Bayes doesn't account for the fact that a dastardly evildoor could intentional game the math by becoming a frequent flyer, in order to get lower security.

Oh, but right, turrists are too poor for anything like that... :rolleyes:

Pre Check, no Pre Check or whatever. I think TSA is focused on the wrong threat vector.

The cleanest way to threaten a commercial airliner is by an underwing attack. An airline/airport employee gets little or no screening. They can bring anything they want inside the secure area, including roll-aboards, which I witnessed at DFW. Some of these people have direct access to the aircraft and baggage/cargo that is loaded aboard.

So tell me, as a terrorist are you going to try to smuggle contraband through passenger security or just walk through the backdoor with whatever weapon you like since no one is watching?

Really? If you define "false negative" as "smuggling prohibited items through the NoS without an alarm," there have been plenty. I recall recent, and not-so-recent, news reports of people being able to get guns and other prohibited items through the NoS. (I won't look up any links right now but perhaps another enterprising poster will do so.)

(I submit this is the only correct definition of "false negative" in this context, as the NoS is designed not to prevent hijacking, but to prevent the smuggling of prohibited items, regardless of their user's intent.)

One case was DFW. TSA tester, gun 5 times through scanners and not detected once.

Maybe not a false positive, just a 100% failure.

Definitely not a false positive, which would be the NoS alarming when nothing is there. This is a false negative (or 5 of them), i.e. the NoS NOT alarming DESPITE something being there.

Indeed. False negatives involving the strip search machines and WEIs have taken place and been documented in the US and Europe at least.

+1 ^

WTH a credit check? Everyone and their brother wants to do credit checks. To my knowledge every time someone checks your credit, it lowers your score. What does credit history have to do with security? Perhaps I'm ignorant on this subject, but someone please enlighten me!

The theory is that if you're deeply in debt, you're more likely to take a bribe.

The idea of "deeply in debt" varies.

By the way, GE continues to be approved even for people who are subject to IRS debt collection activity. And IRS debts are pretty hard to get discharged even under bankruptcy filings.

This is why I believe regular credit checks should be part of regular, frequent updated background checks for all DHS employees.

Past financial solvency is no guarantee of future stability; a TSO in difficult financial circumstances is a TSO who bears watching.

How are they going to expect anyone to pay a fee with the new pilot program of funneling non-precheck people through the pre lanes?

I think P.T. Barnum has a relevant quote.

Indeed. Thanks.