-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Alex Eckelberry <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Fair enough. It's a trade-off that I would gladly make, however. I > might also posit that if we dedicated the financial resouces to stopping > plane crashes as we do to airline security, the ROI would be better. > > I suppose what's lost in this whole discussion is the fact that airlines > are one attack vector. You get that nailed down, the terrorists will > move to shopping malls and other mediums. This is, after all, what they > do in Isreal. > Again, Alex and I agree (not surprising, really :-) I'm of the opinion that, yes -- we do need good screening options at the airport. but I would also argue that if you rely solely stopping these threats at the airport security screening process, you've already lost the battle. The real failure here is how this guy ever managed to get approval to fly in the first place -- this was an intelligence failure, first and foremost. - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj4DBQFLQ+9jq1pz9mNUZTMRAkrGAJUa/msd/DeHemTsU+VDcaW5caEdAJ9lwo6W mwGT4UUafzsYTEXqtkXxYQ== =4ymS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
