WASHINGTON - Government investigators smuggled liquid explosives and detonators past airport security, exposing a dangerous hole in the nation's ability to keep these forbidden items off of airplanes, according to a report made public Wednesday.
The investigators learned about the components to make an improvised explosive device and an improvised incendiary device on the Internet and purchased the parts at local stores, said the report by the Government Accountability Office. Investigators were able to purchase the components for the two devices for under $150, and they studied the published guidelines for screening to determine how to conceal the prohibited items as they went through checkpoint security.
At the end of the testing, investigators concluded that terrorists could use publicly available information and a few cheaply available supplies to damage an airplane and threaten passenger safety.
"It is possible to bring the components for several IEDs and one IID through TSA checkpoints and onto airline flights without being challenged by transportation security officers," said the GAO, Congress' investigative arm.
The covert tests were conducted at Transportation Security Administration checkpoints at 19 airports in March, May and June of this year. The GAO did not identify the airports.
In August 2006, the TSA changed its screening policies after officials foiled a plot to use liquid explosives to blow up commercial airlines headed toward the U.S.
TSA spokeswoman Ellen Howe said the exercise tested only one of the agency's 19 layers of security and therefore doesn't mean the overall system is unsafe.
"While people think about us in terms of the checkpoints and they see us as the checkpoints, there's a lot more layers of security," she said. In addition to the checkpoints, the TSA uses different technologies and has officials who check the validity of documents and observe people's behaviors throughout the airport. "Just because somebody gets through one layer doesn't mean they're going to get through all of the layers."
The report released Wednesday is a version of a classified report with sensitive information left out. The report notes that the covert operations were intended to test only security at checkpoints and not all of the TSA's security layers.
The report listed several instances in which investigators were able to make it through security checkpoints while carrying prohibited items:
• On March 23, a TSA screener would not let one investigator through a checkpoint with a small, unlabeled bottle of shampoo, even though it was a legitimate carry-on item. But the same investigator was able to bring through a liquid component of bomb that would start a fire.
• On May 8, an investigator placed coins in his pockets to ensure he would receive a secondary screening at the checkpoint. But after doing a pat-down and using an electronic hand wand, the screener was not able to catch the prohibited items the investigator brought through the checkpoint.
The TSA agreed with the investigators' recommendation to introduce "more aggressive, visible and unpredictable security measures," as well as the recommendation to deploy new detection technologies.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071115/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/airport_security;_ylt=Aht6ugnNHAnQ6mkOdjfzSXas0NUE
My brother works for Aero Guard, a Canadian provider for air passenger and baggage screening. I'll have to show him this article...
Nothing new here, airport security always sucked.
Quote from: Ergot on November 14, 2007, 10:47:15 PM
Nothing new here, airport security always sucked.
And how would you know this? Would you prefer if there was no screening at all?
Quote from: Killer360 on November 15, 2007, 08:42:47 AM
Quote from: Ergot on November 14, 2007, 10:47:15 PM
Nothing new here, airport security always sucked.
And how would you know this? Would you prefer if there was no screening at all?
Never said I would. They've done several tests like this over the years, results always came back the same.
Quote from: Killer360 on November 14, 2007, 10:35:29 PM
• On May 8, an investigator placed coins in his pockets to ensure he would receive a secondary screening at the checkpoint. But after doing a pat-down and using an electronic hand wand, the screener was not able to catch the prohibited items the investigator brought through the checkpoint.
I'm curious where he hid it. :-o!
Quote from: Ergot on November 15, 2007, 09:37:30 AM
Quote from: Killer360 on November 15, 2007, 08:42:47 AM
Quote from: Ergot on November 14, 2007, 10:47:15 PM
Nothing new here, airport security always sucked.
And how would you know this? Would you prefer if there was no screening at all?
Never said I would. They've done several tests like this over the years, results always came back the same.
Airport security doesn't suck. I think they do a good job.
Quote from: Killer360 on November 15, 2007, 12:17:41 PM
Quote from: Ergot on November 15, 2007, 09:37:30 AM
Quote from: Killer360 on November 15, 2007, 08:42:47 AM
Quote from: Ergot on November 14, 2007, 10:47:15 PM
Nothing new here, airport security always sucked.
And how would you know this? Would you prefer if there was no screening at all?
Never said I would. They've done several tests like this over the years, results always came back the same.
Airport security doesn't suck. I think they do a good job.
Then why do they take my bottled water away, yet fail to detect bomb parts?
Because they want you to buy a new drink once you're inside. Duh!
If you want to smuggle drugs on to a plane, put them in your pockets :P
Quote from: Camel on November 15, 2007, 05:22:07 PM
If you want to smuggle drugs on to a plane, put them in your pockets :P
That might not be so easy when crossing the border, though. But I don't really see what that has to do with anything, since this is about weapons?
I agree with Ergot. Seriously, airport security is such a pain in the ass and yields such crappy results.. I was watching The Today Show last week and there was a story about how, even when TSA officials at certain airports were ALERTED that there would be screeners coming and given their data, they still missed the bombs and screeners. Fail at life much?
Quote from: deadly7 on November 15, 2007, 07:55:52 PM
I agree with Ergot. Seriously, airport security is such a pain in the ass and yields such crappy results.. I was watching The Today Show last week and there was a story about how, even when TSA officials at certain airports were ALERTED that there would be screeners coming and given their data, they still missed the bombs and screeners. Fail at life much?
You're right, they do fail at life. They're only trying to do the impossible.
The clear solution here is to just make everyone strip naked before going into secure areas, and with no carry on items. The expensive ass metal detectors and x-ray machines can be replaced with boxes of latex gloves so that the security personal can conduct cavity searches.
Oh, and you have to take a polygraph test before you get to this point. So that they can you know ask you if you plan to fly the plane into a building...
Woo, another excuse to sacrifice freedom for security! Go authoritarianism! :-\
Quote from: zorm on November 16, 2007, 03:41:40 AM
You're right, they do fail at life. They're only trying to do the impossible.
Oh yes, because it's SOOOOOOO impossible to identify someone when provided an accurate description of what they will be wearing, what they look like, and what they will be carrying.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-screeners15nov15,1,924774.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&track=crosspromo
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=x3nv6TtZeEk&feature=related
You know, if you get to the airport with two hours of buffer time, security is never a real pain in the ass. Sure, you may have to stand around for thirty minutes, remove your shoes, etc. but I've never had a security experience at the airport where all I thought was, "WOW, all that for what?"