Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Businesses Security Hardware Politics

US Might Ban Laptops On All Flights Into And Out of the Country (reuters.com) 498

Posted by msmash from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.
The United States might ban laptops from aircraft cabins on all flights into and out of the country as part of a ramped-up effort to protect against potential security threats, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Sunday. From a report:In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Kelly said the United States planned to "raise the bar" on airline security, including tightening screening of carry-on items. "That's the thing that they are obsessed with, the terrorists, the idea of knocking down an airplane in flight, particularly if it's a U.S. carrier, particularly if it's full of U.S. people." In March, the government imposed restrictions on large electronic devices in aircraft cabins on flights from 10 airports, including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Turkey. Kelly said the move would be part of a broader airline security effort to combat what he called "a real sophisticated threat." He said no decision had been made as to the timing of any ban. "We are still following the intelligence," he said, "and are in the process of defining this, but we're going to raise the bar generally speaking for aviation much higher than it is now."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Might Ban Laptops On All Flights Into And Out of the Country More

US Might Ban Laptops On All Flights Into And Out of the Country

Comments Filter:

  • Maybe this opens up a market for modular laptops? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mellon ( 7048 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:07AM (#54505105) Homepage

    That's about the only positive spin I can put on it. If they're worried about laptops with batteries, let me have one without; then I can just rent batteries when I travel, and the airline doesn't have to worry about it. It would be nice if the whole system could be more modular than laptops currently are.

  • More security theatre (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:09AM (#54505119)

    Meanwhile terrorists are using trucks and going to concerts, not targeting planes. Naked flights coming soon.

    • Re:More security theatre (Score:5, Insightful)

      by shilly ( 142940 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:23AM (#54505187)

      Terrorists are using trucks, going to concerts, *and* targeting planes. Obviously. This is a separate issue from whether the response is either proportionate or effective.

    • That. For some reason planes are to be safer than a mother's lap, no matter the direct and indirect cost, the inconvenience and stress generated. But if you are in a metro car, in a concert, in a convention, you are on your own. For all places except airplanes, cost and convenience are a deterrent for more intrusion/security. But not for planes, no. There you have the big line in the sand. We'll protect that 1% of transport (or whatever), and leave the rest to the wolves, but that 1% will be secure, no matt

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by 0123456 ( 636235 )

      Taking down an airliner costs about a billion bucks when the final bills are paid. Driving over a few people in the street... doesn't.

  • Free laptop rental service! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:10AM (#54505125)

    So, I now bill my clients for "useless" travel time, no big.

    Also, to avoid laptop damage, I use the free BestBuy/Target/Walmart laptop rental service. They do require a full deposit, but it's a free laptop rental for up to 14 days, usually covers it.

    The trick to traveling to/from third world countries is to have nothing more than clothes or electronics worth more than say $40, otherwise some down on their look third worlder will steal it.

    I have a compute stick, it's all I need, snagged it on ebay for $40. Perfect for thirld world countries. Or even raspi's. They work on third world televisions that have only composite in.

    • Re:Free laptop rental service! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by crow ( 16139 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:20AM (#54505173) Homepage Journal

      Reading between the lines, I infer that you're buying a laptop and then returning it. Besides the ethical issues, I've heard that some stores catch on to this and refuse to sell you stuff after a few times.

      What you seem to have mastered that others could learn from is working from a generic system, keeping all your data separate (flash sticks and such).

    • Ain't it obvious? What travellers should do is put everything up in Google Drive/OneDrive/Dropbox, and fly w/o their laptops. When they get to their destinations, they should go to the office/conference they're headed to, log into any of the conference laptops there, and pick up work where they left off. Everything is on the cloud, so lugging around laptops is akin to days when trade happened by camels travelling hundreds of miles.

      And in the event of an internet outage, back up everything temporarily

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by vlad30 ( 44644 )

        Ain't it obvious? What travellers should do is put everything up in Google Drive/OneDrive/Dropbox, and fly w/o their laptops.

        Thats how google masters know which companies to buy and sell and the government does have to hack your system they force you to use theirs oops I mean Google Drive/OneDrive/Dropbox

        • Thats how google masters know which companies to buy and sell and the government does have to hack your system they force you to use theirs oops I mean Google Drive/OneDrive/Dropbox

          Surely the implication is that the data was encrypted first. You can (and should!) encrypt your data before putting it up in the cloud.

