Experts Warn About Security Flaws In Airline Boarding Passes 199
concealment writes in with a story about a newly found security issue with the bar codes on boarding passes. "Flight enthusiasts, however, recently discovered that the bar codes printed on all boarding passes — which travelers can obtain up to 24 hours before arriving at the airport — contain information on which security screening a passenger is set to receive.
Details about the vulnerability spread after John Butler, an aviation blogger, drew attention to it in a post late last week. Butler said he had discovered that information stored within the bar codes of boarding passes is unencrypted, and so can be read in advance by technically minded travelers.
Simply by using a smartphone or similar device to check the bar code, travelers could determine whether they would pass through full security screening, or the expedited process."
Same security for all (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
When I entered Australia as a U.S. citizen studying abroad I was waved through security. I'm still not sure why, but I don't think it had anything do with my boarding pass showing me as definitely not a terrorist.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Most countries don't check entering the country other than customs. I suspect the TSA does it for more funding. It is a department with the largest scope creep I have ever seen.
Re:Same security for all (Score:5, Interesting)
It is a department with the largest scope creep I have ever seen.
You mean aside from the CIA, NSA, IRS, DOD, FBI, the executive branch of the government, the entire government itself? It's pretty hard to quantify 'scope creep' when everybody is guilty.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You mean aside from the CIA, NSA, IRS, DOD, FBI, the executive branch of the government, the entire government itself?
Oh, no no, assuming scope creep is computed as "total size/useful size", TSA can leave everyone in the dust. With CIA/NSA/IRS/DOD/FBI, there is some fraction (we can argue how big) that provides useful service. With TSA there is no such thing.
To my knowledge, TSA hasn't actually caught any terrorists in 11 years of its existence. Every time some other organization (or fellow passengers) apprehend a terrorist wanna be (rare, but it happens), TSA expands it's funding. So by my definition "total size/usefu
Re:Same security for all (Score:5, Funny)
It is a department with the largest scope creep I have ever seen.
You mean aside from the CIA, NSA, IRS, DOD, FBI, the executive branch of the government, the entire government itself? It's pretty hard to quantify 'scope creep' when everybody is guilty.
You misunderstand. Sure, all those agencies have creeps at the scope; but the TSA has the biggest creeps.
Re:Same security for all (Score:5, Informative)
Once you pass passport checks the 'security' on entering Australia [daff.gov.au] is to do with biological security. A US national entering from a US flight is low risk for carrying biological hazards like viable seeds, eggs, infested timber products etc. Had you entered on a flight you joined in Africa or Asia, or been a Chinese national (think suitcase full of traditional remedies), they would likely have X-rayed everything for biological matter. We have stiff penalties for failing to declare prohibited biological items.
Security on leaving Australia bound for the US is largely dictated by US policy.
Re: (Score:2)
Once you pass passport checks the 'security' on entering Australia [daff.gov.au] is to do with biological security. A US national entering from a US flight is low risk for carrying biological hazards like viable seeds, eggs, infested timber products etc. Had you entered on a flight you joined in Africa or Asia, or been a Chinese national (think suitcase full of traditional remedies), they would likely have X-rayed everything for biological matter. We have stiff penalties for failing to declare prohibited biological items.
We even have a TV show about customs and the crap people try to smuggle in. At least I think it's ours... I see ads for it all the time but have never actually watched it. It could be like the Highway Patrol show that comes from NZ.
Re: (Score:2)
The Australian programme I believe is Nothing to Declare. There is also a NZ equivalent called Passport Patrol.
One of the lesser digital channels in the UK broadcasts both shows (normally multiple times a day)
Re: (Score:3)
The Australian programme I believe is Nothing to Declare. There is also a NZ equivalent called Passport Patrol.
One of the lesser digital channels in the UK broadcasts both shows (normally multiple times a day)
The NZ one is Border Patrol. Not sure why they rename it Passport Patrol for the UK audience...
NZ? UK? Border? (Score:2)
Being both island nations with no notion of land borders, the UK name makes some more sense...
