TSA Announces Pilot of Trusted Traveler Program 388
Bob the Super Hamste writes "CNN reports that the TSA has announced the pilot of their trusted traveler program. This is the program where an individual gives up additional information to the government and then gets expedited security. The pilot program will only be available to certain frequent fliers on Delta passengers flying out of Atlanta and Detroit, and to American Airlines passengers flying out of Miami and Dallas. Plans are in the work to expand this to other airports and other airlines as well."
Implying (Score:5, Insightful)
All other travelers presumed guilty.
Re:Implying (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Geez...can't someone have some sense and at least suggest all we really need is maybe a metal detector, and on the other side, a couple of bomb sniffing dogs....no need for special irradiation machines to step through, no need for the latest TSA grope...and likely less TSA personnel to man each site.
[slaps head]
Sorry...was starting to make some sense there...that just doesn't work on the Govt (especial
Re:Implying (Score:5, Insightful)
None of the current tech really addressed the inability of the TSA preventing people from taking box cutters on plains as illustrated by things like this http://www.blackmediascoop.com/2011/06/17/chef-gets-by-tsa-onto-a-plane-with-4-knives-in-bag/ [blackmediascoop.com] .
Since 2001 the door to the cockpit has been improved and the procedures for the pilots... Nothing on the ground has really fixed the issue.
Divide and conquer (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, it's a little bit of "divide and conquer" in the works here. 10, 15, perhaps 20% of air travelers get this "trusted" status. The rest of the herd has to tolerate the indignities, and obviously they deserve it. If they were "trustworthy", after all, they would be like "us", cutting in at the head of the line.
So, with a special class of elites to show off, the TSA will get away with yet greater indignities imposed on the unwashed masses.
Didn't Orwell work this same thing into his story?
Re:Divide and conquer (Score:5, Insightful)
Didn't Orwell work this same thing into his story?
Trust in a government that doesn't trust its own people? Trust in a government that has so many secrets that it can't trust its own people to keep them. Trust in a government that gives more money to its enemies than it does to its own people. Hmmmm....Let me get back to you on that.
Lovely (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a perfect solution that balances the public wish for appearance of freedom, with the government and corporate wish for the appearance of security.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And raises lots of money for the government too!
Re: (Score:2)
Tax the Traveler or Tax society, when the state/country is in debt, how would you prefer to pay off the debt?
How about tax the program out of existence? Looking for deep budget cuts? I'd love to see some numbers for TSA expenses to me and mine.
Re:Lovely (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This is a perfect solution that balances the public wish for appearance of freedom
Only for the rich.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Nay, for the rich, or for those willing to give up every piece of privacy they have.
Re:Higher Risk Areas (Score:5, Insightful)
Right.
You realise that, from a purely statistical perspective, airline terrorism is non-existent.
If risk mitigation were an aim, why create the giant, soft-target of a couple thousands - bottled up in airport queuing areas?when they can
Governments feel secure completely control behaviour. Corporations feel secure, when they have governments captive.
All of them advance their agenda, without the slightest real concern for your individual or collective "safety".
Bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)
And there is no guarantee the system will not be revoked in future - personal information cannot suddenly become private again.
Another "class" of citizen. (Score:5, Insightful)
This system would establish a new class of people who are allowed to travel without question while most of the people are left to undergo "screening".
The system, even as ideally envisioned, is a breeding ground for abuse, because people who give even decently manufactured information to the TSA will get privileged access. Just like RFID passports, it gives the illusion of more security while actually reducing real security, because intelligent criminals will then be trusted without question.
The TSA needs to be abolished, not allowed to create discriminatory, security-harming policies.
I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Until I am PROVEN GUILTY of not being one. I don't have to "opt in" for what should be my no-questions-asked constitutional rights.
Haven't flown much recently, then?
I'm aware you're describing the ideal. No need to educate me on my rights, or erosion thereof. Having traveled internationally recently, I'll add that the TSA's policies are consistent with those of the People's Republic of China. And that should tell you all you need to know.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, when I was in China two years ago, they were a lot friendlier than the TSA in a lot of respects. Not saying that the Chinese are a paragon of civil liberties, of course (they're horrible), but when it comes to airport security, they are less onerous than the USA.
