Re: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen
This is what Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said about ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen on 30 Sep 2004 at 17:06 For instance, is it indeed possible that revealing this rule would pose an additional security risk? If such a rule exists (and it does) then hijackers obviously already know about it. Could this rule also reveal some deeper secrets about how hijackers can be detected? I seriously doubt it. There's some wonderful Sicilian Reasoning in that: We can't reveal the rule because the Bad Guys would figure out what we're looking for. But the Bad Guys already know what we're looking for, but we'll keep the rule secret anyway because we know they know what we're looking for. The thing is, the Bad Guys know that too...
Re: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Tyler Durden wrote: If this is the case, then this reveals what I would argue to be a dangerous mindset: The government needs to protect the people from themselves...ie, from the normal operation of democracy. On Cyperhpunks I would suppose this does not seem suprising. ObObviousUnderstatement: 1 ObDurden: 0 But it perhaps reveals that there is explicit, conscious thought occurring along these lines in the government. THAT, perhaps, is new. Not. ObObviousUnderstatement: 2 ObDurden: 0 -TD -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xBD4A95BF ...justice is a duty towards those whom you love and those whom you do not. And people's rights will not be harmed if the opponent speaks out about them. Osama Bin Laden - - - There aught to be limits to freedom!George Bush - - - Which one scares you more?
Re: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen
From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sep 30, 2004 5:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen .. For instance, is it indeed possible that revealing this rule would pose an additional security risk? If such a rule exists (and it does) then hijackers obviously already know about it. Could this rule also reveal some deeper secrets about how hijackers can be detected? I seriously doubt it. One possibility raised by Dan Simon (I think) on Eric Rescorla's excellent blog is that the rule is part of some monthly briefing that is sent out, which might include some kind of information they'd rather not have published, e.g., be especially careful about anyone carrying a guitar case; we've heard rumors about using one to bring a Tommy gun onboard. Then of course, the argument may be that the government wanted to hide the rule for the very reason of making it more unassailable. In other words, if the rule were known, then it might be more easily contested in court. Hiding the rule protects the law which in turn protects national security. Maybe. I guess the thing that's confusing about any of these answers is that the rules as they're applied must be propogated to thousands of people. It's not like they could easily hide guidance like no more than 10 Arabs per flight or double-screen anyone with brown skin and a Koran--someone would leak it. Perhaps the written rules include things like this that they don't want to subject to court scrutiny, but then how do they get that down to the people doing the screening at the gate? The whole idea of laws that the citizens aren't allowed to see just sounds like something you'd expect in some godawful third-world dictatorship, not in the US. -TD --John Kelsey
Re: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen
John Kelsey wrote... Maybe. I guess the thing that's confusing about any of these answers is that the rules as they're applied must be propogated to thousands of people. It's not like they could easily hide guidance like no more than 10 Arabs per flight or double-screen anyone with brown skin and a Koran--someone would leak it. Perhaps the written rules include things like this that they don't want to subject to court scrutiny, but then how do they get that down to the people doing the screening at the gate? That's a good point. And those screeners ain't exactly the cream of the crop, if ya' know what I mean. A year ago they were making minimum wage, so if someone wanted a copy of those guidelines, it'd be easy as hell to con it out of one of em. (INVOKE SPIRIT OF TIM MAY HERE)...dress all official-like with a clipboard and some random badge, and start quizzing the locals about the current rules. Maybe that wouldn't work at JFK, but go to the airport at, say, Lexington So Carolina or Bumfuck Idaho and you'd get the information faster than a hillbilly can skin a possum for dinner. So no way they could keep such a big secret, and I would suspect that the Brazil-factor is not so great that the TSA doesn't already know that. I think you may be onto something w.r.t the Profiling issue. That may have more to do with it than anything. In other words, they don't want the thing contested in court, and the powers that be may not want to be personally liable. So in other words, this law is basically secret so that it can be secret. If nothing else, the Iraq WMD debacle should teach that they really don't have some deep, secret and justifiable information. -TD _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen
At 05:06 PM 9/30/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote: I post this not as a refernce per se, but to ask the question: Exactly Why Does the Government Not Want to Reveal Their ID Rules? For instance, is it indeed possible that revealing this rule would pose an additional security risk? If such a rule exists (and it does) then hijackers obviously already know about it. Not only that, but as Bruce S pointed out, they can reverse-engineer the rules by sending probes.
Re: ID Rules Exist, But Can't Be Seen
Talking out his ass, Tyler Durden wrote: That's a good point. And those screeners ain't exactly the cream of the crop, if ya' know what I mean. A year ago they were making minimum wage, so if someone wanted a copy of those guidelines, it'd be easy as hell to con it out of one of em. (INVOKE SPIRIT OF TIM MAY HERE)...dress all official-like with a clipboard and some random badge, and start quizzing the locals about the current rules. Maybe that wouldn't work at JFK, but go to the airport at, say, Lexington So Carolina or Bumfuck Idaho and you'd get the information faster than a hillbilly can skin a possum for dinner. Have you ever done penetration testing? It would be harder at a small airport because the people all know each other. It's the larger organizations in which you're able to cloak yourself in anonymity. You are correct, however, in your characterization of the screeners. Sheesh, what a bunch of mouth-breathing imbeciles and petty thieves. I haven't flown since 2001, but I bring people to NYC airports frequently, and am always impressed with TSA's level of professionalism. Not favorably impressed, mind you, but impressed.