Re:Same security for all (Score:5, Informative)
When I entered Australia as a U.S. citizen studying abroad I was waved through security. I'm still not sure why, but I don't think it had anything do with my boarding pass showing me as definitely not a terrorist.
You mean you were treated like a human being? In the rest of the world that's what we call "normal".
Re: (Score:3)
You've not received the SSSS security scan (I've gotten it twice). Forget the barcode, it's written on your boarding pass!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_Security_Screening_Selection [wikipedia.org]
Re:Same security for all (Score:4)
i got that when i came back from the U.S.
i figured it was due to the fact that i had previously travelled to saudi arabia
Re:Meaning of SSSS? (Score:4, Insightful)
Photoshop? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Probably not a good idea. From TFA: "it is illegal to tamper with a boarding card under U.S. law."
Re:Photoshop? (Score:5, Insightful)
Printing an entirely new one with your own bar code doesn't tamper with the existing card at all.
Re:Photoshop? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not tampering, it's forgery. How much of a tech/nerd guy do you have to be to NOT immediately see this?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Photoshop? (Score:4, Interesting)
I usually print my own boarding pass these days. Check-in online and print a web page with barcode image on it. Altering that barcode before printing would be trivial.
Fortunately I don't really need to because last time I travelled it appeared that the nude scanners and shoe removal queue had all gone and just the metal detector was left.
You can still get cheap thrills by putting on a metal belt buckle if you are into that sort of thing. I noticed that a lot of guys wait until they can see how is doing the checks, and if she looks hot they keep their belt on, otherwise it comes off and goes in the tray.
Re: (Score:2)
Printing an entirely new one with your own bar code doesn't tamper with the existing card at all.
Holy crap, you're right! Can't believe that nobody has spotted that loophole! Go ahead and try it - be sure to check back in and let us know how that worked for you.
Re: (Score:3)
True, but I'm pretty sure they don't have any sort of HMAC-type mechanism ensuring they're untampered-with. i.e., unless you put something in there that causes their machines to get cranky, your chances of being caught is nearly zero.
Hacking into banks is also illegal, but that doesn't stop determined individuals from trying.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't personally show up for hacking, and your real name isn't splattered all over the relevant systems.
Re: (Score:3)
In my experience they ask you to hand the pass to a member of staff who scans it. That way if it is the wrong document or obviously forged (e.g. wrong paper) they should hopefully see it. Of course they only glance at it so even a fairly poor forgery would probably pass.
Re:Photoshop? (Score:4, Insightful)
As already pointed out, if you are a terrorist cell, you don't need to alter the boarding passes, just buy enough and see which ones have the minimum screening. Heck, the people selected for maximum screening could make the proccess longer (carry some items that are not allowed but are common and largely innocuous, such as scissors, bottles of water, etc..), thus reducing the likelyhood of the minimum screening catching anyone because of the distraction.
Re:Photoshop? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And from that you get a corollary saying that anybody who isn't terribly concerned about U.S. law is a terrorist. Of course deriving a corollary that way isn't logically sound, but the people who make up corollaries of the form "anybody who ... is a terrorist" aren't terribly concerned about logic.
Re: (Score:3)
Since 11 Sept, all people caught trying to set off bombs on board planes, boarded those planes outside the US. So they didn't have much to do with US security regulations ('law' is the wrong word for this, GP most likely mean 'regulations' or so).
Re: (Score:2)
Since 11 Sept, all people caught trying to set off bombs on board planes, boarded those planes outside the US. So they didn't have much to do with US security regulations
Last time I travelled to the US, I had to go through an extra round of security checks before and after the normal security checks. So it seems the US has succeeded in imposing some version of their regulations on airports in other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm almost certain you're already receiving the minimum scan. There are higher levels that you can and probably have not yet gotten.
Re:Photoshop? (Score:5, Interesting)
That is the scary thing about all that. There is no real screening on site or behaviour analysis, or you know, normal police work. No the level of scrutiny you get is dictated in advance by some random algorithm and independent of what you do there.
