|
A mention on The Register:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12...edaction_fail/ |
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/4.7.1.40 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 12940531)
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/4.7.1.40 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)
I contacted the Office of Public Affairs this morning for a comment. I have spoken with someone there and thus far received a "no comment" but a promise of follow-up later. We'll see what comes of it. |
Originally Posted by bonoman
(Post 12940532)
Under "2.12. INDIVIDUALS WHO REFUSE SCREENING OF ACCESSIBLE PROPERTY", Section B - "The STSO must then offer the individual a final opportunity to complete the screening process. If the individual continues to refuse screening, the STSO must notify an LEO and ensure that screening of
the individual’s accessible property is completed, either by TSA or an LEO." I have said on this site multiple time when a pax ask for a STSO the TSO needs to get one, period. And the STSO should not have tried to write on your BP (my opinion was the STSO was going to make you a selectee on your return, which is wrong). But even so, even if a LEO was summoned your bag would have been checked, right? And that would have waste even more of your time, correct? And as I have said, this is the management SOP, not the screening SOP. They still should have rerun your bag through the x-ray again. It seems the violations in SOP saved you time? I know, not what you want to hear.... |
Would The Washington Post Do?
Originally Posted by amejr999
(Post 12936540)
Just a quick reminder that the SOP is labeled as SSI, and posting information from it on a public forum might expose you to personal liability. It's unlikely, but certainly possible.
Now... anyone know a reporter who wants a scoop? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...113002924.html |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 12940907)
But even so, even if a LEO was summoned your bag would have been checked, right? And that would have waste even more of your time, correct?
That point aside, the option was never given to me, and more importantly, it was deliberately hidden from me by TSA. It is time to TSA to stop this false shroud of security. |
Originally Posted by bonoman
(Post 12940996)
I'd would have elected a real LEO searching my bag with common sense knowing I wasn't going into the sterile area anyway.
That point aside, the option was never given to me, and more importantly, it was deliberately hidden from me by TSA. It is time to TSA to stop this false shroud of security. Not that the TSA employees treated you fairly or properly. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 12941044)
You need to read the sop again. Why do you think the LEO would conduct the search? I've never seen it happen. What I have seen happen is the LEO threatens the pax for arrest and then instructs the TSO to finish the search. This is most likely what would have happened in your case.
Not that the TSA employees treated you fairly or properly. This still distracts from the point that passengers don't have published rights. A citizen can murder someone and know what rights they have every step of the process - documented and consistent. Every LEO in the country knows what a Miranda is, but I can't fly on a plane without guessing which act of the TSA circus I'm going to be subjected to this week. Maybe now the SOP is out there, some lobbying can be done to remedy this belligerent department of the US Gov't. |
Originally Posted by bonoman
(Post 12941134)
Probably this part that says "ensure that screening of the individual’s accessible property is completed, either by TSA or an LEO."
