Schneier on Security

Clive Robinson • May 8, 2008 8:45 AM

Opps just re read my post the people I want to behave more reasonably are the security bods.

Basicaly I’m fed up with security alert after security alert the economic cost probably considerably out weighs the actuall (financial) cost of terrorist activity by now.

And no I do not want to start an argument about the human or moral cost of terrorist activities simply because it’s a game that the terorist will always win at in the end unless we deliberatly discount its effects.

Clive Robinson • May 8, 2008 9:03 AM

@photofan,

No I’m quite serious,

Firstly the easiest way to get rid of a process is to prove to the process owner that it does not work and is actually hurting them more than any benifit (ie the security boss).

Secondly if they are terorists their image will be recorded for future use (which CCTV has not been good at).

Thirdly if the security bods jump on one set of people (photographa) they have to accept that their response is going to be effectivly recorded and will hopefully moderate their behaviour appropriatly.

I could give a whole lot more reasons but I’m sure most folks can think of them for themselves.

Clive Robinson • May 8, 2008 10:34 AM

I read in a newspaper this morning that yet more people have been accused of terorism.

Guess what apparently they had a “powerfull magnet” besides laptops and cammers.

Now I do not know about the rest of you but I have a several powerfull magnets around my house some very powerfull. Like a lot of people there are a couple in the kitchen another is for my son to play with (under supervison) and another I use for erasing magnetic media befor I dispose of it.

I guess I could now be in trouble 8)

What next to be a terorist weapon, maybe Bruce should run a competiton 8)

Clive Robinson • May 8, 2008 3:53 PM

@godzilla808,

“Maybe their just tourists”

Probably not, unless they where from another part of the UK. There is just something about the way people dress and move in the UK that tends to make them stand out as such.

It’s a bit like Bruce’s “acting hinky” it’s something you know when you see it but trying to describe it is like trying to make water flow uphill (not imposible just difficult and likewise difficult to explain 8)

I guess as a “cop out” you could say the British just lack style and prescence. It’s why European tourists are so easy to spot (and sadly rob in London). And as for people from the US and Canada, well hmm how do I put it tactfully?

@ Chris,

“… In England that speak proper english …”

Saddly no, the “Queen’s English” tends only to be spoken by those to whom it has been taught abroad or in the better parts of Scotland…

The use of words like “whom” etc are a dead give away that you are not from England, unless you have a particularly type of “Mid North Surrey” or “home counties” “plummy” accent once heard world wide on “BBC anouncments” that now tends only to be taught at elocution lessons.

You are much more likley to hear such localised “outh speak” as “init, betcher, teached” all of which make my soul cringe and offer up a heart felt plea to those British and Irish novelists and poets who in times past brought a genteal elegance to the English language 😉

Clive Robinson • May 9, 2008 1:00 AM

@James,

“Would you have reacted the same to agroup of young girls trying to be arty …”

First off I should make clear that the two gentelmen where not photographing each other and the camera was a small digital compact, and it was the flash that alerted me to them and the gent using the camera had his back to me when I made my comment to my partner and she noded agrement.

Secondly it depends on what you mean by “young”. If you mean less than teenage then no I would have thought “why do their parents let them do it”. If early to mid teen and not under obvious supervision then I would have thought “why don’t they grow up”. Mid teen and later my thoughts would have been the same.

And as for “girls” v “men” I doubt if it would have effected my thinking at all.

The reason behind my thinking was simply my whole hearted loathing of “security alerts” and the bunch of idiots who think it’s a great way to “cry wolf”. Having lost something like a week of my life to the dam things.

Bruce calls it “security theater” but that implies you have a choice as to if you want to be in the audience.

A simple fact that most people have not realy stated. If you take the number of people that have either died or been maimed in road traffic accidents since 9/11 in any given country. And weigh it against the number killed or maimed by terrorist activity in the same country you are likley to find a difference of atleast an order of magnitude.

Now ask yourself how much that country has spent (direct costs) on preventing “death on the roads” compaired to “fighting the war on terror” then ask yourself what the further “indirect costs” are.

Finaly ask yourself where all the “direct cost” money has gone and the benifit gained by the rest of the populace in the country.

To put it simply there are a large number of signs we are about to enter a major recesion that might lead to a global depression.

Currently the finger is being pointed at the banks and bad lending on mortgages as the cause. But in reality there is to little money in the economy due to the “war on terror” and it is this that will probably define the level of pain felt by the average person for the next few years.

And for the doubters look at the level of pain in any given country v it’s costs on the “war on terror”.

Oh and remember to make adjustments for dependancy. For instance Spain and Portugal have had very high inflation of property prices due to people from Britain and Germany bying holiday homes and taking holidays there. The colapsing UK economy has caused significant problems for both Spain and Portugal.