Section 107

with millions of pax travelling through hundreds of airports and roughly one hundred IG tests being performed unannounced (to the FSD or the local airport PD) at any of the dozens of Cat X airports, yeah, it is really covert.

In regards to the arguments I made in other threads about the pervious round of tests and whether these were "red teams" or not and how much planning goes into conducting these tests, the following passage from the news article [emphasis added] is useful:

"But the real test will come this summer. Roth said the inspector general’s office is currently developing protocols for another round of covert testing. The results will be reported to the Homeland Security Committee and other panels.

Just to recap: these tests are highly planned by experts in aviation security and the participants are well-prepared and -trained by those experts on the weaknesses of the systems being tested.

Random kettles, James Bond wannabes, and motivated but run-of-the-mill tewwowists and miscreants will not ever have anywhere near the success rate those conducting the tests will have. That said, the screeners should still have better success rates than they will achieve in this next round of tests. I am expecting successful penetration rates of between 50%and 70%. Still pretty poor.

Boggie Dog

Are you suggesting that the OIG tests are unrealistic? If they are well trained security experts, as you state, I would think that they know what types of threats Screeners might encounter.

petaluma1

I thought the IG's office said after the abysmal testing of last year, that his "auditors" had no special preparation for going through the checkpoints.

Boggie Dog

Indeed he did.

chollie

Perhaps the 'protocols' are the items to be concealed, where/how they'll be concealed, and how to approach the checkpoint, ie, opt out to guarantee an NoS screening or have Pre on the BP to get that level of screening.

In theory, each time the tests would be tweaked as necessary to particularly address the previous cycle's weakest points.
The last round was so bad that I wouldn't expect they need to make too many drastic changes.

KRSW

Announcing "covert" tests? Um...last time I checked, terrorists don't announce when they're going to attack. This test has already failed by making it publicly known!

/Get rid of the TSA...stop the madness. There's no fixing this sinking ship and it's getting in the way of putting REAL security measures in place.

KRSW

I had the opportunity to contribute to some of the "tests" about 10 years ago. It was absolutely maddening. We were only allowed to "test" the passenger screening itself. Leaving a 'bomb' in the screening area wasn't allowed. Bypassing the checkpoint wasn't allowed. Driving onto the airfield wasn't allowed, even though at the test airport there was nothing except a simple motorized arm-gate preventing people from accessing it. Using an unconventional bomb wasn't allowed. A bomb/explosive/weapon which they provided HAD to be used in every test. We weren't allowed to provide our own improvised dummy explosives/weapons.

I hope the current testers are given more leeway.

At the same time, this all is a moot point. Cockpit doors are now reinforced, and passengers aren't going to take S*** from anyone who acts up. The basic weaknesses of 9/11 have been solved, none of it by TSA or TSA screening procedures.

A screening checkpoint with just an unstaffed WTMD, on the honor system, would work better than the TSA. You better believe other pax, especially <redacted by moderator>, would be giving the stink-eye to anyone who set off the WTMD and would be calling LEOs to investigate. The reduction in hassle and delays would be a huge boost to the airline industry, creating more jobs than lost by dissolving the TSA. We could then use the billions wasted on TSA to improve ATC and airport facilities, which would create even more, higher-paying jobs.

petaluma1

Here's a great "tool" for those doing the testing to use:

https://twitter.com/AskTSA/status/741078543959003137

Section 107

hmm, I am going to start making margarita and/or vodka melons and bring them in my carryon. Insert straw - instant legal happiness.

Not exactly. He said the auditors were not themselves security experts - they were his regular staff.

What I am explaining is that his regular staff that carried out the tests were prepared and trained by security experts.

A very important distinction. It will be the same in this next round.

Yes, all of those things and much more goes into the planning these tests.

It is the same concept as "mystery shoppers" - the fact that staff know they are or might be out there does not preclude the value or the effectiveness of the testing.

Or put your way, since the terrorists have already announced they are going to attack us they have failed because their intentions are publicly known.

(An altogether different issue is that the terrorists have won because they have succeeded in pushing us into the ridiculousness that is our current security regime.)

Boggie Dog

https://oversight.house.gov/wp-conte...-Testimony.pdf

I disagree with your statement on DHS IG/Red Team testing.

DHS IG John Roth in his testimony before a House committee on 11/3/2015 stated ".....the tests were conducted by auditors within our Office of Audits without any special knowledge or training......."

petaluma1

That's what I recall reading last year when the testing results came out. These were just regular people who easily got "explosives" past TSA.

Boggie Dog

Or the DHS OIG gave false testimony if Section 107 has it right.

Section 107

Roth is nothing if not exact. He did not misspeak/mislead or give false testimony.

They were the regular OIG audit staff who carried out the tests. These were not folks, prior to the preparations for the tests, who had specialized training or experience in such testing let alone in the specific equipment and procedures.

They do now, however....

Boggie Dog

So the OIG Auditors were not "prepared and trained by security experts" as stated in an earlier post?

Section 107

No, that is not what I said.

Let me try to put this in two other ways:

A.

1. The IGs auditors did not have specialized training nor specialized experience in smuggling prohibited items through a TSA checkpoint prior to being selected to participate in the tests.

2. After being selected to participate in the tests, but BEFORE actually conducting the tests, all team members received detailed preparation and training on how to conduct the tests from the security experts overseeing the tests.

B.

A few of the relevant steps of how the tests were conducted:

- decide to conduct the tests
- engage security experts, each with many years of specialized training and specialized experience, to plan and oversee the tests.
- The experts plan and prepare all protocols and procedures.
- Select participants from regular staff to conduct the tests.
- Brief, prepare and train the participants on the protocols and procedures.
- Conduct the tests.
- Evaluate the results.
- Report out.