Security theater indeed !
Re:Photoshop? (Score:5, Interesting)
the level of scrutiny you get is dictated in advance by some random algorithm and independent of what you do there.
Which is actually the safest method, short of checking 100% of passengers. It's easy to game any system that predictably targets specific groups, you just makes sure your agents aren't in those groups and you're safe. If the chances of being searched are random, you can't reduce the risk of getting caught.
Of course, you'd ideally also want to have some smart guys to do additional searches based on observation. But they seem in short supply.
The real security theatre is the immense effort devoted to imaginary threats, liquids and shoes, for instance, which were never a real threat to begin with.
Re: (Score:3)
However if it is random and the indicators for a random search can be known, it's still security theater. Get a boarding pass, scan it for the random search indicators. If the boarding pass has them, then the agent just aborts and gets a new boarding pass under a new ID.
Re:Photoshop? (Score:5, Informative)
quite possible [schneier.com], as Bruce Schneier explains in detail.
Re:Photoshop? (Score:4, Funny)
Or perhaps to do a good ol' "DROP TABLE flights;"?
Link to the actual blog (Score:5, Informative)
The truth... (Score:3)
Re:The truth... (Score:5, Insightful)
'Tis a jobs program, and nothing more. Even the congressmen who are against the idea of the TSA are busy spinning it as providing jobs to their constituents.
Which is funny on so many levels. We all know that the TSA was built on a lie, we all know that it is worthless, we all know that it is bleeding the taxpayers dry, and we all know that we'd be better off without it. And yet, they're going to keep it, because jobs. Jobs which provide no net income, jobs which cost three times more than they are worth, jobs with glass ceilings built in, jobs which do not help America to grow anywhere but the waistline, and yet, they are so desperate to protect them. The money they are earning in kickbacks must be tremendous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
'Tis a jobs program, and nothing more. Even the congressmen who are against the idea of the TSA are busy spinning it as providing jobs to their constituents.
You could privatize the vast majority of the TSA without any ill-effects, keeping just a small rump whose job would be to test whether the privatized parts are still doing their security checks correctly. This is pretty much how airport security is handled in most of Europe; the security staff are employed by the airport (or, more usually, a specialist contractor) and there's just central validation that the checks being performed are adequate with respect to the threat.
Re:The truth... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There is only one thing that is responsible for declining pleasure travel, and that is the condition of peoples' personal economy. The complaints are coming from an insignificant minority. All things considered, business is pretty good.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong. I know of at least 10 people personally who have stopped traveling for pleasure because of the TSA. They do "stay cations" (I hate that f'in word) now. If I know this many people (who used to fly as families of 3-5 people at least once every year) then there are a whole lot more who've also chosen this option.
Re:The truth... (Score:4, Insightful)
Besides that it's election time, you guys have high employment already so it's political suicide for either party to say "hey you couple hundred thousand (or however many work in TSA) low-educated workers, please go find another job as we're shutting you down".
Re: (Score:2)
Besides that it's election time.
When is it not election time anymore?
Re: (Score:2)
Are there that many vacancies for air marshalls?
Re:The truth... (Score:4, Funny)
We could retrain these guys and up their salaries at the same time to be Air Marshalls.
Seriously? These are people that couldn't qualify for a position as a security guard at the local mall and you want to arm them and put them on a pressurized airplane? No thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
'Tis a jobs program, and nothing more. Even the congressmen who are against the idea of the TSA are busy spinning it as providing jobs to their constituents.
It would be better to train those people in construction or trades, but I keep remembering that large swaths of the population have this thing against hard manual and physical labor.
Re:The truth... (Score:4, Informative)
we all know that it is bleeding the taxpayers dry
All your arguments except that one are valid. Some math will tell you why.
