Comments on: travel security silliness tidbit http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/ Ramblings on law school in New York, free software, and the spaces in between. Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:14:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Advogato - Recent Blog Entries http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24636 Advogato - Recent Blog Entries Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:43:55 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24636 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Hawley got interviewed on fluids today, after I slagged on his agency yesterday. Not very convinced- best case scenario TSA is still completely [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> Kramer auto Pingback[...] Hawley got interviewed on fluids today, after I slagged on his agency yesterday. Not very convinced- best case scenario TSA is still completely [...]

]]> By: Luis Villa’s Blog / random bloggy bits http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24629 Luis Villa’s Blog / random bloggy bits Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:03:34 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24629 [...] Hawley got interviewed on fluids today, after I slagged on his agency yesterday. Not very convinced- best case scenario TSA is still completely [...] [...] Hawley got interviewed on fluids today, after I slagged on his agency yesterday. Not very convinced- best case scenario TSA is still completely [...]

]]> By: Luis http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24628 Luis Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:00:41 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24628 Oddly, he gave an interview to Schneier today <a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/07/conversation_wi_4.html" rel="nofollow">on exactly this topic.</a> Oddly, he gave an interview to Schneier today on exactly this topic.

]]> By: Rekha http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24627 Rekha Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:57:20 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24627 It's funny how the TSA head gets to say "security theater" in a New York Times article, making people think - for an instant - that he isn't a complete loser: “Taking lighters away is security theater,” Mr. Hawley said. “It trivializes the security process.” And then the instant passes and we all remember that smoking is in serious decline (new Gallup report http://galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=28213), and we still can't bring lip balm, medication, or even water through security. Oh, and we're still taking off our shoes. It’s funny how the TSA head gets to say “security theater” in a New York Times article, making people think - for an instant - that he isn’t a complete loser:

“Taking lighters away is security theater,” Mr. Hawley said. “It trivializes the security process.”

And then the instant passes and we all remember that smoking is in serious decline (new Gallup report http://galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=28213), and we still can’t bring lip balm, medication, or even water through security. Oh, and we’re still taking off our shoes.

]]> By: Aaron http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24623 Aaron Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:16:30 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24623 I went through security about six times flying from Bolivia to the US. It was... not fun. In La Paz, we were not permitted to bring water onto the plane-- even if we bought it post-security. Also in La Paz, they dithered about my girlfriend's insulin and syringes. The first decision: well, the insulin is OK but no syringes. The person conducting my screening stopped doing mine to help the person doing hers, and explain why insulin and syringes go together. Then they sort of forgot about me and I went on my way. To be on the safe side, though, they took her mascara. She also got the pat-down screening in La Paz and Miami because of the diabetes equipment. But in New York, it passed unnoticed. My favorite part was the two rounds of bag-rummaging, which was mandatory for all passengers but wasn't very carefully conducted. They sort of opened the bags up, looked at the pile of dirty laundry, and closed them again. I guess that long as your luggage isn't 100% explosives or drugs, you're pretty much OK. I went through security about six times flying from Bolivia to the US. It was… not fun.

In La Paz, we were not permitted to bring water onto the plane– even if we bought it post-security. Also in La Paz, they dithered about my girlfriend’s insulin and syringes. The first decision: well, the insulin is OK but no syringes. The person conducting my screening stopped doing mine to help the person doing hers, and explain why insulin and syringes go together. Then they sort of forgot about me and I went on my way. To be on the safe side, though, they took her mascara.

She also got the pat-down screening in La Paz and Miami because of the diabetes equipment. But in New York, it passed unnoticed.

My favorite part was the two rounds of bag-rummaging, which was mandatory for all passengers but wasn’t very carefully conducted. They sort of opened the bags up, looked at the pile of dirty laundry, and closed them again. I guess that long as your luggage isn’t 100% explosives or drugs, you’re pretty much OK.