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll add that the TSA's policies are consistent with those of the People's Republic of China.
That is an unwarranted insult to the Chicoms. As far as airports go, the Chicoms are nowhere near as bad as the TSA. Airport security in China is FAR, FAR more accommodating and FAR FAR more respectful to passengers than the TSA is.
That is first hand knowledge.
Re: (Score:2)
Until I am PROVEN GUILTY of not being one. I don't have to "opt in" for what should be my no-questions-asked constitutional rights.
Now that you've swept away TSA with a two sentence assertion on an internet forum, can we all go directly to the gate at the airport without any security checks?
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe I was just blowing off some steam in a public forum about an issue that frustrates me. See the difference??
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
As Ronald Reagan and similar idiots would likely say: "Trust... but verify."
(Note: does not actually involve trust.)
Re: (Score:2)
If you insist on verifying everything someone tells you, you don't trust them at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You trust them to take action. You verify they did in fact do as they say later and that it provided the agreed upon results. The same way your boss trusts you to do your job, then later when time permits, verifies you did it correctly and takes appropriate action.
Blind trust is what fools do. Trust as you put it, is built up over time through verification.
No standing (Score:3)
Unfortunately it isn't you whose rights are being violated because you don't have a constitutionally guaranteed right to fly on Delta's or American's planes. It is they whose rights are being abridged by the government making it mandatory on them to require that their passengers be screened by the TSA. And they aren't likely to sue to defend their rights. What we need is some airline to step up and refuse the TSA and then challenge it all the way up when they get shut down for it.
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:5, Informative)
Except that there is no constitutional right to fly in an airplane. If you don't like their rules, don't fly.
Argument over.
Except the whole point of the US Constitution is that lists the rights of the government, not the rights of the people. And prohibiting people from traveling in private transport is not one of them.
Commerce among the states (Score:2)
Except the whole point of the US Constitution is that lists the rights of the government, not the rights of the people. And prohibiting people from traveling in private transport is not one of them.
Does a plane take off in one state and land in another? If so, it's "commerce among the states" that the Congress has always been allowed to regulate.
Re:Commerce among the states (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the Founding Fathers would be horrified by the idea of crowding into a metal tube and being thrust through the air at over 500 mph.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What if I can afford to buy an airplane outright, and then charge people to fly in it?
I can't have whatever security measures I want if I do this -- this is just an airline, and the TSA won't let me do this without groping the people that pay me to fly in my plane.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm guessing the only reason they don't is....there aren't any terrorists.
(Also the reason they aren't blowing up airport scanner queues, shopping malls, trains, buses, sports stadiums, museums, Hooters bars, etc., etc., etc)
Re: (Score:3)
So I don't go to some of the places that I used to have on my destination list, and where I do go, I try to drive. In the last two years, I've flown only for business, and once for a funeral for which we couldn't pla
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:5, Informative)
Reference 49 USC S40103(a)(2): "A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/49/usc_sec_49_00040103----000-.html
Right to Travel: Argument Continues (Score:2)
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that there is no constitutional right to fly in an airplane. If you don't like their rules, don't fly.
Argument over.
So...anything not in the constution is fair game for Goverment to trample all over?
You know why "amendments" were added to the constution? Because the government tried stuff like this before. The difference is that the people back then had balls and stood up to the government. Today the country is full of sheeple like you.
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:4, Insightful)
This logic doesn't fly (pardon the pun) with other rights; how is it at all acceptable that we should be expected to waive one set of rights to reasonably realize another?
Oh, and I take it you don't understand that rights don't come from the US Constitution - you are born with them and the US Constitution is designed to put limits on the government to prevent it from violating those rights. It is not an exclusive list of rights. At least, it wasn't supposed to be before we started pissing on it in the name of safety.
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:4, Informative)
But that's not what we're takling about here. The TSA rules are government rules being forced on all people attempting to fly, regardless of what PRIVATE airline they choose. The Constitution does not grant government authority to impede the travel of it's citizens. In fact, the reality is the reverse; the Constitution ensures the rights of the citizens to travel freely.
