
TSA will require separate screenings for electronics larger than a cell phone - ohjeez
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/26/16034694/tsa-xray-screening-electronics-tablets-laptops-game
======
caboteria
> In standard screening lanes, TSA agents will be stationed in front of X-ray
> machines to verbally assist passengers with the new screening procedures.

Is "verbally assist" a new euphemism for "yell at"?

~~~
deathanatos
Yeah, I think it is.

I somewhat recently had a TSA agent bark _conflicting_ instructions at me:
"Please remove all metal and electronics before the metal detector." Okay,
simple enough. But when I started executing her directive, "you can leave your
watch on." "It's a smart watch — it's an electronic with metal." She didn't
seem to understand that.

------
technofiend
>Of course, those enrolled in the TSA’s Precheck program will not have to
remove their oversized electronics, due to their willingness to trade their
fingerprints (and $85) for speedier screening. The TSA notes that Precheck is
now available at 200 airports nationwide, up from 180 at the start of the
year.

Despite the snark, precheck is worth the money if you're a regular domestic
traveler as are the trusted traveler programs [1] if you travel abroad. Some
airlines seem to flag a trusted traveler as precheck although it's not
terribly consistent, so I wouldn't rely on that.

[1] [https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-
programs](https://www.cbp.gov/travel/trusted-traveler-programs)

~~~
mnm1
To whom does the $85 for TSA pre-check go? Seems like a racket that, like most
other things in this country, is aimed mainly at the poor. Pay more, get
through. Can't pay? Fuck you.

~~~
pc86
Well, pre-check does actually require a human being to do something with your
application and work to happen on the part of the government. I'd rather the
folks requesting the service pay for that than the taxpayers as a whole. Don't
ascribe to classist malice what is simply a fee for service.

------
cylinder
Their own separate bin? I'm interpreting this to mean, electronics in their
own bin, together, is fine. One bin for each laptop, tablet, phone, etc would
be madness.

However, I don't think a laptop and an iPad will fit into one bin without
overlapping each other.

So now we are at probably four bins per person including their carry-on bag as
a "bin." This is really ridiculous and will lead to even longer, more chaotic
lines.

~~~
deathanatos
> _One bin for each laptop, tablet, phone, etc would be madness._

The current case, in every airport I've traversed, was each laptop in a
_separate_ bin.

I believe I stumbled through an airport "piloting" this program (BOS) as we
had to remove tablets, too. We were not told "everything larger than a phone",
we were told "laptops and tablets" — all in separate bins. _It took five bins_
to get through.

"Piloting" new security regulations, to the passenger, appears as if TSA has
no idea what their own rules are. Every airport I visit seems to have its own
inconsistent idea as to what I need to take off, what needs to go in a bin,
etc.

In my experience, the baggage X-ray is the bottleneck at the checkpoint; I
don't see how this is going to help.

Also, does this include cameras? Who's the judge as to whether a camera is
larger than a cell phone? (And just what I want, to advertise even more loudly
the valuables I'm traveling with.)

~~~
pc86
Do you think it would be any faster if you had to "check" your carry on at
check-in, they were all scanned asynchronously from you actually going through
security, and you pick up the bag on the other side in a mini baggage claim
scenario? I know baggage claim proper is generally a madhouse, but if it's
just literally going through a wall to allow the actual security screening to
happen faster, I think it could be faster overall.

Would definitely need some infrastructure changes in the airports themselves,
which is probably a pretty big negative.

~~~
orclev
Considering I trust the average TSA employee about as much as a junky I found
on a street corner, no way am I letting my electronics out of my sight. I
already take them all on as carry on specifically to keep the TSA from
stealing them, moving to a system like this would mean I couldn't travel with
electronics (other than the exempted cell phone) anymore since there's like a
25% chance that the TSA will decide to swipe it.

------
crypt1d
I've never been to the US. I'd love to visit though, so many beautiful places
to see! I had this idea to rent an RV on the west coast and spend a few months
visiting bunch of places.

But lately I've been deterred by all this TSA crap and the political
'developments'. I just no longer feel comfortable about traveling there. Don't
get me wrong, my home country is far from peachy. But everything I read about
US these days screams - don't come here. I'm sure their tourism industry wont
fall apart because of one person, but I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only
one that feels like this.

Seems like I'll just go somewhere warm for the winter to chill out (Canary
Islands, anyone?)

~~~
overcast
It really is not as big of a deal as everyone acts like it is. Take your stuff
out, take off your shoes, and your belt. Walk through, get on your plane.
Enjoy the US. This place is HUGE.

~~~
GuiA
Get detained in a tiny cell at Houston airport for 12 hours with no
explanation (happened to my father). Get your entry denied and have your
vacation plans + all the money you spent on hotels/rentals/etc go to waste
(happened to a friend of mine).

