Loss of Privacy

That’s right folks. The FBI and DHS have come up with a handy list so that you can tell if you are a hotel terrorist or not.

Download (PDF, 91KB)

In case you can’t see the PDF, here’s the memo in full.

(U//FOUO) Known or possible terrorists have displayed suspicious behaviors while staying at hotels overseas—including avoiding questions typically asked of hotel registrants; showing unusual interest in hotel security; attempting access to restricted areas; and evading hotel staff. These behaviors also could be observed in U.S. hotels, and security and law enforcement personnel should be aware of the potential indicators of terrorist activity.
(U//FOUO) Possible indicators of terrorist behaviors at hotels: The observation of multiple indicators may represent—based on the specific facts or circumstances—possible terrorist behaviors at hotels:
— (U//FOUO) Not providing professional or personal details on hotel registrations—such as place of employment, contact information, or place of residence.
— (U//FOUO) Using payphones for outgoing calls or making front desk requests in person to avoid using the room telephone.
— (U//FOUO) Interest in using Internet cafes, despite hotel Internet availability.
— (U//FOUO) Non-VIPs who request that their presence at a hotel not be divulged.
— (U//FOUO) Extending departure dates one day at a time for prolonged periods.
— (U//FOUO) Refusal of housekeeping services for extended periods.
— (U//FOUO) Extended stays with little baggage or unpacked luggage.
— (U//FOUO) Access or attempted access to areas of the hotel normally restricted to staff.
— (U//FOUO) Use of cash for large transactions or a credit card in someone else’s name.
— (U//FOUO) Requests for specific rooms, floors, or other locations in the hotel.
— (U//FOUO) Use of a third party to register.
— (U//FOUO) Multiple visitors or deliveries to one individual or room.
— (U//FOUO) Unusual interest in hotel access, including main and alternate entrances, emergency exits, and surrounding routes.
— (U//FOUO) Use of entrances and exits that avoid the lobby or other areas with cameras and hotel personnel.
— (U//FOUO) Attempting to access restricted parking areas with a vehicle or leaving unattended vehicles near the hotel building.
— (U//FOUO) Unusual interest in hotel staff operating procedures, shift changes, closed-circuit TV systems, fire alarms, and security systems.
— (U//FOUO) Leaving the property for several days and then returning.
— (U//FOUO) Abandoning a room and leaving behind clothing, toiletries, or other items.
— (U//FOUO) Noncompliance with other hotel policies.

As Bruce Schneier has said, “If you ask amateurs to act as front-line security personnel, you shouldn’t be surprised when you get amateur security.”

By the way, if you read the list carefully, yours truly is a terrorist. Now, excuse me while I go report myself.

On the Friday, April 6 edition of the Alex Jones Show, Alex talks with cryptographer, computer security specialist, and author Bruce Schneier. Mr. Schneier is a vocal critic of “security measures” used by the Transportation Security Administration. He was invited to testify before Congress about TSA abuses but was “formally uninvited” after the TSA complained. He is the author of numerous books, including Liars and Outliers: Enabling the Trust that Society Needs to Thrive, Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World, and Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World.

Yes, Alex Jones falls more into the conspiracy theorist category, but Bruce Schneier was on the show. Watch it and make your own decision as to how informative it is.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) wants to hear from individuals who have a question or a story to tell. They may just listen even though the panel will be stacked with those who seem to favor the TSA.

This hearing will be led by Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Transportation Committee Chairman John L. Mica (R-FL). Mica is also a senior member of the Oversight Committee.  Both committees have focused on the need for significant TSA reform in order to improve transportation security and eliminate the waste of taxpayers’ money on ineffective or poorly implemented programs.

The focus of Monday’s hearing will include Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT), the Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program, the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program, the Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) program, and other security initiatives administered by the TSA.  The Committees plan to continue conducting joint oversight hearings examining additional TSA issues in the coming months.

Members will solicit questions from the public via their Facebook pages to ask TSA officials at the hearing.

For those that do not have a Facebook account, there isn’t any other alternative to submit stories or questions, thus shutting out numerous people who would like to comment.

If you want to participate in this public discussion by your government, you must do so in a private, closed off, walled community and agree to this 3rd party’s terms and conditions. Democracy isn’t supposed to work this way. Those who wish to have a voice are either silenced or forced to compromise themselves to simply try to participate in their government.

Bruce Schneier was scheduled to appear, but now is not. You can read can read the transcript from his debate with Kip Hawley here.

Bruce Schneier calls it The Normalization of Security. We have become so accustomed to TSA security, that, even if it’s a parody, people accept it as the normal thing to do.

The second room of the queue is now a security check area, similar to a TSA checkpoint. The two G-series droids are still there, G2-9T scanning luggage and G2-4T scanning passengers. For those attraction junkies, you’ll remember that the G-series droids are so named because in the original Disneyland Park version of the ride, they were created by removing the “skins” from two of the goose animatronics from the soon-to-close America Sings attraction (Goose = “G” series). While we won’t tell you why, you’ll enjoy paying a lot of attention to what the scans of the luggage show is inside. When it’s your turn to go through the passenger scan (a thermal body scan effect), you may be verbally accosted by a security droid. [Editor Note (5/23/11): This is a theming element of the queue, and a great parody at the expense of TSA. This is NOT a serious or actual security scan - the thermal imaging is similar to what has been used for years in Test Track at Epcot.] Also, keep an eye out in the queue for an earlier version of RX-24 (“Captain Rex”) from the original Star Tours; he’s labeled “defective” and has some familiar dialogue.

While I don’t normally mind parodies, this seems to me as a way of legitimizing something that should not exist in the first place. It makes invasive security acceptable. Yes, it’s a joke because the “security” on the ride is considered a joke and extremely lazy, however, it is very unsettling.

The feeling of security and the reality of security don’t always match, says computer-security expert Bruce Schneier. He explains why we spend billions addressing news story risks, like the “security theater” now playing at your local airport, while neglecting more probable risks — and how we can break this pattern. (Recorded at TEDxPSU, October 2010 at Penn State University in University Park, PA. Duration: 21:05)