Re:I Am Trusted Traveler (Score:4, Insightful)
Multi-Step Approach (Score:5, Insightful)
Step 2: Initially limit ability into "elite program" to create artificial demand
Step 3: Make it more painful for those not in "elite program" to travel
Step 4: Create new "platinum elite program" requesting even more privacy information
Step n: All your base are belong to us
In all seriousness, this is the slippery slope everyone talks about.
Re: (Score:3)
Give them free miles for every privacy item they give up and nobody will ever care.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you need to leave travelers happy, when you abuse them even more?
Re:Multi-Step Approach (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is more likely that they are trying to accumulate additional data that would allow them to more easily track your daily activities to build such a database. I'm not saying the go
Be polite... (Score:5, Funny)
When my doorbell rings and the Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons are on the doorstop, I tell them "No, thanks."
When the TSA offers to restore a small bit of the freedom I used to have anyway, but only after forcing me to give up something else, I say, "No, thanks, you intrusive motherfucking bastards."
Mom did try to raise a polite child, you know.
Re: (Score:2)
I took this route with a JW missionary and his grandson who came by sporadically. Ironically, while the grandfather never came to my door again, the grandson would frequently come over on Saturday with his friends and ask me about mainline Protestantism, and problems he was having with the NWT.
Self pat-down (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That will get you put on another list.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mind groping my crotch as long as somebody else is doing the striptease for me to watch...
DO NOT WANT! Have you seen the people that TSA hires? Ewww!
In other news (Score:2)
Terrorists and other ne'er-do-wells begin active surveillance and recruitment of people who have previously gained "trusted traveler" status.
Translation: go find someone who's already got their "get out of grope" card, and arrange for *them* to carry the Happy Boom Blox.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:In other news (Score:5, Interesting)
Note that people who opt for the "trusted traveller" program are going to be subject to exactly the same security measures that we had in airports immediately after the 2001 attacks. The only difference is that now the government gets to access personal details that they were prohibited from accessing before. The best way to avoid constitutional restrictions is to get people to voluntarily give up their rights.
This is worse than the current system (Score:5, Insightful)
Any terrorist with half a brain trying to plan an attack on an airplane now knows exactly how to do it: Forge an identity or recruit a new terrorist that can meet the Trusted Traveler requirements. Then use the Trusted Traveler identity to bypass the security that might catch your terrorist plot. Bruce Schneier writes a great deal about this: If you create an easier-than-standard path through security constraints, the bad guys, just like the good guys, will take the easier route, every single time.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. You can make a system that is harder to get in to than the effort to get through a single instance. Your error is to not realize that the system is only easier over multiple trips. The background check and other requirements are harder to accomplish. Someone that can get trusted traveler would be unlikely to be recruit-able and would certainly be risky to try and recruit. Forging shouldn't be a possibility as the records should be electronic and include a photo. The effort to get in to the syst
Re:This is worse than the current system (Score:5, Insightful)
The next terrorist attack will not the the same as the last terrorist attack.
Already tried and shut down (Score:5, Informative)
It was then started again, but more limited. http://daggle.com/clear-airport-security-with-all-downsides-2179 [daggle.com]
So... how long will this incarnation last?
Re: (Score:2)
They had a program in 2009 called Clear to speed you through screening and it was abruptly shutdown without explanation.
I had heard that the company running the program wasn't making a profit. That, plus the laptop fiasco mentioned by the other poster killed it pretty quickly.
What is this supposed to do, exactly? (Score:3)
you know (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The regs say "a state issued photo id".
A buddy of mine uses his concealed carry permit... seems to me that would work great for the trusted traveler program. Most states already have a process for obtaining one (realistic or not), and after fingerprinting and both state and FBI background checks, well... you prolly aren't a terrorist.
Doesn't this defy the goal of securing the flights (Score:2)
Reserving Judgment (Score:3, Interesting)
It sounds interesting, but given their history I'm highly skeptical. I could see it improving things, but it all depends on two things.
a) How much and what information they're actually collecting (they didn't say):
The amount and nature of the information that will be sought was not disclosed.
