Airport Security Part I: Security Lines
Airport security is much maligned in this country. Everyone from the joe standing in the security line wondering why he must throw away his water bottle and take off his shoes to the well respected security professional who has written tomes on everything from cryptography to hacking has besmirched the process.
I must confess that I found myself in this crowd more often than not. As I stood in line sans shoes and liquids I'd glance around at the facility about me and identify a few ways a do-badder could beat the system depending on their funding, patience and goals.
Inevitably, I would mentally get whatever items I needed through the screening process with a fair enough likelyhood of success that I felt quite comfortable joining the throngs of critics.
Then, one day while I was on the road I had an epiphany: "Some of the best minds (don't laugh) have come up with this system. What am I missing?" Therein lay the key question.
I had been mentally compromising airport security from the mindset of a terrorist who was willing to throw their life away for their cause. This is the wrong approach. Being willing to throw one's life away for Jihad is *very* different from being willing to get caught and rot in our legal system for the rest of your productive life. There is no glory in jail, only in death.
So now, what I had considered plots with a reasonable success rate (say, 3 out of 4 times) now suddenly became very risky. Even plots that I estimate would have a 90+ percent success rate don't seem worth the risk of me (the fictional terrorist) rotting in jail and not being able to bring Allah's righteousness down upon the infidels (that, apparently, is the rest of you). Allah wants me on earth being productive, or dead through Jihad, not tossing someone's salad in prison (if you don't understand it, don't look it up. Seriously).
This changes the security game. While security is (unfortunately) 90% reactive and 10% proactive (I made those numbers up) airport security screening as it is defined today (and as it is implemented in larger airports) is a necessary and effective step towards securing our airports. We don't need to eliminate threats, we just need to make them risky enough so that a terrorist isn't willing to risk their chance at death through jihad through the air carriers. In this case, "risky enough" could simply mean the possibility of catching them 1 in 10 times.
I believe we have accomplished this. So much so, in fact, that we have virtually guaranteed that the next attack will come through a different venue. The *only* reason they may continue to risk a shot at the airlines is because of the "bang for the buck" (pardon the tasteless pun) with regards to the impact it had on our economy.
I have faith, however, that the same minds that came up with our security (knowing every little detail about it and the odds of circumvention) are pondering that next possible attack.
And dare I say they have probably already foiled it.
P.S. Yes, there are still tragedies happening around the world related to this, such as the Tube and bus bombs in England. I am fully aware of these, but they only strengthen my position belief in the sufficiency (for the cost) of our airport security systems.
Now, my mental attacks are focussed elsewhere...for the most part.
-Brian
I must confess that I found myself in this crowd more often than not. As I stood in line sans shoes and liquids I'd glance around at the facility about me and identify a few ways a do-badder could beat the system depending on their funding, patience and goals.
Inevitably, I would mentally get whatever items I needed through the screening process with a fair enough likelyhood of success that I felt quite comfortable joining the throngs of critics.
Then, one day while I was on the road I had an epiphany: "Some of the best minds (don't laugh) have come up with this system. What am I missing?" Therein lay the key question.
I had been mentally compromising airport security from the mindset of a terrorist who was willing to throw their life away for their cause. This is the wrong approach. Being willing to throw one's life away for Jihad is *very* different from being willing to get caught and rot in our legal system for the rest of your productive life. There is no glory in jail, only in death.
So now, what I had considered plots with a reasonable success rate (say, 3 out of 4 times) now suddenly became very risky. Even plots that I estimate would have a 90+ percent success rate don't seem worth the risk of me (the fictional terrorist) rotting in jail and not being able to bring Allah's righteousness down upon the infidels (that, apparently, is the rest of you). Allah wants me on earth being productive, or dead through Jihad, not tossing someone's salad in prison (if you don't understand it, don't look it up. Seriously).
This changes the security game. While security is (unfortunately) 90% reactive and 10% proactive (I made those numbers up) airport security screening as it is defined today (and as it is implemented in larger airports) is a necessary and effective step towards securing our airports. We don't need to eliminate threats, we just need to make them risky enough so that a terrorist isn't willing to risk their chance at death through jihad through the air carriers. In this case, "risky enough" could simply mean the possibility of catching them 1 in 10 times.
I believe we have accomplished this. So much so, in fact, that we have virtually guaranteed that the next attack will come through a different venue. The *only* reason they may continue to risk a shot at the airlines is because of the "bang for the buck" (pardon the tasteless pun) with regards to the impact it had on our economy.
I have faith, however, that the same minds that came up with our security (knowing every little detail about it and the odds of circumvention) are pondering that next possible attack.
And dare I say they have probably already foiled it.
P.S. Yes, there are still tragedies happening around the world related to this, such as the Tube and bus bombs in England. I am fully aware of these, but they only strengthen my position belief in the sufficiency (for the cost) of our airport security systems.
Now, my mental attacks are focussed elsewhere...for the most part.
-Brian
Comments