  • Great, now how long do we have to wait till all electronics are banned? Maybe if it was actual security and not theater we wouldn't have this problem. Maybe if people were rational about the actual threat level and not scared like mice in daylight we wouldn't waste billions of dollars and hours of labor helping the terrorists win without them even attacking.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Maybe if it was actual security and not theater we wouldn't have this problem.

      What else are they supposed to do? Any effective effort is blocked by activists.

      The monthly terror attacks in the Western world are being perpetrated by people from the same few countries. Yet any effort to more closely look at who we let into our countries or reducing the amount of people we let in unchecked is being brigaded by a hysterical media and liberals who throw around -isms all day.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by 0123456 ( 636235 )

        Yes. Blame the judges who refused to let the government take effective action against the people who would make these kind of attacks.

        If you want to let terrorists into your country, you can't really complain when the government starts treating everyone like a terrorist.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        We (United States) should dial back our involvement (interference, imperialism) in the Middle East.

        Subjugated people fight back. Funny how Middle Eastern terrorists aren't attacking China, Africa, and South America, isn't it? They are attacking the countries that subjugated them, and continue to be a lightening rod in that area of the world.

        It's a cycle, and assholes on both sides keep feeding it - the bombings (jihad and airstrikes), fake news, lying politicians, dehumanization, religious extremist, etc.

        Un

  • or else they'd ban "Small, potentially explosive devices"

    eg smart phones.

    • or else they'd ban "Small, potentially explosive devices"

      Not at all. Smartphones are good at catching fire, but not so good at exploding with force to e.g. knock a hole in the air frame. Even if the insides were replaced with explosives. That's kind of the point here. They are only banning items with large batteries in them as there's more potential for larger explosive devices to be planted in them.

    • Speaking of which, why don't the terrorists simply stock up on the Samsung Note 7s?

  • Flying to the US keeps getting funner (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lisandro ( 799651 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:19AM (#54505171)

    Seriously, what the hell are you guys doing to your country?

    • Re:Flying to the US keeps getting funner (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:32AM (#54505257)

      The more interesting question is, who the hell would want to go to that country anymore?

      Right. Fewer and fewer people [slashdot.org]. But it is because of Trump. Not because flying there has become a ridiculous jump-the-hoops game that no self respecting person would ever subject himself to if he has any choice.

      Hell, I'd seriously ponder flying to Canada and driving to the US if I ever have to go to any state within 1000 miles of the Canadian border.

      • Hell, I'd seriously ponder flying to Canada and driving to the US if I ever have to go to any state within 1000 miles of the Canadian border.

        Just remember: we only have one road, but it goes both ways: east to west and west to east!

        I say that because my nephew visited last year and he was forced to take his vacation in Gaspé.

    • No, watching people flying to the US is getting funnier. Flying to the US is getting more burdensome.

      • Re:Flying to the US keeps getting funner (Score:5, Insightful)

        by green1 ( 322787 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @10:46AM (#54505693)

        My concern isn't with what the US decides to do to people flying in and out of their country. There's no way I'd subject myself to that anyway.
        My concern is that these horrible policies tend to be adopted by everyone else shortly afterwards. It's why I still can't take my water bottle on any flight despite there having never in the history of aviation ever been a credible threat related to liquids. (though at least I can keep my shoes on...)
        Security theatre started in the US, and spread quickly to pretty much everywhere else. I just don't want to find that my own country is next with these stupid rules.

        • It's why I still can't take my water bottle on any flight despite there having never in the history of aviation ever been a credible threat related to liquids.

          There *IS* a credible threat related to liquids...
           
          ...a threat to the profits of the businesses selling liquids at a steep price on the other side of the security checks.

    • Not just us. A few weeks back when the initial ban went into effect, the UK enacted nearly the same ban on laptops flying into the country (though only from 6 countries, rather than the US' 8) at the same time the US did. This isn't just a US thing, sadly.

