Bruce Schneier | |||||||||
Schneier on SecurityA blog covering security and security technology. « Burglars and "Feeling Secure" | Main | Electronic Voting in Ireland » December 20, 2004How Not to Test Airport Security
Four days after police at Charles de Gaulle Airport slipped some plastic explosives into a random passenger’s bag as part of an exercise for sniffer dogs, it is still missing -- and authorities are stumped and embarrassed. It's perfectly reasonable to plant an explosive-filled suitcase in an airport in order to test security. It is not okay to plant it in someone's bag without his knowledge and permission. (The explosive residue could remain on the suitcase long after the test, and might be picked up by one of those trace mass spectrometers that detects the chemical residue associated with bombs.) But if you are going to plant plastic explosives in the suitcase of some innocent passenger, shouldn't you at least write down which suitcase it was? Posted on December 20, 2004 at 09:13 AM • 16 Comments • View Blog Reactions To receive these entries once a month by e-mail, sign up for the Crypto-Gram Newsletter. Actually, “authorities are stumped and embarrassedâ€? is an understatement : the minister of interior made a statement saying it was “scandalousâ€?. Apparently it was the idea of two security officers, and not (thank god) an established practice. A few days after the incident, disciplinary action was taken against them and they were suspended. Posted by: Ned Baldessin at December 20, 2004 09:29 AM Simply amazing! And what separates the authorities from the criminals and other terrorists? No one should be trusted with explosives at the airport, neither police nor terrorists! Suspension seems pretty lame for committing an unethical and almost certainly highly illegal act. Do the laws not apply to police? Posted by: Ted Demopoulos at December 20, 2004 11:40 AM This begs several questions for speculation. Is it proved that this was an accident? What if it wasn't? Is other contraband being put in people's luggage? As the saying goes, "Who watches the watchers?" So, supposedly, the passengers can't smuggle explosives aboard the plane. This just means that apparently, security personnel can do it instead. It's a truism that no matter how strong your security is, it can still be breached by your best friend. Even though this was an accident, and security requires some level of trust (in the screening personnel), trust should be engineered out of systems as much as possible. Posted by: Francois Kashy at December 20, 2004 12:01 PM Two weeks later, officials in New York lost a bag full of explosives while conducting a similar test. The bag later turned up in Amsterdam. At least they weren't using an unsuspecting passenger's bag. Posted by: Eric Angell at December 20, 2004 01:29 PM So what? What if their security was vastly improved due to well-rehearsed security procedures? Isn't constant training and testing a mark of good security? So in the future they'll use their own bags instead of passengers'. And maybe they'll put in, say, a radio transmitter to help them track the bag if they lose track of it. So their system will improve even more. But it sounds to me as though many people are calling for ending the tests-- degrading the security far more than a lost plastic brick ever did. It's not plutonium; there's plenty of explosive already loose in the world. I don't understand what the big deal is. Posted by: Eric at December 20, 2004 02:52 PM At least the explosives were fake in the case of the NY airport. (What's scary is, the machine did it's job and caught the device... the people fell down on the job.) Neither incident makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Posted by: cls at December 20, 2004 04:03 PM Last year I flew from Gatwick to Bahrain carrying two laptops. I put one of them in check-in luggage. With such a fuss being made of baggage security I had complete confidence as my bag disappeared through the check-in porthole. Posted by: Allen Jasson at December 21, 2004 04:17 AM While some people here are laughing it isn't very funny if they find explosives on arrival in some fun human rights loving country like Saudi Arabia. Posted by: AlRayyes at December 21, 2004 04:22 AM > It's not plutonium; there's plenty of explosive already loose in the world. I don't understand what the big deal is. Is that a troll? There may be a lot of explosives in the world, but none of them should be in airport luggage, don't you think? That they shouldn't test their system is a straw man. It's just that the way they are currently doing it is patently idiotic. Posted by: empty at December 21, 2004 11:56 AM Kurdish... am I right that the signature vindictiveness towards the french (the people who gave the US of America the Statue of Liberty) gives you away as actually being American? Posted by: Allen Jasson at December 21, 2004 12:02 PM “Basically, it could have gone anywhere — to the four corners of the world.â€? -- one word: eBay Israel Torres Posted by: israel torres at December 21, 2004 03:17 PM I think there was a similar incident in Canada. An innocent traveler found that something had been smuggeled into his bag. It turned out that it was a security test, and they had mixed up his bag with that of an agent. I don't find he reference, if anyone could post it? Posted by: piglet at December 22, 2004 04:27 PM No, it's no laughing matter. Posted by: Allen Jasson at December 23, 2004 06:56 AM After my recent experience 9/3/07 with security through wearing a back brace at Charles de Gaulle Airport, nothing would surprize me. Insult to injury, the lock of my suitcase was missing and the zip had been left wide open. Was I to be the target for them ? Posted by: mo at April 4, 2007 04:20 PM Charles de Gaulle Airport security told a 72 year old woman 9/3/07, on going through the archway causing it to ping, wearing a back brace to 'TAKE IT OFF'. her reply was No, not in front of all the passengers going through security 'TAKE IT OFF' was again stated. (in order to comply it meant her unzipping her trousers which would fall to the floor, partly removing her nickers enabling her to remove her back brace in front of many passengers)The Humiliation they caused her through saying No is Unforgiveable. Anybody who has a disability beware of securiity at Charles de Gaulle Airport, they will Humiliate you . Posted by: Mo at April 4, 2007 04:50 PM Post a comment
Powered by Movable Type 3.2. Photo at top by Steve Woit.
Schneier.com is a personal website. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of BT Counterpane. |
|
Comments