TSA budget: $8.1 billion
US federal budget: $3.7 trillion
So the TSA makes up approximately 0.2% of the federal budget. You could cut it to $0 and still make no significant dent in the deficit. The big ticket items are, and have been for decades: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Defense. After the crash in 2008, unemployment insurance, food stamps, WIC, and housing assistance jumped up because more people are unemployed, hungry, or homeless. But the TSA just isn't even remotely close to what's bleeding the taxpayers dry.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that America has a fundamental learning issue, which leads to these kinds of flaws. They can't even get a three letter acronym right. Unless they are taking a leaf out of the French book, by calling it Theatre Security America.
What is wrong with that? (Score:2)
What flaw are we talking about?
Obviously it is a feature for "technically minded travelers". Ist'n it?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When people have tried to walk away from the airport upon discovering, they were selected for the extra microwaving (or groping), they were told, they can no longer leave and must go through the screening. The reason was given [go.com], that doing otherwise would allow terrorists to attempt to travel, but back away if they find themselves selected for more rigorous checks.
Well, if the level of checking is printed right there on one's boarding pass, the terrorists don't have to reveal themselves. When they find out
Re: (Score:3)
Full Security Screening for John Butler (Score:2)
Which one will John Butler will be receiving...
How long till John Butler gets arrested? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wonder how long till John Butler gets arrested for sharing this info. National security and all that.
Re:How long till John Butler gets arrested? (Score:5, Informative)
On October 26, 2006, Soghoian created a website that allowed visitors to generate fake boarding passes for Northwest Airlines. While users could change the boarding document to have any name, flight number or city that they wished, the generator defaulted to creating a document for Osama Bin Laden.
Soghoian claimed that his motivation for the website was to focus national attention on the ease with which a passenger could evade the no-fly lists.[3] Information describing the security vulnerabilities associated with boarding pass modification had been widely publicized by others before, including Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY)[4][5] and security expert Bruce Schneier.[6] Soghoian received media attention for posting a program on his website to enable the automatic production of modified boarding passes. Democrat Edward Markey, House of Representatives committee (telecommunications and the internet) stated Soghoian should be arrested.[2]
At 2 AM on October 28, 2006, his home was raided by agents of the FBI to seize computers and other materials.[7] Soghoian's Internet Service Provider voluntarily shut down the website, after it received a letter from the FBI claiming that the site posed a national security threat.[8] The FBI closed the criminal investigation in November 2006 without filing any charges.[9] The TSA also initiated a civil investigation in December 2006,[10][11] which was closed without any charges being filed in June 2007.[12][13]
Obvious High Risk (Score:2)
I don't know about 'hidden codes' - a few years ago I took my family on an around the world trip, traveling west from Australia via Dubai and London. All our US boarding passes were stamped with big red 'SSS' letters, except for my wife, who has a British passport.
At every security gate my three kids and I got the full treatment of pat-downs and extra screening, even being pulled out of the normal line and taken aside in some cases.
The reason, I supposed, was because we came to the US from Dubai arriving o
Re: (Score:3)
I was randomly selected for the SSS tag on my boarding pass. It was great. We were in Phoenix and the regular screening line was massive, at least an hour long. The "special" line had about 10 people in it. We zipped right through. Would have needed to skip lunch if we were in the regular line.
We noticed the letters on the pass too before entering the lines so I guess they have not really cared about this "issue" in the past.
I think the special screening is more of a quality control measure on the regu
Re: (Score:2)
Probably SSSS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_Security_Screening_Selection [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I was randomly selected for the SSS tag on my boarding pass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_Security_Screening_Selection [wikipedia.org]
You sure there wasn't a fourth "S" on your ticket?
TSA only = US focused (Score:5, Informative)
this only applies to the TSA who actually scan and pass people around the security scanning solution based on the results of what is in the barcode. in europe, you always have to go through scanning process, regardless of what your 2D barcode has encoded within in. all the TSA is doing here, is opening up a chance for terrorists based on local soil to get through the security scanning process simpler. the challenge is that the USA has the most number of travelers through the airline system than anywhere else in the world; doing extensive security checks does choke the system - so, they need to try and filter out the more frequent/trusted flyers, the net result is they are wasting time screening some since they done screen everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
In today's times where you need a Visa to enter the US, a lot of people bypass it. In the past it was difficult to fly from let's say South America to the Far East, because everybody had to fly via the US. This is a thing of the past. You can now fly via Dubai or South Africa. You can even do a round the world tour without stepping on US territory a single time, but went through all continents.