]]> By: Stephen Smoogen http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24622 Stephen Smoogen Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:33:58 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24622 One thing that I didnt realize til one security class was that TSA compliance standards are regional (maybe sort of like court cases?). So what one airport might do is not what another might. The origins of this absurdity had some actual sense (not all airports could meet equiptment standards at the same time, allow airports to have some flexibility so that bad-guys might not have a standard playbook).. but do to the usual lack of funding, oversight, and the fact that the airlines/airport owners and TSA are in a passive aggressive relationship.. its all gone to hell. One thing that I didnt realize til one security class was that TSA compliance standards are regional (maybe sort of like court cases?). So what one airport might do is not what another might. The origins of this absurdity had some actual sense (not all airports could meet equiptment standards at the same time, allow airports to have some flexibility so that bad-guys might not have a standard playbook).. but do to the usual lack of funding, oversight, and the fact that the airlines/airport owners and TSA are in a passive aggressive relationship.. its all gone to hell.

]]> By: Mark http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24621 Mark Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:49:31 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24621 Just got back from an Oakland-Vegas trip where they were literally checking the size of each bottle and saying "Nope, can't take this... this is 3.6oz. The limit is 3.4oz... --TOSS--" I don't know where they pulled "3.4" but given that every airport handles it differently just goes to the arbitrary nature of the stupid rule. I usually don't deal with that hassle and check a bag, but it is just so much faster just to do carry-on. And given the fact is there is absolutely no way you can fit any real amount of toiletries in a 1qt ziplock bag, it is completely ridiculous. Just got back from an Oakland-Vegas trip where they were literally checking the size of each bottle and saying “Nope, can’t take this… this is 3.6oz. The limit is 3.4oz… –TOSS–” I don’t know where they pulled “3.4″ but given that every airport handles it differently just goes to the arbitrary nature of the stupid rule. I usually don’t deal with that hassle and check a bag, but it is just so much faster just to do carry-on.

And given the fact is there is absolutely no way you can fit any real amount of toiletries in a 1qt ziplock bag, it is completely ridiculous.

]]> By: Planet http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24619 Planet Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:10:50 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24619 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] travel security silliness tidbit (5) July 30, 2007 04:54 AM Luis travel security silliness tidbit July 30, 2007 04:54 AM [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> Kramer auto Pingback[...] travel security silliness tidbit (5) July 30, 2007 04:54 AM Luis travel security silliness tidbit July 30, 2007 04:54 AM [...]

]]> By: iain http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24618 iain Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:15:07 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24618 The UK security is far more tight. They have spotted everything I've carried through security, I'd doubt very much that you'd manage to get your lip balm through over here. My only complaint with it is that you can take 100ml containers of liquid on, but my contact lens fluid only comes in 110ml bottles and having the liquid in the proper container makes things so much easier (to both use, and explain) The UK security is far more tight. They have spotted everything I’ve carried through security, I’d doubt very much that you’d manage to get your lip balm through over here.

My only complaint with it is that you can take 100ml containers of liquid on, but my contact lens fluid only comes in 110ml bottles and having the liquid in the proper container makes things so much easier (to both use, and explain)

]]> By: Oded http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24617 Oded Mon, 30 Jul 2007 08:43:42 +0000 http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/07/29/travel-security-silliness-tidbit/#comment-24617 While i personaly think that the no liquids law is delusionaly paranoid, in your case i'd have to opt for the first option - last time i flew with a connection in the US, by mistake i boarded carrying a nail file (of the professional 10" long kind - smaller weapons were used by the 9/11 terrorists), which was undetected by 2 metal detectors, an x-ray screening (or whatever they use these days) and a manual search through my bag. While i personaly think that the no liquids law is delusionaly paranoid, in your case i’d have to opt for the first option - last time i flew with a connection in the US, by mistake i boarded carrying a nail file (of the professional 10″ long kind - smaller weapons were used by the 9/11 terrorists), which was undetected by 2 metal detectors, an x-ray screening (or whatever they use these days) and a manual search through my bag.

]]>