, that most of our security measures are bunk. Not only that, but they are costly bunk. We spend millions making sure peoples shoes don't have explosive or that their cola won't explode, yet, that logic only would have worked if it where applied earlier, not now.

We need a fundamental change in the way we deal with terrorist threats. Not large, expensive, and ineffective reforms on how many guards and smoke detectors the airports have.

 

[HumblePie]

Yep, he had a lot of good points. A few points I might split hairs over, but mostly I agree.

 

[Zebo]

Everything about terror war should be done on the down low. No big invasions of countries, no big screening exercises at airports, etc but that does not get people PAID (MIC TSA etc) or politicians elected.

PS - just to be clear that does not mean Special Forces wouldn't be on it and working with tribes overseas blasting terrorists, forming hit squads , etc , or FBI wouldn't be tracking people. But really no practical reason for a big show. I largly disagree with his touchy freely lets make friends crap at the end - even Obama realizes some people and groups are just plain evil and need a good killin' KKK, Taliban, etc.

 

[StageLeft]

There's no doubt that the security measures put in place since 911 have been underwhelming and objective studies of this have confirmed it.

I am personally offended at the stupidity of airport measures, particularly in regard to such fvcking silliness as having Grandma take her shoes off as often as Ahmed, the bearded 22 year old with shifty eyes. It's just damned stupid. Profiling is an integral part of detective work. And if you don't want to make it racial, just make it age-based. Have me take off my shoes, but my 5 year old daughter get real.

But as the article says and it's obvious if you made airports impervious terrorists would just go elsewhere. That's what they do in israel, isn't it? is it really that much worse to have a plane bombed out of the sky than a cafe? Does it matter at all? Or a crowded bus or a school bus? None of those have any defense whatsoever. Honestly, it speaks to the rank stupidity of these idiots that they keep trying to do planes. There are endless other vulnerabilities in society beyond planes, as we saw in England with the bus attacks.

 

[Cogman]

Everything about terror war should be done on the down low. No big invasions of countries, no big screening exercises at airports, etc but that does not get people PAID (MIC TSA etc) or politicians elected.

PS - just to be clear that does not mean Special Forces wouldn't be on it and working with tribes overseas blasting terrorists, forming hit squads , etc , or FBI wouldn't be tracking people. But really no practical reason for a big show. I largly disagree with his touchy freely lets make friends crap at the end - even Obama realizes some people and groups are just plain evil and need a good killin' KKK, Taliban, etc.

He didn't say anything about making friends. He said that the most effective anti-terrorist measures are done by infiltrating known terrorist hot spots. Attack the source of the problem, not the end result.

He also said that over-reacting should be avoided. Try the suckers like the criminals they are, but in general, don't make a big deal about it.

 

[OutHouse]

all the airline attacks since 9/11 on American carriers originated from overseas where airport security screening of passengers is not as tight.

 

[Jhhnn]

all the airline attacks since 9/11 on American carriers originated from overseas where airport security screening of passengers is not as tight.

Yeh, and they've all been completely amateurish, doomed to failure.

Terrorists will adapt to whatever targets are available, as the author suggests. If they really wanted to disrupt air travel, They'd fill their backpack with plastique, use an actual detonator, pop it off while waiting in the midst of the huge lines at many airport security checkpoints.

Stop this, biatch.

Instead, we get mental cases who can't even sacrifice themselves properly so as to gain instant admission to Heaven.

What we see of the so called security apparatus installed after 9/11 is all for show, not for substance. It's there to convince us that we're protected, that the govt is "doing something" about "Terrar!" Gitmo is little different.

My wife jokingly refers to the TSA as "Workfare for Brownshirts", and I suspect she's not far off the mark.

 

[Rainsford]

There's no doubt that the security measures put in place since 911 have been underwhelming and objective studies of this have confirmed it.

I am personally offended at the stupidity of airport measures, particularly in regard to such fvcking silliness as having Grandma take her shoes off as often as Ahmed, the bearded 22 year old with shifty eyes. It's just damned stupid. Profiling is an integral part of detective work. And if you don't want to make it racial, just make it age-based. Have me take off my shoes, but my 5 year old daughter get real.
...

Profiling IS an integral part of detective work...but screening passengers at the airport is not detective work. Real police profiling is done for specific cases, on a MUCH smaller group of people, where they know ahead of time that there is a perpetrator. Profiling for airport security would be more like if the police tried to prevent murder in a city by figuring out a profile for all previous murders, then regularly searching the houses of people who fit that profile.

Profiling (racial or otherwise) for airport security sounds good because of the example you mention with Grandma and Ahmed. Except it ignores a lot of non-obvious issues, mostly coming from the fact that Ahmed is only marginally more likely than Grandma to be a terrorist...and if Ahmed is NOT a terrorist, picking him for extra screening is just as pointless as singling out Grandma.