TSA: don't bring uncharged devices from oversea

http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2014/07/06/enhanced-security-measures-certain-airports-overseas

by alternize • 12 years ago

68 64 12 years ago

It's been proven these arbitrary restrictions don't actually enhance security. We need to see the TSA move to behavioral analysis for them to actually make a difference.

middleclick• 12 years ago

I am quite naive in these matters but I see two reasons why this won't happen: 1). This will effectively tear down the security theater (again, I assume this is what it is and may be uninformed that there is a real threat). 2). It is difficult to train a large number of personnel to perform behavioral analysis given the traffic the US airports handle.

ams61102• 12 years ago

israel reportedly does a good job at it. Of course they only have to deal with a few airports.

chimeracoder• 12 years ago

It's been proven these arbitrary restrictions don't actually enhance security.

Agreed.

We need to see the TSA move to behavioral analysis for them to actually make a difference.

They've tried this. In practice, it ends up being a very thin cover for racial profiling[0].

Of course, when the TSA itself admits[1] that there is no evidence of a threat of terrorism against aviation in the US, it's not surprising that more "advanced" techniques of detecting terrorism prove to be ineffective.

[0] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/us/racial-profiling-at-bos...

[1] http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/tsa-admits-...

waps2• 12 years ago

Of course there's a flip side of this coin. I think it's a very good bet that this action was not taken in a vacuum. So someone disguised a weapon or a bomb as an electronic device in their hand luggage, and got it on board and was caught.

So who takes responsibility ? Because that's the million dollar question, although in this case, more like 100 million dollar question. If you make the TSA less onerous and the result is a plane plowing into a skyscraper, who pays ?

I think this action is at least partially the result of insurance companies saying "not us".

Do you have a better answer ?

chrismcb3• 12 years ago

To make what sort of difference? Abolishing the TSA would probably have the exact same effect.

far33d• 12 years ago

This is a huge pain in the ass. When I travel, I often don't use my phone for many days at a time, and usually return without a charged device.

rachelbythebay• 12 years ago

That's okay -- I'm sure they'll have a wide assortment of convenient charging devices which you can use. Hope your phone isn't vulnerable to USB-channel attacks...

Zancarius• 12 years ago

Knowing the TSA, they'll just confiscate the devices and "incinerate them."

vacri• 12 years ago

I've left something running on my phone and had it 'dump charge' overnight when usually it would last another day. There's all sorts of ways to unexpectedly lose charge.

This new rule will get them a lot of public kickback if they continue to enforce it. Bottles of water or nailclippers are cheap and have no personal attachment. Phones are expensive and people's lives are wound around them - not to mention that especially in this digital age, I wouldn't be suprised if more than a few people travel with no itinerary beyond what's kept on their phones.

late2part4• 12 years ago

Could it be that this is all part of a dragnet to track ESN/MEID of people's devices?

ggreer• 12 years ago

I'd be much less annoyed by these restrictions if the TSA did a better job explaining the reasons for them. Unfortunately, a statement such as, "Our scanners can't reliably tell the difference between batteries and specially-crafted explosives." is not something they want to publish. I have no idea if that's actually true, but it seems plausible.

Also, the implementation of this policy seems rather inconsistent. Are broken/powerless devices allowed in checked luggage? Can they be shipped via air freight? If I bring spare batteries, do I have to put them in a device and power it up? Etc.

Edit: It looks like this is a reaction to rumors of a plot to build bombs that look like laptops.[1]

1. http://abcnews.go.com/International/terrorists-team-syria-bu...

MBCook6• 12 years ago

[...] reaction to rumor [...]