Speak to any foreigner that has had prolonged contact with US
immigration/border agencies (particularly if they are from a poorer country -
doubly so if it's a muslim country) and you will hear plenty of stories like
that.

------
gt565k
Pretty sure this has been happening for a while. The last few times I've
traveled, people were told to put laptops and tablets in separate bins as
well.

Makes sense... we shouldn't discriminate laptops at the security lines!

All large electronics in separate bins!

~~~
gumby
The article says they've been trialing so I suppose you've been using pilot
airports.

------
rhinoceraptor
I had to do this at DTW, I was carrying 3 laptops and 2 tablets. I also had my
carry on searched because I had 12 cans of sardines which look funny in the
x-ray.

~~~
elthran
Okay, I'll bite - why did you have 12 cans of sardines in carry on?

~~~
monksy
Just to mess with the agents.

I'm surprised that he didn't get required to throw them out. (They contain
liquid)

~~~
lisper
Not cool. The agents are just trying to do their jobs. The fact that the
system is fubar is not their fault.

On the other hand, people like you hold up the line for everyone.

~~~
rhinoceraptor
The guy in front of me had 4 cans of soda which he had to throw out. My
sardines just had to be scanned for explosives or whatever the scanner thing
is, but it seemed like they were fine to bring.

At least they didn't see the supplement powder I packed in their own separate
plastic baggies :)

~~~
Dolores12
Your supplement powder has different density than explosive, hence different
color on their screens. They saw it for sure.

~~~
rhinoceraptor
I wasn't worried about that, I was worried they would think it was drugs,
since I had three snack bags full of white powder.

------
Sukotto
It's amazing the immediate, _viscerally angry_ , reaction I have the moment I
see "TSA" in an article headline.

I can't think of any other organization that evokes that near-rage quite as
fast or as strong. Even Immigration doesn't seem as hateful.

~~~
glenra
Me too. It's not just fact that TSA has the job to make travel more
inconvenient and annoying and expensive, but that there seems to be _no limit_
to how much extra expense and annoyance we're willing to let them inflict on
us. And the fact that all this security theater clearly makes us _less_ safe -
killing extra people in car crashes and destroying economic productivity that
could have saved far more lives.

There seems to be nobody willing to push back against the idiocy that is the
TSA. In paying their salaries we are almost literally paying for rope to hang
ourselves. If we can't eliminate or cut back programs _this dumb_ and _this
destructive_ , is there any hope for technological progress at all? Or are all
efforts to improve the human condition similarly doomed to be hamstrung by
rent-seekers and grandstanders and paranoid muckrakers?

Every time I have to stand in that line I get a little bit _more_ furious that
we can't get rid of these idiots and their counterproductive procedures and
just _walk over to the gate and get on a plane_ like a civilized person.

------
grandalf
Putting a device on its own tray means that an algorithm can apply heuristics
to it to determine if it should receive a wipe test or additional human
screening.

By placing the items onto a tray, the orientation of the device is more likely
to be consistent and not obscured by other objects in the line of sight of the
scanner, making algorithmic object recognition easier when a 2D scanner is
used or if the bag contained items that make the data harder to process.

Imagine if your goal was to get a weapon through security, what would you do?

\- Enclose it in a fluid or gel-filled case that appeared similar to a
rechargeable battery pack on the scanner.

\- Enclose it in an appropriately sized shielded sub-enclosure of a common
device, so that it appeared similar to the unaltered device on the scanner.

For some reason laptops were identified as a likely device for this sort of
use-case, hence the ban on laptops for flights originating from some places.

So after the ban the adversaries likely decided to try using a boombox or a
SLR camera to house a weapon, and maybe even tried an electronic drum pad or
other less common device.

Consider what kind of information the scanner obtains about the objects being
scanned. Some is 2D but newer ones area increasingly 3D. So you have a 3D
capture of the various relative densities and thicknesses of materials used to
construct a device. Chances are machine learning algorithms are very good at
determining which scan is an unaltered electronic device and which has been
altered (additional wires, components, materials included).

It's also necessary to train the system, so asking travelers to place their
digicams, drum pads, etc., in a separate bin allows the scans to be used as
training data for unaltered device characteristics, and help officials learn
how to train the algorithms to detect subtle modification or alteration of
devices.

Chances are the same kind of highly advanced machine learning is being applied
to the live video of passengers lining up for screening, with face, vital
sign, and body carriage recognition algorithms designed to detect anxiety,
deception, etc. For example, if you are rocking back and forth with a clenched
chin and elevated heart rate that might be a small data point which (if
combined with a laptop that has a >10% probability of having been altered)
might result in a human screening and pat down.