With the Visa requirement, the US tracks foreigners. With TSA, the US tracks it's own citizen...
You think the barcode is bad... (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only could you photoshop the barcode, but hell, you could photoshop the name, the destination, the flight number, pretty much anything you wanted... The brainless goons at the security checkpoint wouldn't know the difference. (They don't scan tickets or anything).
In my experience (working for a contractor for a major US airline), you could even use a photoshopped (printed at home) boarding pass to get on the plane. When they scan it at the gate and the computer beeps saying "no such thing", generally the non-english-speaking gate agent will just scan it a few more times, give up, and let the person on the plane. When the passenger count from the computer later doesn't match up to the number of people on the plane, they'll just "go with what's on the plane" in the interest of getting the plane out on time. This happens on a DAILY BASIS. "Security" is a joke.
Re: (Score:3)
Not only could you photoshop the barcode, but hell, you could photoshop the name, the destination, the flight number, pretty much anything you wanted... The brainless goons at the security checkpoint wouldn't know the difference. (They don't scan tickets or anything).
In my experience (working for a contractor for a major US airline), you could even use a photoshopped (printed at home) boarding pass to get on the plane. When they scan it at the gate and the computer beeps saying "no such thing", generally the non-english-speaking gate agent will just scan it a few more times, give up, and let the person on the plane. When the passenger count from the computer later doesn't match up to the number of people on the plane, they'll just "go with what's on the plane" in the interest of getting the plane out on time. This happens on a DAILY BASIS. "Security" is a joke.
I'm a little dubious about your claims... although it wouldn't be the first time stupidity has exceeded expectations.
I wonder what will happen with all this security in place when another plane gets hijacked? I guess we'll all have to be put to sleep at boarding time and then shipped to our destination in cocoons. At least we wouldn't have to eat airline food and put up with people kicking our seats then.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:You think the barcode is bad... (Score:4, Insightful)
its funny how close the "unlock cockpit" and "vent cabin" buttons are on the planes control panel.
don't forget the most dangerous weapon on an airplane is THE AIRPLANE ITSELF.
all a pilot would have to do in the worst case is 1 vent the cabin 2 disable the autopilot 3 have a bit of "fun" with aerobatics
result 1 plane full of folks that have been tossed about like dice in a cup. ("ATC this is flight 34583 request immediate clearance for landing and Medical meet us on the ground." "roger flight 34583 nature and scope of injuries...")
Re: (Score:3)
a pilot that knew what he was doing (which includes every pilot "type certified" for %aircraft%) could do a lot in the window of Normal Operations to Risk Damage to the Airframe/Passengers. The way it would work is 1 vent the cabin 2 DIVE for lower altitudes 3 have copilot call the nearest ATC for a Emergency Landing Clearance.
THIS PLANE WILL NOT BE HIJACKED.
as far as Legal Issues are concerned i would think that the FAA would allow "Reasonable Care in Limiting Damage" as a defense.
Re:You think the barcode is bad... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've actually had this happen to me. Connecting flight, they gave me a new boarding pass at the gate (one with a boarding group number), and I neglected to check that it was the right one. The ticket scanner beeped weirdly when I tried to board but the agent waved me on anyway, and only when I found someone else in my seat did I realize that I had been given someone else's boarding pass, and that person had already boarded.
I believe it was Washington Dulles, westbound.