Always a great thing to base policy on.

nickthemagicman2• 12 years ago

Is this just getting us used to powering on our laptops so the next step will be logging in and seeing whats on the computer?

late2part4• 12 years ago

Perhaps, but it's already sadly quite legal for them to do that: http://www.pcworld.com/article/142429/article.html

marco1• 12 years ago

Really? This is from 2008. Can someone confirm this is still true?

nickthemagicman2• 12 years ago

Were slowly getting conditioned to accept these intrusions.

jimktrains2• 12 years ago

Ah yes. More senseless rules that do nothing but make life more complicated for everyone.

lips• 12 years ago

Soo.. I also can't bring anything might be on the fritz or broken, or items that require a specific input or external device to do more than show a green LED? Or does a power indicator pass muster? This really seems impractical if enforced to the letter.

monksy4• 12 years ago

The scary thing about this is that the US people have no control over this initiative. We didn't ask for this, we have no control over their decision to do that. What are we going to do.. go to our congress person? They're not going to do anything over that.

late2part4• 12 years ago

We have control. We simply choose not to exercise it. We vote these congress-people into office, and they allow these things to happen. Mail your congressman, ask them to introduce a bill to fix this. Tell them if they don't you'll work to drive them out office. Campaign against those that support tyrannical security theater.

chc• 12 years ago

This seems to assume there is a glut of qualified candidates we could back instead who don't also support it.

judk• 12 years ago

And what happens when both electable parties' political machines put up primary candidates on the same side of an issue?

mkal_tsr• 12 years ago

I look forward to you producing a list of all representatives and senate candidates that are against these privacy violations, with citations of course.

monksy4• 12 years ago

What is that going to do? You have to remember that these people have been in office long enough to ignore their constituents and get away with it. They are prepared for when you send them a complaint. They'll return a form letter indicating. "Thank you for sending your complaint... insert a subtile fuck off but polite message .. etc"

It's the same with sex based laws. [I.e. having a broad def for a registered sex offender] They're unwilling to repeal ineffective ones in the hopes of not appearing ineffective towards the subject.

----

Anyways going off the rant. The problem is that the only way that we have the opportunity to "sway" the organization's actions is via a set of proxies. We have to influence our congress person, along with others, then we have to convince them that it's worth doing something and following through. If that's not enough we'll have to compete with the TSA unions/employees who claim that what they're doing is important/etc, the lobbyers who have fancy material for the congress person claiming "effectiveness", etc.

It pretty much looks hopeless.

Fomite• 12 years ago

I did a fair amount of international traveling back in the 1990's, and I recall several people saving that last bit of power in their laptops to power them on at security.

Guess it's just coming back into fashion.

ams61102• 12 years ago

I recall the same thing. It's not a new technique, though it seems to me that I haven't seen it done recently (I rarely travel by air and in fact tend to avoid it if there's any other option, so my observations don't mean much)

MBCook6• 12 years ago

I'm not sure this is new either. I remember traveling with my laptop (post 9/11) in sleep mode going through security so I could quickly 'turn it on' to show that it was a real laptop.

From what I can remember they're always (since before 9/11) been able to make you turn stuff on to prove it's real. Maybe they'll do it more, but it's not as if this rule came out of nowhere.

I agree with one of the top comments (as I write this) that if they every truly started confiscating 'dead' devices (at least of Americans) they would quickly run afoul of congress due to complaints.

Body scanners? "Whatever makes me safer." Taking your iPhone? "YOU'LL LOSE YOUR JOB".

gkoberger• 12 years ago

Previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7995512

Rapzid• 12 years ago

What's the science behind this? Is it not a bomb if it "powers on"? Is it a bomb maybe if it doesn't? Do unpowered devices pose more of a threat than powered devices?

NamTaf• 12 years ago

They want to unlock your phone and poke around. If it's 'out of battery' that's not an excuse.

efiftythree2• 12 years ago

I think their premise is that a device which has been converted to a bomb large enough to cause total destruction of its target would have had the majority of its components removed thus rendering it non-functional. Following that "logic" a device which powers on has a much lower chance of being an explosive device.

Osiris• 12 years ago

That doesn't make sense. A simple x-ray would show that the internal components have been removed.

chrismcb3• 12 years ago

Because a raspberry pi is SOOO large...

blazespin3• 12 years ago

The problem isn't the TSA, the problem is terrorism and the geopolitical policies that foment them.

blazespin3• 12 years ago

Oh yes, downvote. The possibility that the TSA has a threat that someone is going to be planting a bomb in a laptop that can't be detected by chemical smell is zero. It's not like terrorists have access to the same chemical detection equipment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing_at...

chrismcb3• 12 years ago

Terrorism? What Terrorism? You are probably more likely to get shot at a school shooting, than be involved in a "terrorist" attack. No matter how perfect a society you have, you will always have "geopolitical policies" that will "forment" potential terrorists.

jrockway2• 12 years ago

Pointless. Plenty of airports that allow transit from domestic flights without another security check. The terrorists will just board there.

coherentpony• 12 years ago

Plenty of airports that allow transit from domestic flights without another security check. The terrorists will just board there.