I could easily imagine them requiring absurd amounts of information, such as full disclosure of banking accounts, family background information, etc., etc. Given that I'm sure they won't be trustworthy enough to store it safely, this could be a deal breaker for many (and have disastrous consequences when their database is hacked).
And b) What exactly this means:
Security experts have long expressed concern about so-called "clean skins" -- potential terrorists who enroll in "trusted traveler" programs to avoid scrutiny during a terror mission. But the TSA says it will continue to incorporate random and unpredictable security measures to address such concerns.
Random and unpredictable security measures even for "trusted travelers" sounds like it could make it not worth the effort. Furthermore, I can't imagine this program will last any longer than the first "close call" terrorist event where someone sneaks through using this program. So yeah . . . judgment reserved.
WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like watching all of the scariest bits of 1984 and Brave New World all coming together.
A world in which citizens have no liberties, and think that's how it should be. The state controls everything and tells you what to think. McCarthyism meets the Keystone Kops.
If the Americans are voluntarily giving up all of their liberties for this farce of security ... then the rest of the world us screwed. Because governments which have slightly less compunction about running roughshod over their citizens will be quite willing to do this as well ... in fact, they'll be required to in order to allow a flight into the US. Give it time, and the US will require these like the other heightened security measures.
So, the great bastion of personal liberties is essentially leading the charge to stripping them away from themselves and dragging everybody else along with them. All in the name of protecting those very liberties they're giving up.
I grieve for what America used to stand for. I also grieve for how it bodes for the rest of us.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe in all things in life there is a happy middle ground.
All categorical statements are wrong and over-simplified. ;-)
Can I finally use my damn TWIC card for something? (Score:4, Funny)
How will this work if I have other clearances? (Score:4, Insightful)
I still think the TSA should be abolished and that no one should be subject to screening before any form of travel by the government.
Will this system be separate or does it allow for equivalences? I have friends in security with actual government clearances and deep background checks. I have a concealed carry permit which subjects me to a mild background check and regular automated checks for arrests, convictions, restraining orders, and other such naughty behaviours.
Of course lets not forget that I shouldn't have to dork around with any of this anyway. If I buy a ticket I should be allowed on the damn plane without a metal detector and without a screening unless that is part of the terms of the sale.
Oh, this'll end well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Were I a nefarious evildoer, I'd figure out who's on this list -- easy to do by observing who goes through the line -- then kidnap said person's family and threaten to do horrible things to them unless they took this package on board.
I mean, really. Does the TSA really think we're stupid enough not to see this for the security theater it so shamelessly is? Or do they simply not care any more?
b&
Re: (Score:2)
If I were a nefarious evildoer, I would simply join the trusted traveler scheme myself.
Why not? If "do you intend to become a suicide bomber" is one of the questions, I can simply answer "no". How would anyone know that I was lying?
Re: (Score:2)
Or do they simply not care any more?
They only care about the money we let them spend.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As best I can make out, this is about making a shorter line for frequent travelers. I seriously doubt this is going to change the bag/person screening part of the procedure. (Not that the current screening isn't just security theater, but I don't think they're going to change it).
Already in Canada (Score:2)
We've had this for a little while in Canada, and it works quite well. What they've done is re-purpose the Nexus Card [cbsa-asfc.gc.ca] for security lines.
Nexus is a joint Canada-US initiative whereby applicants get pre-screened by both countries. If you are approved you can use self-declarations plus iris scanning (air) or RFID card (land) when entering Canada from anywhere or entering the US from Canada. The program is kludgy but it keeps getting improved. It costs $50 for five years and is absolutely indispensable
Like getting a secret clearance (Score:2)
If you've ever worked for a company that is involved with certain government contracts you might have had to apply for a 'secret clearance'. There are of course many levels of this, but it does involve making all sorts of information available to the government to prove you are who you say you are. I would imagine that the level of clearance they are talking about for the trusted flier program is a few notches below that of a top secret clearance. My nephew recently got a job with a government agency req
Land of the free? (Score:2)
"Papers please..."