BP data (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The Joys Of Flying (Score:5, Interesting)
including the inability to get non-stop flights for most routes, having to pay to park in a lot that is still a 10 minute ride to the terminal, having to arrive 2 hours early to ensure getting thru security on time to board, having small innocuous items in my pockets stolen by TSA, risking having large innocuous items in my bags stolen by TSA, getting severely overcharged for food at airport terminals, getting X-rayed by someone who is not my doctor or dentist, having to do mini-marathons thru airports to make connecting flights, getting my bags lost, etc. etc. have all combined to cause me to decide to drive everywhere I go. Eventually, the Alcan Highway is going to get photographed up the wazoo, by me, 'cuz I'll drive up and ferry back. But the X-rays were the last straw, that shall not stand. I quit. You can find me on I-10 to Tucson next year, I-74 from Indy to La Crosse, I-64 to St. Louis, etc. etc. Until the unconstitutional TSA activity is removed, I will not choose to fly anywhere I can drive, or boat, or travel by train.
Here is some cheese (Score:2)
Easy fix to luggage theft (Score:3)
All you have to do is have proper locks and PROPERLY CHECK A FIREARM.
as of that moment your luggage is considered a sealed container and can not be legally opened without you being present. ...)
(please note this does not have to be a working firearm and details may vary with each airline but
Excuse me, sir, I'd like you to come with me... (Score:2)
..."It's completely random, you're not being singled out..."
YAH, RIGHT!
I will stick to ground-based travel. Until they decide to put portable microwave ovens in front of the boarding gates for my CYCLE!
Opt In (Score:2)
Isn't this like stamping the ticket "first class" or "mvp flyer?"
Of course if you did away with the TSA and security screening, this wouldn't be a problem.
Profiling (Score:2)
Indeed. It's pretty hard to say "random search" if the guy's badge code has a special section selecting him for "extra screening"
This sounds more like a special code that exempts people from a full search, but I wonder what other codes there might be.
Re:Profiling (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. It's pretty hard to say "random search" if the guy's badge code has a special section selecting him for "extra screening"
It could be determined randomly before people are able to print their boarding passes.
In fact that would probably be the best way to ensure a random search, since a person at the gate might be influenced by your appearance.
Plus, if you have legitimate reason to believe someone is higher than average risk, you could just specify what's needed on the boarding pass, and not have to rely on the staff to spot you based on a picture.
Re: (Score:3)
Ah, for all values of random where random = any flag in a DHS database anywhere.
Just so thrilled that we have discrimination down to a science.
Re:Profiling (Score:4, Informative)
Ah, for all values of random where random = any flag in a DHS database anywhere.
Just so thrilled that we have discrimination down to a science.
Profiling is awesome. It surpasses all other screening methods in efficiency and effectiveness.
Not only is it fast (it can be done entirely before the passenger even arrives at the airport), and those not flagged can be sent through with a minimum of screening (all this equals much less waiting), it is also efficient as it would have caught all the 9/11 hijackers as well as the 'shoe bomber' and the 'underwear bomber', while none of the scanners would have caught anything, and even the grope search is likely to have missed almost everything.
Another backside to the current scanner-fixated system is that it creates some awfully attractive long queues filled with people outside the secure area where even a small nail bomb easily could kill hundreds. If you are going to assemble a lot of people in a confined space at the airport it should be inside the secured areas where they are less of a target.
And of course there's plenty of other places with lots of people assembled and little or no security - like malls, concerts, amusement parks, train- and bus stations or so on. There's a lot of potential targets so the only efficient means to secure them it to take out any potential terrorists way before they can get near such places or even get their hands on bomb materials and explosives.
Re: (Score:2)
What kind of profiling are we talking about?
Racial profiling wouldn't have helped: Richard Reid (the shoe bomber) is mostly white, Umar Abdulmutallab (the underwear bomber) is black, and the 9/11 hijackers were Arabic-looking. And the most successful "home-grown" terrorists were white guys: Ted Kazinski and Timothy McVeigh. And if the bad guys figured out that, say, white women over 40 were getting screened less, they'd recruit a white-looking woman over 40 with a name like "Jane Smith".