  • Worse Than Security Theater! (Score:3)

    by HannethCom ( 585323 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:23AM (#54505185)
    Does anyone remember why we are supposed to bring our batteries in the cabin? It is because of the risk of them catching fire, or exploding at low pressure, like found in a cargo hold. Especially when they are in devices like laptops.
    I guess the TSA is just too incompetent though as every other place people have tried lining labors with explosives it has failed. Yes, I know the UK started this stupidity!
    Oh well, I guess we'll just have to live with multiple ticking time bombs on every plane. I wonder when the first plane will crash from this idiotic policy?

    • I wonder when the first plane will crash from this idiotic policy?

      People use the word "idiot", "idiotic" and "idiocy" at a 8532% higher rate than 25 years ago. Pre-cursor signs of the era of idiocracy and yet nobody is trying to change the future.

      Steve Austin, 2142, Logging off.

    • Minor correction: cargo holds are pressurized at cabin pressure. The whole plane is a giant cylinder. Having two diffent pressure zones or even just an oddly shaped cabin is more dangerous than just pressurizing the whole thing.

      Remember: animals travel in the cargo hold all the time.

      -Chris

  • When they banned bringing water through security, the sales of water bottles inside the security area. This will create a huge demand for rental businesses. You can already rent portable DVD players that you return at your destination airport. This could be expanded easily to laptops and iPads.

    • This will create a huge demand for rental businesses....rent [and] return at the destination airport....This could be expanded easily to laptops...

      I'm not sure how that helps people who want a laptop to use after they leave the airport. Like most, I take my laptop on business trips, because I'm going to use it to work at my destination.

      I actually almost never use my laptop on board the plane. And I don't trust leaving it in checked baggage.

    • When they banned bringing water through security, the sales of water bottles inside the security area.

      What happened to the sales of water bottles inside the security area? Don't leave us hanging, man!

      This will create a huge demand for rental businesses. You can already rent portable DVD players that you return at your destination airport. This could be expanded easily to laptops and iPads.

      Define "easily". Unless people start bringing all their accounts, programs and media/files/etc with them on a USB drive,

  • Real Test: Other Countries (Score:5, Informative)

    by Roger W Moore ( 538166 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:27AM (#54505211) Journal
    The real test about whether this is warranted is whether other countries will adopt similar bans. The ban on devices from Middle Eastern countries had a half-hearted and variable adoption in the UK and Canada. I also wonder if this is not a ploy of the terrorists. The IRA (Irish terrorist group not a US retirement account) used to phone up the police with fake bomb warnings for major London train stations to cause widespread disruption without actually having to do anything other than once every few years leaving a real but small explosive device just so the police could never ignore their warnings.

    It seems that the current breed of terrorists might be playing the same game. Talking about a laptop device to bring down a plane when they think it is likely to be picked up simply to cause widespread disruption while sticking to bombing open venues, driving lorries through crowds or whatever similarly evil but security avoiding schemes their warped minds can come up with.

    • Australia will. They blindly follow Americans to the point where they are already basically the 50th state of the USA.

    • While 9/11 was a well-coordinated and spectacular attack... I'm just a normal non-fanatic, non-obsessed guy who can come up with a dozen better ways off to terrorize a population just off the top of my head, none of which involve me dying while implementing them, though I suppose after the first or second go they'd carry a small risk of capture and incarceration.

      When you think about it from that perspective, it's extraordinarily pathetic just how little they've achieved. Despite all the cloak-and-dagger, t

  • While we're at it, let's ban all carry-on luggage, handbags, phones, etc.

    • Well, at least for me, the USA has banned human passengers. Why does the USA makes so many separate rules if they simply mean "stay away"?
  • Let's ban all flights and be done with it.
  • It's what we are now.
  • If this was a serious concern, then there are means by which it is possible to require passengers to demonstrate the working functionality of their laptop/netbook equipment before the flight.

    So, this is either an ill-thought-through remark that has either been mis-represented by the press [or will be withdrawn by the spokesperson]; or in the alternate, it is a legitimate statement of intent for which the underlying desire is to squeeze competing airlines out of the routes that fly to and/or from the Unit

    • If this was a serious concern, then there are means by which it is possible to require passengers to demonstrate the working functionality of their laptop/netbook equipment before the flight.

      It doesn't prove anything. You could easily replace parts of an old laptop with explosives (ex: remove the optical drive, replace the 2.5" HDD with a small compact flash card with IDE adapter, use a smaller battery, etc). It will still work anyway.