This still distracts from the point that passengers don't have published rights. A citizen can murder someone and know what rights they have every step of the process - documented and consistent. Every LEO in the country knows what a Miranda is, but I can't fly on a plane without guessing which act of the TSA circus I'm going to be subjected to this week. Maybe now the SOP is out there, some lobbying can be done to remedy this belligerent department of the US Gov't. The way I look at it, and it's just my opinion/spin on it, the LEO is an intimidation factor. Everyone I work with says they notice a change in the pax's attitude when the LEOs arrive. The pax usually becomes more cooperative. I guess you haven't seen where I have post that much of what is SSI should be public. We do not disagree on this. Edit: my other point seems to remain valid: by not following the sop it seems they saved you time. Yes, the TSA employees were wrong, and most likely jerks. And I am a bit confused: you said you were very rushed for time, is that true or not? |
At least one blogger has picked this up: http://www.wanderingaramean.com/2009...upid-move.html
When the TSA make mistakes this egregious it really isn’t all that hard to pick on them. The latest is that their Screening Management Standard Operating Procedure is published on the internet. I actually like that. I don’t think that security through obscurity is a good idea. Of course the document is marked SSI and includes this footnote on every page: SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION WARNING: THIS RECORD CONTAINS SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION THAT IS CONTROLLED UNDER 49 CFR PARTS 15 AND 1520. NO PART OF THIS RECORD MAY BE DISCLOSED TO PERSONS WITHOUT A “NEED TO KNOW,” AS DEFINED IN 49 CFR PARTS 15 AND 1520, EXCEPT WITH THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OR THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION. UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES OR OTHER ACTION. FOR U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, PUBLIC DISCLOSURE GOVERNED BY 5 U.S.C. 552 AND 49 CFR PARTS 15 AND 1520. So the decision to publish it on the Internet is probably a questionable one. On top of that, however, is where the real idiocy shines. They chose to publish a redacted version of the document, hiding all the super-important stuff from the public. But they apparently don’t understand how redaction works in the electronic document world. See, rather than actually removing the offending text from the document they just drew a black box on top of it. Turns out that PDF documents don’t really care about the black box like that and the actual content of the document is still in the file. Yup, their crack legal staff managed to screw this one up pretty badly. Want to know which twelve passports will instantly get you shunted over for secondary screening, simply by showing them to the ID-checking agent? Check out Section 2A-2 (C) (1) (b) (iv). Want to know the procedure for CIA-escorted passengers to be processed through the checkpoint? That’s in the document, too. Details on the calibration process of the metal detectors is in there. So is the procedure for screening foreign dignitaries. It is pretty pathetic that the folks supposedly responsible for administering this “security” program cannot even be bothered to do the simplest parts of their job correctly. Then again, passing through the checkpoint every time I fly it is pretty clear that they do a lot of things incorrectly. Just chalk this one up to more of the same idiocy. More done badly. Want to read it for yourself? Grab a copy here. Who knows how long they’ll keep it online. Once you’ve downloaded the PDF you’ll see the black boxes. Simply highlight the text (start above and drag down to below the redaction area) so that you’re selecting all of the stuff in the “redacted” area. Copy the selection and paste it into the word processing client of your choice |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 12941175)
Other than that they basically tell the person the search will go on, do not be disruptive, and then they have the TSO continue the search. Notice the SOP does not say that the pax has a choice who will continue the search.
Edit: my other point seems to remain valid: by not following the sop it seems they saved you time... And I am a bit confused: you said you were very rushed for time, is that true or not? |
Originally Posted by greggwiggins
(Post 12940963)
Just a note that the Travel Section editors and writers of The Washington Post are having a webchat a little over two hours from when I'm posting this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...113002924.html
Originally Posted by BarbiJKM
(Post 12941196)
At least one blogger has picked this up: http://www.wanderingaramean.com/2009...upid-move.html
|
I just downloaded the .pdf file with the non-redaction redactions. Just for fun, I did a "show all comments" command from Adobe Pro in the hopes that the idiots had left all of the review comments in the document they released. Darn -- there were no comments I could find. Someone more skilled with Adobe Pro might want to take a look and maybe we can some juicy comments and notes they may have left in the document. ;)
|
Originally Posted by bonoman
(Post 12941284)
And this has been when someone has been found with a forbidden object and no longer wants to enter the sterile area? That defies logic.
Trust me, at the rate at which this guy was cherry picking things out of my bag, he was not interested in saving me time. While time was a driving factor, my reason for posting was wanting to know what those SOPs were. |
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 12941302)
I'm looking forward to that.