When filmed at high frame rate, heart beats are detectable via blood vessel
coloration changes. Animals (like humans) are very easy to analyze this way
with the right hardware and algorithms.

~~~
javajosh
It's strange to me that we screen for weapons at all, other than explosives.
The cabin is sealed. There is a marshal on the plane to limit gun/box-cutter
level damage. At that point the plane itself is no more dangerous (actually
considerably less dangerous) than an ordinary subway car.

With explosives, I've always thought an internal smuggle would work the best.
I mean, you're going to suicide anyway, so why not stick C4 up your ass? Or if
you're really serious, have some surgically installed into you.

One threat would be a small shaped charge to open the cabin, but that seems
very unlikely. Last but not least, the WMD threat of biological weapon, 12
Monkeys style, which is a) not specific to planes and b) impossible to guard
against, once the weapon is lost.

~~~
grandalf
I agree. I think that the threat posed by weapons was already fully mitigated
on the day of 9/11 when the passengers on the last aircraft tackled the
hijackers in spite of the box cutters. All this with no marshal, no sealed
cabin door, etc.

The airport screening stuff has been a fiasco that is far more political and
psychological than based on actual risk reduction, and the additional cost and
time it takes to go through security has cost the economy _billions_ in lost
productivity.

I think that the big target at present is actually explosives. I think that C4
resembles the contents of a typical LiIon cell when viewed on a scanner, or
could be made to appear quite similar if prepared by someone moderately
skilled who had access to (or knowledge of) the scanner and the physics behind
it.

Your point about a subway is interesting because we've seen no attacks on
subways in the US since 9/11 and even a failed, low-budget attack would result
in massive subway line closures and military presence in the subway for
months, making it an effective fear-creation attack that would cost a city
hundreds of millions of dollars, and potentially much more in lost
productivity and mental anguish.

I think the reason we haven't seen those attacks is because so few people
would actually want to do them. A can of gas brought into a subway car in a
backpack and ignited while the door was closed, combined with an armed shooter
using a handgun would cost < $500 and would easily result in widespread
closures. If two individuals did this same attack on two separate lines on the
same morning, the financial damage would multiply substantially, even if
nobody was killed. Suddenly there would be TSA scanners in all subway entries
and it would take an extra few hours to ride a few stops.

But on a plane, even a small explosive charge can take the aircraft out of the
sky, so I think there is still motive for attackers to try this vector, but if
the goal is to make airplanes crash it would be far more effective to use a
high powered rifle near an airport and actually shoot at the aircraft. Some
airports offer geographical features where this attack would be particularly
effective.

That we haven't seen anyone do this also suggests strongly that there is
virtually nobody who wants to harm American citizens living in the US, or
perhaps that all those who do have extremely grandiose ideas for attacks that
are very unlikely to succeed.

The 9/11 attacks were a brilliant way to weaponize aircraft, but after that
was used once it becomes a lot harder to use it again. My guess is that if
there ever is another large attack it will be something completely different.
The first WTC bombing failed, but (similar to 9/11) relied on a very open
loophole (fertilizer + van + parking garage under skyscraper). So I think
authorities should be focusing on identifying the attack vectors that we are
still vulnerable to that haven't been tried.

~~~
orclev
I honestly don't understand what the motive for the TSA is. I mean, yes it's
security theater and political "we must do something" in action, but it
doesn't seem like that's enough to justify the continued stupidly of that
organization. The best guess I have at this point is that the combination of a
convenient jobs program that isn't republican kryptonite, plus convenient pork
projects (hello body scanners), with the added bonus of a perpetual excuse to
eliminate personal freedoms and drum up the boogeyman man of terrorism
whenever it's convenient is just too tempting to let go.

------
magoon
I was hoping to never hear the term "phablet" again.

------
kylehotchkiss
As long as I can take the laptop / camera on the plane and don't have to fret
over it being stolen by the baggage handlers who look in bags.

------
doubt_me
I think I remember reading that Israel found laptop bomb batteries. Or some
country found them.

~~~
thenewwazoo
You remember the president of the USA disclosing code-word level classified
intelligence, gathered by Israeli agents in Egypt, about ISIS planning laptop
bombs, to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador, without going through
the necessary internal approval channels or getting permission from Israel.

[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/17/pres...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/17/president-
trump-intelligence-leak-homeland-security-russians-laptop-bombs/101802538/)

------
kbos87
The people who complain about heightened security never have a better
proposal. This article is pure pandering with no balanced opinion of the fact
that there could be credible motivations to ask for this.

~~~
djsumdog
The TSA has stopped zero terrorists. It's security theater. It's just dumb. No
other country requires people to take off their shoes. No other country will
feel you up if you fail the millimeter wave scan. Their false positive rate is
so high it's pretty much random chance.

Sure security is bad in other countries. I've had to remove everything from my
bag in several airports, but America is still somehow the worst in spite of
that. Fuck the TSA. When I do leave the US, I take a train to Canada and fly
from there. Their security is mostly the same, but at least I feel like I
can't complain since it's not my country.

~~~
diabeetusman
They both have an insane false-positive rate as well as an insane false-
negative rate (95%, as other people have pointed out).