      Hell, you could put liquid explosive into shampoo bottles, paste explosiv

  • US Might Ban Laptops On All Flights Into And Out of the Country, this is considered a prelude to the Trump administrations next major move in aviation security which is to ban passengers and cargo on all flights in and out of the USA. In an interview on "Fox News Sunday" U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly was quoted as saying: "We have determined that the largest two security risks in aviation are passengers and cargo. Passengers are basically a bunch of morons anyway and unquestionably a general n

  • No more flights to the US then (Score:3)

    by johannesg ( 664142 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @09:48AM (#54505367)

    The ban apparently also includes cameras, and I will not (ever) put my camera in my (for all intents and purposes unlocked) hold luggage.

    No matter visiting national parks or interesting cities, and no more doing business in that country.

    Well, I suppose I could fly into Canada and cross the border by car. Or are laptops also forbidden on those borders?

  • This is about inconveniencing people so badly that they'll gladly say "Yes please" when the TSA demand the budget for newer equipment - equipment that would allow laptops back onto the planes. Some equipment manufacturers are about to make a lot of money off the government.

  • Isn't it more dangerous to check a laptop and put it in the baggage compartment?

    I thought the most likely hazard of a laptop on a plane is the battery catching fire due to a defective design.

    People have had their laptops catch fire in the passenger compartment. That seems safer, because they can see it on fire and put the fire out.

    If the laptop catches fire in the baggage compartment, isn't it more likely to burn without anybody noticing it and lead to a bigger fire?

  • Lithium-ion batteries in cargo hold? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zuki ( 845560 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @10:11AM (#54505473) Journal
    This below are comments from pilots and their spokespersons:

    Some airline pilots and safety advocates have questioned putting more electronics into checked luggage. In rare circumstances, lithium-ion batteries spark fires, which could go undetected in the cargo hold.

    After reports the U.S. would expand the laptop ban to Europe, the British Airline Pilots’ Association said May 15 that the risk would be greater with electronics in cargo than in the cabin.

    “Given the risk of fire from these devices when they are damaged or they short-circuit, an incident in the cabin would be spotted earlier and this would enable the crew to react quickly before any fire becomes uncontainable,” said Steve Landells, a flight-safety specialist for British pilots. “If these devices are kept in the hold, the risk is that if a fire occurs the results can be catastrophic.”

    Kelly told reporters Friday that the Federal Aviation Administration tracks safety issues while he oversees security, but he’s been told that batteries in electronics should be safe in checked luggage so long as they are turned off and not rattling around loose.

    So now we're having to calculate if the risk of something really bad happening onboard due to an electronic device's battery kept in the cargo hold catching fire is higher than the risk of terrorists having explosives in their laptops.
    • "so long as they are turned off" is unrealistic. Some people barely even know the difference between suspend and off. And plenty are likely to forget.

  • ...problems like these.

    Why not just go "whole hog" and ban international flights??? That's the absolute way to prevent any bombing of airline flights!

    Ban laptops (which removes another several hours of productivity for some folk), and attackers will use luggage. Ban luggage and they will use pants made of fibers with the requisite explosive materials that can be reformed in the lavatory on-board. Ban pants and they will insert them in their own body cavities, or have them surgically implanted.

    At root, bu

  • I guess my one overseas international trip a year is going to require me to return via Toronto or Montreal... West coast-ers can use Vancouver. Even though it's just a chromebook I use the flying time to organize all the pictures I took while on vacation. Not cool TSA, not cool...

  • I would think that something this ridiculous couldn't be possible in a democracy, but then I remember the backward rednecks who voted in Trump, probably never get on planes anyway. Planes are just something that those who don't live in fly-over-country use to fly over them. So why not make them as annoying as possible to use?

  • For those not in the know (Score:3)

    by burtosis ( 1124179 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @10:24AM (#54505559)
    This has to do with isis manufacturing laptops with an integrated shaped charge so as to easily pass security yet be effective enough to rupture the wall of an aircraft. This has nothing to do with laptop battery fires. Before trump blabbed this to the Russians he met with in the Oval Office right after firing Comey, I'd already guessed this when a similar ban was implemented from middle eastern and European flights.
    • Why not create a book shaped explosive and then put a book cover around it?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ledow ( 319597 )

      If you can make a charge that can get past security and is only the size of a laptop battery, there are an almost infinite number of things you could hide it in. And laptops would probably be the LAST thing to bother with because they are oddly-shaped, have to work, are often separate in scanning, etc.

