Airline Security Theater Considered Harmful - John Quarterman
Go John. This is the exact same argument that's been put forth regarding the ADIZ around the DC area. All theater, no real use.
Airline Security Theater Considered Harmful:
Bruce Schneier
points out in Wired
that not only is airline security such as is currently supplied by TSA is mostly security theater to make people feel better
rather actually do anything to make them safer (he's said that before),
but he also listed numerous other problems and proposed what to do instead.
I've got a few further suggestions.
Some other problems Schneier listed:
- the various no-fly lists were poorly designed and poorly implemented
critiques of that by Schneier and others were apparently removed from the TSA web pages
Registered Traveler programs don't improve security: they're about convenience and their vendors making money
even that last is dubious, since uptake has been much lower than expected
He sums it up by saying what everybody who has paid attention already knows:
Exactly two things have made airline travel safer since 9/11: reinforcement of cockpit doors, and passengers who now know that they may have to fight back.
Airline Security a Waste of Cash Wiredby Bruce Schneier, 02:00 AM Dec. 01, 2005 PT
Then he suggests what to do about it:
Everything else -- Secure Flight and Trusted Traveler included -- is security theater. We would all be a lot safer if, instead, we implemented enhanced baggage security -- both ensuring that a passenger's bags don't fly unless he does, and explosives screening for all baggage -- as well as background checks and increased screening for airport employees.
Then we could take all the money we save and apply it to intelligence, investigation and emergency response. These are security measures that pay dividends regardless of what the terrorists are planning next, whether it's the movie plot threat of the moment, or something entirely different.
If we used some of that money to improve emergency communications (fire, police, paramedics, etc.) in likely target areas for not only terrorist attacks but also for other big risks (hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, fires, etc.) we'd make the country more resilient. We could even do this by encouraging municipal wireless networks by having emergency responders' communications go over redundant wireless meshes that their communications budgets paid for, instead of the several non-interoperating types of communications networks they use now. All this should also provide an economic boost by making air travel much more pleasant and thus encouraging more people to fly, and by promoting a municipal wireless industry.
Where's a politician willing to stand up and say what we're doing now isn't working, and we need to change to something that will do some good instead of wasting money?
-jsq