For some reason I am having trouble understanding the first sentence.

You're saying there are airports in the US that you can stopover at (with starting point also in the US) that don't put you through a second security check for a leg that leaves the US? I thought they all did that.

blazespin3• 12 years ago

You're saying you can avoid a TSA check from overseas if your final destination is US? Example of this? I doubt any example is from an at risk country.

jrockway2• 12 years ago

Yes, there are plenty of airports that have a transit area that you can just be in without any checks after arriving from a flight. Changi in Singapore comes to mind.

monksy4• 12 years ago

There are airports that have their own "US Based entry" areas as well. I had a pre-passport check in Switzerland. Why? I have no clue, it's not normal but they have US agents there trying to look up everyone coming in.

px1999• 12 years ago

The TSA and other US airport security process has gotten to the point where it's unnecessarily onerous. I avoid even stopovers in the US when flying (unless the US is my final destination) because it's such a wildcard/inconvenience both with security as well as immigration - it's easier to just pay more and fly direct or pick flights that are less convenient but don't transit through the US.

If they start confiscating un-poweruperable devices at any scale (ie if it were an enforced policy), that'd make transiting or traveling to the US far more prohibitive (realistically, i'd never transit with my primary laptop; and I'd imagine that a lot of organisations would start allowing their staff to only travel through the US with their China laptops)... ie it sounds like a terrible set of rules to have; and an even worse set to consider enforcing.

edit: I'm Canada-based and travel internationally several times each year -- avoiding the US on these trips is a real inconvenience.

Mandatum• 12 years ago

I've always opted to fly through HK rather than LA, US customs are both scary and slow. (As well as feeling like a an underground parking lot..)

michaelmior• 12 years ago

Slightly different situation, but while I was away in Israel for a conference, the battery on my laptop stopped holding a charge. Thus, I could only power on my machine if it was plugged in.

Of course in the airport I was asked to turn it on. I explained the situation and that I had no adapter, so they offered to take into a back room to check. I agreed and they came back around 15 minutes later to say it was charged and I should turn it on now.

Obviously something was lost in translation, but they ended up getting me to talk to the head of security. Finally I had to surrender my battery and charger for additional screening and pick them up at the airport a few days after my arrival.

antidamage2• 12 years ago

How the shit does this relate to aviation security?

MBCook6• 12 years ago

Explosives (to my knowledge) don't provide power, thus helping prove the battery isn't just a bomb.

And preventing bombings has been a 'big deal' in aviation security for a few decades now.

antidamage2• 12 years ago

They've never overcharged a LiPol then.

nfoz• 12 years ago

Many of the first release of Apple Macbooks had a "random shutdown syndrome" problem with their heatsinks. The laptop would randomly hard-shutdown and then be unable to turn back on for some time. This is widely documented.

I was experiencing this problem shortly before heading through US airport security. I was terrified they would ask me to turn on the laptop. They took me aside, but it was to ask me questions about the remote-control that came with these early macbooks (it was an apple product they didn't recognize, so they were suspicious).

My point is, there's no way to know that your product -- any product -- won't fail when you're going through security. The assumption that all devices going through security will be operational, is bogus.

dmishe• 12 years ago

I wonder if iOS/OSX "no charge" screen will be enough of a proof.

davecheney• 12 years ago

I travel a lot, at least 6 international trips a year, and do you know what? The rest of the world appears to be a reasonably safe place to fly, and you don't need to take your shoes off or have a reach around to visit those countries.

Smell that freedom folks - you've created a security 'organization' whose only policy is to create more inane forms of security theatre.

TSA: don't bring uncharged devices from oversea

Related Stories