      At that point, you could just put it in a small statue and carry it in your overhead luggage.

      Again, security through "imaginary" scenarios.

      If someone can get an bomb through security onto a plane disguised as

  • The way government run airline security is going, this is what the future holds:

    Pre-takeoff announcement, around 2030: "Please remain in your seats and place your hands and feet into the shackles. We will take off after the cabin crew has secured all passengers. Please use the blowtube in front of your face if you need to use the facilities. Please note that there is a $150 fee for each bathroom trip and you will be accompanied at all times. Cabin crew of an incompatible gender and sexual orientation is ava

  • from Eurasia: http://www.independent.co.uk/n... [independent.co.uk]

    No security checks, beautiful nature, arriving into a city center, no baggage limit, free WiFi, etc.

  • Foreign or domestic (Score:5, Interesting)

    by petes_PoV ( 912422 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @11:53AM (#54506015)

    the idea of knocking down an airplane in flight, particularly if it's a U.S. carrier, particularly if it's full of U.S. people

    So what is it about already being in the US, that would make it impossible for a baddie to put a bomb in a laptop and board an internal flight ... on a US carrier ... full of US people?

    Once the individual has gained entry to the country (or done so by being born there), is there any special difficulty with sourcing the materials needed. Or is it just that internal flights from every little two-bit airport has so much better security than ANY of the major hubs in any country you care to mention?

  • How do they justify this? (Score:5, Informative)

    by dweller_below ( 136040 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @02:44PM (#54506899)
    If the TSA is going to make a change, they must prove that the overall benefits justify the costs. Remember that time they said they needed porno scanners? It turned out that the porno scanners didn't work. And, TSA upper management made money off the sale of the porno scanners. At this point, we should just assume that any proposed TSA change is simply another "make TSA management rich" scheme. While we wait for the TSA's analysis, lets review a few facts:

    Here are some reference pages on various types of death in the US:

    So, your chance of dying of various things in the US is:

    • - Heart disease & cancer in the US: (about 1 in 7 deaths.) For every terrorism death, there are 35,000 deaths by heart disease and cancer.
    • - Dying in a motor vehicle accident: (about 1 in 100.) For every terrorism death, there are about 2,200 deaths by motor vehicle accidents
    • - Drowning in the US: (about 1 in 1200) For every terrorism death, there are about 200 deaths by drowning.
    • - Being killed by police in the US: (about 1 in 2300) For every terrorism death, there are about 105 deaths by police
    • - Dying in a plane crash: (about 1 in 10,000) For every terrorism death, there are about 25 deaths by plane crashes
    • - Killed by lightning in the US: (about 1 in 160K.) For every terrorism death, there are about 1 and 1/2 deaths by lightning.
    • - US Citizen killed by terrorists from 2005 through 2014: (about 1 in 240K deaths.)

    The TSA failure to find weapons and explosives rate is 95%. IE, they only find 1 out of 20: https://www.theguardian.com/co... [theguardian.com]

    It looks like you could show a decrease in deaths by shutting down the TSA and spending the money on all kinds of other things. For example, you would probably save thousands of people every year, if you took the TSA's budget and used that money to give a daily carrot to everybody in America.

    Of course, the future of the KID (Karrot Issuance Daily) agency is not all shiny orange. The yearly number of carroticides might even exceed the number of US people killed by terrorists. But, even factoring in the increase of death by carrot, there still would be tremendous net positive benefit.

  • Another odd aspect of these proposed changes (Score:5, Informative)

    by zuki ( 845560 ) on Monday May 29, 2017 @04:15PM (#54507279) Journal
    If they are considering banning laptops on flights out of the US... can someone/anyone please explain how a domestic outbound flight is different from an international one. This argument doesn't even make sense.

    Lest we forget, it bears remembering that the hijacked flights that took down the Twin Towers were domestic ones... why would a terrorist only take his explosives on to an international flight? If they enact this ban, it would have to be on every flight, domestic or international.

Slashdot Top Deals

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Close