Bad idea. (Score:2)
Will it allow snowglobes? (Score:3)
'Cause my 8 year old just got denied at a TSA screening for having a snow globe in her carry on. I'm still trying to figure out the specific logic. It's not a blunt weapon, since you can take on all sorts of similar sized objects which could be used as blunt weapons. I'm not sure if it's glass, but if it is it would be no less of a weapon when broken than the mirror in my overnight bag if broken. It might be the liquid, but a globe is sealed and can't be opened without tools - which they won't let you carry on, so it can't be part of a binary (or higher) explosive to be combined int he air. (N.B.: it fit in a quart bag, though I'm sure there was more than 3oz of liquid in it) Of course, that would mean that it would have to be primary explosive...but they let us just check the bag, so they've let us put the explosive on the plane.
DHS spends $50B a year; Half a Trillion dollars since the WTC/Pentagon incident. I want my fucking money back.
Just a hack away (Score:2)
So all someone has to do to get easier security is hack their database and add their information in. Nice.
Because frequent flyers are *never* terrorists. (Score:5, Interesting)
"Raised privacy concerns" (Score:3)
Why bother protecting airplanes? (Score:4, Insightful)
There are enough people gathered in a tight wad at airport security lines these days to present a far tastier target for terrorist attack than the planes themselves. Imagine a wheelie-suitcase full of explosive (with whatever precautions would be necessary to evade the bomb-sniffing dogs outside the airport -- I'm sure with an appropriate program of multiple layers of airtight seals and thorough chemical washing this could be done) and shrapnel set off in the middle of a security line; you'd probably kill at least a hundred people and close down the airport for a long time, causing millions of dollars in economic damage. Set it off close to the front and you stand a good chance of ruining a lot of expensive x-ray equipment in addition.
Why go after the hard target when there are much easier fish to catch?
No offense... (Score:3)
LOL Collaborators (Score:3)
This worked out really well for the collaborators last time:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/06/26/1435209/Out-of-Business-Clear-May-Sell-Customer-Data [slashdot.org]
I'll say it again: Do extra, voluntary action to cooperate with the police state in legitimizing the "papers please" nonsense, and get exactly what you deserve.
It started as a simple excuse to lock you into your ticket purchases. It still has that negative effect, and not a single positive. After all, matching ID to ticket had been done for decades leading to, and of course on, 9/11.
I think I see our problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
TSA/DHS annual budget: 43.1 billion.
NASA annual budget: 17.3 Billion.
We'd rather molest the children than secure their future.
Re: (Score:2)
That's "white list" to you. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So I can buy my way out of airport security? (Score:4, Funny)
Capitalism solves everything!
Re: (Score:3)
Keep trying to demonize capitalism though. It helps the image of the capitalists.
Re:So I can buy my way out of airport security? (Score:4, Insightful)
Funny, but this is not capitalism.
Re:So I can buy my way out of airport security? (Score:4, Funny)
More than that. I've never been body scanned or pat downed the 2-dozen or so flights since the start of the program a year and a half ago??? I'm kind of sad that I'll have to share my good fortune with the plebs in my special line for people who shower and shave before boarding an airplane. What's the point of American Express upgrades anymore?
If you can't detect my sarcasm, let's add a little more.
If I were in charge for the pilot program, I'd have a simple question. "Do you want to overthrow the Federal Government" Anything from "Hell yes!" to "Not really, but I wouldn't be sad to see it happen" will guarantee you're harmless and ready for accelerated screening techniques. Shifty eyes and an "Absolutely not. God bless America, and No One Else!" answer will guarantee you're a lying tarwowist. I think we can all agree on that... and nothing else.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure the enhanced patdown will be able to find it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm sure the enhanced patdown will be able to find it.
in the parent thread's case, I doubt it.
Re: (Score:2)
That's hardly fair. Detroit is the largest airport in Michigan, I live a few hours away and still travel out of there.
Re:From Detroit? (Score:5, Funny)
A one way out of Detroit isnt suspicious. It means you've got the good sense not to come back.
Bigoted against Muslims (Score:4, Informative)
I think it has more to do with the poster being a bigot -- because Detroit has the highest muslim population in the US.
Re: (Score:2)