And I found out about it here. ^^ to FlyerTalk. |
Originally Posted by BarbiJKM
(Post 12941196)
At least one blogger has picked this up: http://www.wanderingaramean.com/2009...upid-move.html
Want to read it for yourself? Grab a copy here. Who knows how long they’ll keep it online. Once you’ve downloaded the PDF you’ll see the black boxes. Simply highlight the text (start above and drag down to below the redaction area) so that you’re selecting all of the stuff in the “redacted” area. Copy the selection and paste it into the word processing client of your choice |
Originally Posted by greggwiggins
(Post 12940963)
Just a note that the Travel Section editors and writers of The Washington Post are having a webchat a little over two hours from when I'm posting this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...113002924.html Are Secrets Revealed Worth Excitement or Worry?: Someone in the travel blogosphere discovered recently that the secret TSA screening manual was actually posted on the Internet by the government about nine months ago. Did you go through it yet and find anything worth reporting on? Christopher Elliott: It's an interesting document. Who knew that diplomatic pouches and foreign dignitaries were exempt from TSA screening? It looks as if someone should have done a better job redacting that manual. Better yet, they shouldn't have released it at all. I'm not sure if any of this matters. Since my last column about the TSA, I've been in touch with insiders who tell me these procedures are not always followed. Maybe it's worth a follow-up column? _______________________ New York, NY: Have you read the recently discovered "redacted" content from the TSA's Screening SOP and if so what are your thoughts on the content deemed supposedly too secret for public consumption? Watch lists of specific countries? Instructions for how to wash hands after a positive ETD swab? How to calibrate the WTMDs? More info here. Christopher Elliott: As I've already said, the document is interesting, but I'm not sure if there's anything in there that is worth stopping the presses for. Now, if you have a copy of the unredacted document, please send it along ... |
Well, I just Tweeted a link to Trollkiller's site with the document to my 800+ followers and the 20 lists I’m on. The TSA Blog Team has been awful quiet on Twitter since Thanksgiving, but I have a feeling things might get busy for them. :D
|
Originally Posted by N965VJ
(Post 12942052)
Well, I just Tweeted a link to Trollkiller's site with the document to my 800+ followers and the 20 lists I’m on. The TSA Blog Team has been awful quiet on Twitter since Thanksgiving, but I have a feeling things might get busy for them. :D
I think I would have ignored the goings on if I made decisions for TSA. That way a case could be made that the document was out of date and nothing in it was completely valid. The way TSA handled this so far makes one think that parts of the SOP were in fact current and valid. I also think if there was a document for travelers that outlined the TSA procedures that travelers would have to comply with and clearly explained limitations and such that this would have never happened in the first place. TSA treats the everyday traveler as a threat while most of us should be treated as an asset against the 1 in a 100~ billion bad guy. I honestly believe that the whole TSA paradigm is flawed and until changes in core principles are made TSA will never gain the trust (or cooperation) of the public. TSA has shown a distinct lack of interest in their blog of late, I'm betting its nearing its end. |
BoingBoing picked this up as well:
Unfortunately, the security geniuses at the DHS don't know that drawing black blocks over the words you want to eliminate from your PDF doesn't actually make the words go away, and can be defeated by nefarious al Qaeda operatives through a complex technique known as ctrl-a/ctrl-c/ctrl-v. Thankfully, only the most elite terrorists would be capable of matching wits with the technology brilliance on display at the agency charged with defending our nation's skies by ensuring that imaginary hair-gel bombs are kept off of airplanes. |
|
If I was acting "TSA Supreme Leader" I might be dusting off my resume.
|
|
Looks like they can either say the release isn't a security threat thereby admitting that SSI is a joke or admit they made a mistake. I'll bet the spin machines are planning an option C.
|
I wonder if the days of manual typewriters and non-digital copiers are coming back so this won’t happen again? :rolleyes:
|
This story has officially 'sploded in the Twittersphere. About every minute another Tweet if you note the timestamps:
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c2...hd73568e-1.jpg |
Originally Posted by DevilDog438
(Post 12938804)
I agree with others, carry a copy in your carry-on. If you really want to bring attention to it, carry it in a binder with tin-foil in the cover pages...
|
Originally Posted by goalie
(Post 12942873)
and make sure that the cover page is slipped under the clear plastic on the cover of the binder so that it is clearly visible by others when you open it up to read on your flight and remember to leave it on your seat when you go to the head ;)
3...2....1.... Should have been a fine day to work at TSA HQ!:) |
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8830/4.5.0.138 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)
I'm enough of a tree hugger to not want to waste 95 pages of paper on a TSA SOP. |
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 12943254)
I'm enough of a tree hugger to not want to waste 95 pages of paper on a TSA SOP.
