Original URL: 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/29/capps_replacement_in_trouble/
Passenger screening gimmick stuck at the gate
By Thomas C Greene in Washington (thomas.greene at theregister.co.uk)
Published Tuesday 29th March 2005 18:13 GMT

Passenger screening gimmick stuck at the gate 'CAPPS-3' not ready for
takeoff

The US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is behind schedule in
developing a new terrorist-busting database system called Secure Flight, a
report (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05356.pdf) by the Government
Accounting Office (GAO) says.

After confronting the obvious defects in the old pre-9/11 CAPPS
(computer-assisted passenger pre-screening system), which allowed 19 violent
terrorists to board flights on a single morning, the TSA set out to develop
CAPPS-2, supposedly an improvement. When that project failed to result in a
working system, TSA announced that it would re-work the entire scheme.

Proposed improvements included letting the government, rather than airlines,
administer the system, so that secret counter-terrorist intel could be used,
and merging airline passenger data with commercial data such as that stored
by privacy invasion outfits like ChoicePoint.

TSA got off to a strong start, successfully changing the system's name, for
example, but has since fallen behind on lower-priority modifications, such
as establishing privacy standards, and basically making it work.

Congress established ten milestones that Secure Flight must pass before its
intended roll-out in August. Of these, nine remain to be satisfied. (An
advisory committee has actually been chosen as required, but the criteria on
which its advice will be based are still up in the air.)

According to the report, the nine milestones remaining are: "Stress test
system and demonstrate efficacy and accuracy; Assess accuracy of databases;
Make modifications with respect to intrastate travel to accommodate states
with unique air transportation needs; Establish effective oversight of
system use and operation; Install operational safeguards to protect system
from abuse; Install security measures to protect system from unauthorized
access; Life-cycle costs and expenditure plans; Address all privacy
concerns; Create redress process for passengers to correct erroneous
information."

That's quite a shopping list, and it is hard to imagine a bureaucracy like
DHS/TSA getting through it, even in the highly unlikely event that
everything goes well. And if there are major problems, they will have to be
identified and corrected, after the customary blame game has been enacted on
Capitol Hill.

So the chance that this scheme will actually be implemented in August is
very slim, especially when one considers the extraordinary capacities that
it is expected to have.
An anti-terrorist machine

According to GAO, the required system capabilities are: "Comparison of data
contained in the passenger's reservation (PNR) with information contained in
government watch lists; Matching information in the PNR to CAPPS I rules to
identify individuals who should be subject to additional security screening;
Checking PNR data against commercial databases to assist in confirming the
passenger's identity; Matching PNR data against lists of international
fugitives and government 'wanted lists' to identify known criminals; Using
algorithms developed through intelligence modeling to identify previously
unknown terrorists; Maintaining a list of individuals, who have been
previously cleared under credentialing programs, to minimize the volume of
passengers that must be prescreened; Providing the capability to create a
temporary watch list based on information extracted from current
intelligence reports, such as blocks of stolen passports."

A computerized system that could reliably satisfy one of those requirements
day-in, day-out, with passenger volumes as heavy as the USA's, would be
mighty impressive. But here we have something out of Star Trek, in which
taxpayers are investing billions, with so many potential points of failure
that it will be a miracle if it doesn't increase the risk of hijackings.

It be full of bad data that will repeatedly flag and inconvenience the wrong
travellers. (The existing CAPPS system didn't stop the 9/11 hijackers,
although it did catch US Senator Edward Kennedy
(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/19/senator_on_terror_watch/) and
former singer Cat Stevens
(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/26/cat_stevens_midair_terror/), for
example.)

Worse, a system such as this is, by design, exceptionally easy for
terrorists to reverse-engineer. By making a series of 'dry runs,' a
terrorist crew can easily learn which members get flagged and which don't,
insight of tremendous value for choosing the individuals most likely to
succeed in an actual attack.

So it comes as no surprise that TSA should have fallen behind in developing
a system intended to do the impossible. The only odd thing here is the fact
that the law enforcement establishment, the public, and Congress foolishly
persist in believing that "information technology" is the answer to
real-world security problems. �



You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to