Behavioral profiling
Re:Profiling (Score:4, Insightful)
Another backside to the current scanner-fixated system is that it creates some awfully attractive long queues filled with people outside the secure area where even a small nail bomb easily could kill hundreds. If you are going to assemble a lot of people in a confined space at the airport it should be inside the secured areas where they are less of a target.
The fact that nothing remotely like this has happened speaks volumes about the threat faced
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. It's pretty hard to say "random search" if the guy's badge code has a special section selecting him for "extra screening"
It could be determined randomly before people are able to print their boarding passes.
In fact that would probably be the best way to ensure a random search, since a person at the gate might be influenced by your appearance.
Plus, if you have legitimate reason to believe someone is higher than average risk, you could just specify what's needed on the boarding pass, and not have to rely on the staff to spot you based on a picture.
It would be easier to have the system check against a database of persons for nationality / race. You could also have it parse the name for key consonant combinations like "kh", "Abd", "Muh", "Azi" so on and so forth. There are too many ways to reduce the "randomness" factor.
Re: (Score:3)
So you'd include my old classmate Bill Burkholder in that group. Good catch.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Small price to pay for freedom, you commie.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, he just let shoe bomber Richard Reid through and harassed Paula Abdul for no reason.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It could be determined randomly before people are able to print their boarding passes.
In fact that would probably be the best way to ensure a random search, since a person at the gate might be influenced by your appearance.
It doesn't make much sense from a security standpoint to roll the random dice in advance, since a terrorist could book a number of flights under different aliases and then miss the flights where he/she is pre-selected for screening.
I'm not ruling out the authorities actually reasoned the way you're describing, though. "Enhanced security" at airports seems to have very little to do with actual security, and more to do with reassuring the public the situation is under control.
Plus, if you have legitimate reason to believe someone is higher than average risk, you could just specify what's needed on the boarding pass, and not have to rely on the staff to spot you based on a picture.
Having the information on the boa
Re:Profiling (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Profiling (Score:5, Informative)
Bingo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_Security_Screening_Selection [wikipedia.org]
I got into an argument with a customer service representative (and flew standby -- not sure which was responsible) and received this.
Re:Profiling (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Although I know that mathematically it's possible, the fact that in my last 10 flights I always got this marking makes me believe there is profiling done based on various criteria.
Re:Profiling (Score:5, Interesting)
Airline employees can manually mark any boarding pass as SSSS.
How do I know? When it was possible to fly by purposely refusing to present ID, I once flew on a ticket that was paid for by another family member. When I went to check in and check my bags, they asked for ID. I told nicely told them that I prefer not to be identified and will be flying as a selectee. Person at ticket counter gives me a dirty look and responds (expectedly) that the SSSS is required if you don't present ID, but everything flowed smoothly after that. It's a shame that you can't refuse to identify yourself anymore these days.
After that, I think I was flagged as all my boarding passes for the next couple years had SSSS on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It used to be that if you had the SSSS printed on your boarding pass, you had to enter the secured area through a different gate. If you waited in line at the wrong checkpoint, the would still make you go to the special one. This was at least happening at ORD and DTW. This all went away when you could get your boarding passes at home -- so pretty much you were limited to knowing your security screening level from the time the gate agent printed your boarding pass to the time you go to the screening area,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The SSSS Eh? Isn't that carrying alliteration a little far?
Surely
Re: (Score:2)
This is not a security flaw but rather makes for some interesting question re the "random selection" process. But this will probably be yet another "nothing to see here, move along" type revelation.
Indeed, I don't recall having anyone scan my BP until I go through the gate at boarding time. Unless I'm forgetting it, the TSA preprocessors look at it, and look at your passport through the little lens thingy, but don't use a scanner.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you want me to point out the flaw in that argument, or can you spot it yourself?
And on a side note, you seem to be one of the few, active named accounts I'm still seeing on /. these days. Where'd everyone go?
Re: (Score:2)
This type of thinking is much the same that brought us the dangers of your soda bottle or bottle of water and shampoo on the flights.
A terrorist could just decide not to be a terrorist on that flight and go again.