Electronic devices ban Europe to the US [merged threads]
May 11, 2017, 6:14 pm
#286
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brunei
Programs: Enrich Sapphire. Kris Flyer Silver.Le Club Accorhotels,Starwood.
Posts: 2,201
The US govt will sure be making life difficult for its own employees, diplomats, and soldiers if they impose this.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
The rule is firm enough that these federal employees were instructed that if they were planning travel with sensitive government equipment, cancel existing reservations on affected flights and rebook connecting routes via Europe, even though that would mean higher fares and not using GSA city-pair contracts where available.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
The rule is firm enough that these federal employees were instructed that if they were planning travel with sensitive government equipment, cancel existing reservations on affected flights and rebook connecting routes via Europe, even though that would mean higher fares and not using GSA city-pair contracts where available.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
I just do not think the US govt has thought this ban through carefully.
Surely if the risk has to do with specific countries, could the demand not be for security in those countries and their airports be ramped up with better screening machines, better training for the security staff, tighter control check in bags and screening as well as loading....
I can't imagine how they can get around this without causing more chaos for everyone.
I said it earlier. Will say it again. It's a case of shooting themselves in the foot more often than not,.
May 11, 2017, 6:22 pm
#287
Join Date: Jan 2010
Programs: DL: PM, Marriott: Gold, Hilton: Gold
Posts: 62
Well a lot of this started from the ONE tweet that started this thread. With our current govt bragging about stopping leaks it was curious that a LEAK was sent to an aviation tweetsphere person and the majority of articles referenced it on DAY one then other articles referenced "sources". In other words, a scoop MAY not always hold truth behind it, still think it's possible for this ban to happen but the timeline sources gave was off.
May 11, 2017, 6:25 pm
#288
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 825
The US govt will sure be making life difficult for its own employees, diplomats, and soldiers if they impose this.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
May 11, 2017, 6:34 pm
#289
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal (ONT), PVD/BOS, JAX, RSW
Programs: AA/US PlatPro & 1.05MM, DL Plat (challenge), UA dirt
Posts: 3,189
The US govt will sure be making life difficult for its own employees, diplomats, and soldiers if they impose this.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
The rule is firm enough that these federal employees were instructed that if they were planning travel with sensitive government equipment, cancel existing reservations on affected flights and rebook connecting routes via Europe, even though that would mean higher fares and not using GSA city-pair contracts where available.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
The rule is firm enough that these federal employees were instructed that if they were planning travel with sensitive government equipment, cancel existing reservations on affected flights and rebook connecting routes via Europe, even though that would mean higher fares and not using GSA city-pair contracts where available.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
What would really suck is if they roll this out on domestic routes because my new position would have me shuttle between CalTech and LLNL on a near weekly basis.
May 11, 2017, 6:36 pm
#290
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CLE
Posts: 1,886
I think if you have GE you are already vetted. I carry sensitive agency information on my work laptop. If that was lost/stolen it would be massive. However, I only plan to take my iPad mini and iPhone with me. I don't see how Delta can protect my belongings even with gate checking them in with receipt. This will be a massive cluster--hoo-hoo.
May 11, 2017, 6:43 pm
#291
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: 4éme
Posts: 12,043
May 11, 2017, 7:44 pm
#293
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,951
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
May 11, 2017, 7:49 pm
#294
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 825
That's a big reason why I don't use my laptop or iPad to do work at home. If I can remote into my hospital's computer system to sign out cases, I need to treat those devices with much greater care lest someone other than me manage to remote into the system.
May 11, 2017, 7:54 pm
#295
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
The US govt will sure be making life difficult for its own employees, diplomats, and soldiers if they impose this.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
The rule is firm enough that these federal employees were instructed that if they were planning travel with sensitive government equipment, cancel existing reservations on affected flights and rebook connecting routes via Europe, even though that would mean higher fares and not using GSA city-pair contracts where available.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
I know some US diplomatic staff in countries affected by the initial ban. It turns out there is a hard and fast policy that US govt-owned electronics with sensitive data must be carried in person, not put in checked luggage. "Sensitive" extends considerably farther than "classified" in this context -- e.g., a laptop with human resources data, or proprietary information from a regulated firm or contractor bid. It's a low threshold, though it doesn't include all US govt equipment (e.g., if someone takes a blank laptop just to access remote email).
The rule is firm enough that these federal employees were instructed that if they were planning travel with sensitive government equipment, cancel existing reservations on affected flights and rebook connecting routes via Europe, even though that would mean higher fares and not using GSA city-pair contracts where available.
If it becomes essentially impossible to travel internationally with electronics on your person, I'm not sure how the US govt plans to resolve that -- rules for federal employees on protecting devices have been getting tighter, not looser.
Now that I think about it, we have stricter rules about what to do with your IT devices in a hotel. Placing a USG laptop in one's checked luggage is as bad as leaving the same laptop on the desk in your room when you're out for dinner.
My speculation is that a lot of agencies will do what the DoD and IC did years ago when many of us had to carry pouches of classified materials on domestic and overseas flights. We were given courier letters to show to the checkpoint contractors (or TSA, I suppose) that said we were official USG couriers and that the pouch was not to be opened. Our security staff consulted the FAA to make sure our letters said the right things. We were told to leave the airport and miss our flights rather than be forced to open our pouches. It may come down to having to carry a similar letter asking the security people to allow us to carry the laptop because we are USG employees with USG IT hardware. That doesn't mean crap overseas, but I suspect we will soon have a domestic electronics ban. The TSA has to keep inventing threats in order to keep being funded.
May 11, 2017, 7:57 pm
#296
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: SoCal to the rest of the world...
Programs: AA EXP with lots of BA. UA 2MM Lifetime Plat - No longer chase hotel loyalty
Posts: 6,699
I'd rather we focus on immediate 100% PED screening - if there is time needed to roll out the hardware then an interim cabin ban is reasonable. The equipment to do this was being used by some European governments after 9/11 essentially they were screening every notebook and every electronics device for several weeks after that event using explosive detection equipment. It greatly adds to the screening time but removing these devices we'll just move people with ill will two other soft target points.
May 11, 2017, 8:04 pm
#297
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: SoCal to the rest of the world...
Programs: AA EXP with lots of BA. UA 2MM Lifetime Plat - No longer chase hotel loyalty
Posts: 6,699
Even going back post 9/11 nothing out of a European screening checkpoint has been subject to an incident. Multiple incidents of firearms making their way past TSA checkpoints doesn't seem like a problem to anyone in this current Administration.
May 11, 2017, 8:13 pm
#298
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: VPS
Programs: IHG Diamond, Delta PM, Hilton Gold, Accor Gold, Marriott Silver
Posts: 7,269
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_804
May 11, 2017, 8:32 pm
#299
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brunei
Programs: Enrich Sapphire. Kris Flyer Silver.Le Club Accorhotels,Starwood.
Posts: 2,201
I got curious about EgyptAir 804 since the last I heard there was some 'is it or isn't it?' regarding terrorism, and apparently that discussion is still going on, with the French talking the most, and suggesting that the fire was caused by, you guessed it, lithium batteries catching fire in the cockpit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_804
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_804
Wonder if this caused the problems MH370 faced as well and why we have no logical reason as to why it flew where it did for so long without any crew intervention.
We have some big problems now with this lithium issue....which is very scary.