I heard back from the TSA finally. Don't worry, layers will protect us. :rolleyes: http://www.wanderingaramean.com/2009...rotect-us.html The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has become aware that an outdated version of a Standard Operating Procedures document was improperly posted by the agency to the Federal Business Opportunities Web site wherein redacted material was not properly protected. TSA takes this matter very seriously and took swift action when this was discovered. A full review is now underway. TSA has many layers of security in place to keep the traveling public safe and to constantly adapt to evolving threats. TSA has put appropriate measures in place to effectively screen passengers at airport security checkpoints nationwide. |
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 12943294)
I heard back from the TSA finally. Don't worry, layers will protect us. :rolleyes:
What makes them think it will protect us? ;) |
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has become aware that an outdated version of a Standard Operating Procedures document was improperly posted by the agency to the Federal Business Opportunities Web site wherein redacted material was not properly protected. TSA takes this matter very seriously and took swift action when this was discovered. A full review is now underway. TSA has many layers of security in place to keep the traveling public safe and to constantly adapt to evolving threats. TSA has put appropriate measures in place to effectively screen passengers at airport security checkpoints nationwide. The document was published in response to a vendor's questions about a TSA RFP. They published, as part of a procurement solicitation, an "outdated" SOP!!? Let's see if I have this straight. TSA wants to hire a contractor to do what they don't do any more and pay them big bucks. Now that is progress! I'm glad the TSA takes this matter very seriously. I hope that the swift action was to figure out it was not qualified to do its job and is in the process of disbanding itself once and for all. On the other hand, I suspect that my dream is not coming true and the TSA at this very minute has assembled a collection of blindfolds and a firing squad. |
I'm going to enjoy the next few days in seeing the TSA squirm and emphasizing the SOP being "outdated" and all the "layers" that's out there.
|
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 12939029)
I think much of what is SSI should be so. But that is just my opinion.
|
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 12941044)
Why do you think the LEO would conduct the search? I've never seen it happen. What I have seen happen is the LEO threatens the pax for arrest and then instructs the TSO to finish the search.
|
US News and World Report is now reporting TSA to Conduct Full Review After Leak of Sensitive Information.
Gee, why would that be necessary if the information was “obsolete”? |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 12942956)
BB is getting the puppy post together now.
3...2....1.... Should have been a fine day to work at TSA HQ!:)
Originally Posted by LessO2
(Post 12943506)
I'm going to enjoy the next few days in seeing the TSA squirm and emphasizing the SOP being "outdated" and all the "layers" that's out there.
"7, 9, 17, 7, 20, 7, 24a and, uh, 7." Might want to stay away from 10. :p (No, it never gets old. ;) ) |
Too bad they don't send out redacted electronic FOIA documents.:p:D
|
Originally Posted by IslandBased
(Post 12943999)
Too bad they don't send out redacted electronic FOIA documents.:p:D
|
Originally Posted by greentips
(Post 12943475)
The document was published in response to a vendor's questions about a TSA RFP. They published, as part of a procurement solicitation, an "outdated" SOP!!?
|
Flew out of MSP today. The mood at the checkpoint was decidely chilly. No yelling, bags weren't torn apart. Perhaps they had a sobering briefing from management.
PV had gone silent with no updates either. Blogdad Bob didn't have a good Monday either. As to the validity of the document, I've written many, many documents and suspect that while some sections have changed that the meat of the document still resembles what we're reading today. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:15 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.