[1]Don't Fear the TSA Cutting Airport Security. Be Glad That They're

[1]Don't Fear the TSA Cutting Airport Security. Be Glad That They're
Talking about It.:

Last week, [2]CNN reported that the Transportation Security
Administration is considering eliminating security at U.S. airports
that fly only smaller planes - 60 seats or fewer. Passengers
connecting to larger planes would clear security at their
destinations.

To be clear, the TSA has put forth no concrete proposal. The
internal agency working group's report obtained by CNN contains no
recommendations. It's nothing more than 20 people examining the
potential security risks of the policy change. It's not even new:
The TSA considered this back in 2011, and the agency reviews its
security policies every year. But commentary around the news has
been [3]strongly negative. Regardless of the idea's merit, it will
almost certainly not happen. That's the result of politics, not
security: Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), one of numerous outraged
lawmakers, has already penned a letter to the agency saying that
"TSA documents proposing to scrap critical passenger security
screenings, without so much as a metal detector in place in some
airports, would effectively clear the runway for potential terrorist
attacks." He continued, "It simply boggles the mind to even think
that the TSA has plans like this on paper in the first place."

We don't know enough to conclude whether this is a good idea, but it
shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. We need to evaluate airport
security based on concrete costs and benefits, and not continue to
implement [4]security theater based on [5]fear. And we should
applaud the agency's willingness to explore changes in the screening
process.

There is already a tiered system for airport security, varying for
both airports and passengers. Many people are enrolled in TSA
PreCheck, allowing them to go through checkpoints faster and with
less screening. Smaller airports don't have modern screening
equipment like full-body scanners or CT baggage screeners, making it
impossible for them to detect some plastic explosives. Any would-be
terrorist is already able to [6]pick and choose his flight
conditions to suit his plot.

Over the years, I have [7]written [8]many [9]essays critical of the
TSA and airport security, in general. Most of it is security theater
- measures that make us feel safer without improving security. For
example, the liquids ban makes no sense as implemented, because
there's [10]no penalty for repeatedly trying to evade the scanners.
The full-body scanners are [11]terrible [12]at [13]detecting the
explosive material PETN if it is well concealed - which is their
whole point.

There are two basic kinds of terrorists. The amateurs will be
deterred or detected by even basic security measures. The
professionals will figure out how to evade even the most stringent
measures. I've [14]repeatedly [15]said that the two things that have
made flying safer since 9/11 are reinforcing the cockpit doors and
persuading passengers that they need to fight back. Everything
beyond that isn't worth it.

It's always possible to increase security by adding more onerous -
and expensive - procedures. If that were the only concern, we would
all be strip-searched and prohibited from traveling with luggage.
Realistically, we need to analyze whether the increased security of
any measure is worth the cost, in money, time and convenience. We
[16]spend $8 billion a year on the TSA, and we'd like to get the
most security possible for that money.

This is exactly what that TSA working group was doing. CNN
[17]reported that the group specifically evaluated the costs and
benefits of eliminating security at minor airports, saving $115
million a year with a "small (nonzero) undesirable increase in risk
related to additional adversary opportunity." That money could be
used to bolster security at larger airports or to reduce threats
totally removed from airports.

We need more of this kind of thinking, not less. In 2017, political
scientists Mark Stewart and John Mueller published a [18]detailed
evaluation of airport security measures based on the cost to
implement and the benefit in terms of lives saved. They concluded
that most of what our government does either isn't effective at
preventing terrorism or is simply too expensive to justify the
security it does provide. Others might disagree with their
conclusions, but their analysis provides enough detailed information
to have a meaningful argument.

The more we politicize security, the worse we are. People are
generally [19]terrible [20]judges of risk. We fear threats in the
news [21]out of proportion with the actual dangers. We overestimate
rare and spectacular risks, and underestimate commonplace ones. We
fear specific "[22]movie-plot threats" that we can bring to mind.
That's why we fear flying over driving, even though the latter kills
about 35,000 people each year - about a 9/11's worth of deaths each
month. And it's why the idea of the TSA eliminating security at
minor airports fills us with fear. We can imagine the plot
unfolding, only without Bruce Willis saving the day.

Very little today is immune to politics, including the TSA. It drove
most of the agency's decisions in the early years after the 9/11
terrorist attacks. That the TSA is willing to consider politically
unpopular ideas is a credit to the organization. Let's let them
perform their analyses in peace.

This essay originally appeared in the [23]Washington Post.

(Via [24]Schneier on Security - emphasis above is mine)

Bruce knows at least as much about this as anyone outside of TSA, and
one can argue more than most inside. I always appreciate his analysis.
Also on:

[25]Twitter
__________________________________________________________________

My original entry is here: [26]Don't Fear the TSA Cutting Airport
Security. Be Glad That They're Talking about It.. It posted Mon, 13 Aug
2018 13:30:15 +0000.
Filed under: business, global, privacy,

References

1. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/08/dont_fear_the_t.html
2. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/01/politics/tsa-considering-eliminating-screening-at-smaller-airports/index.html
3. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/02/politics/tsa-airport-security/index.html
4. https://www.schneier.com/books/beyond_fear/
5. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2010/01/stop_the_panic_on_ai.html
6. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2010/01/profiling_makes_us_l.html
7. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2010/12/why_the_tsa_cant_bac.html
8. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2010/11/a_waste_of_money_and.html
9. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2015/06/why_are_we_spending_.html
10. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2008/10/time_to_show_bottle.html
11. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/12/hiding_petn_fro.html
12. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/01/german_tv_on_th.html
13. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2010/12/why_the_tsa_cant_bac.html
14. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-things-he-carried/307057/
15. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/03/harms_of_post-9.html
16. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/03/21/tsa-spending-3-d-scanners/447410002/
17. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/01/politics/tsa-considering-eliminating-screening-at-smaller-airports/index.html
18. https://www.amazon.com/Are-Safe-Enough-Measuring-Assessing/dp/0128114754/
19. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2007/05/psychology_of_securi.html
20. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2007/03/why_the_human_brain.html
21. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2012/07/drawing_the_wrong_le.html
22. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2005/09/terrorists_dont_do_m.html
23. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/08/07/dont-fear-the-tsa-cutting-airport-security-be-glad-that-theyre-talking-about-it/?utm_term=.d05ea964f4eb
24. http://www.schneier.com/blog/atom.xml
25. https://twitter.com/TokyoGringo/status/1028998192233373700
26. https://www.prjorgensen.com/?p=1450