[42076] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Totally OT, sorry; was (Re: Lack of Security)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Fraizer)
Thu Sep 13 11:52:56 2001
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 11:52:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Fraizer <nanog@Overkill.EnterZone.Net>
To: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.org
In-Reply-To: <20010913101636.A39550@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0109131147340.17127-100000@Overkill.EnterZone.Net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> The problem I have with all of the FAA action is that anyone with
> a valid rating can rent a plane, even planes this large if they
> have enough money. I would guess the hijackers wanted a plane full
> of people for additional shock value, but obtaining an empty (but
The passengers were a small "insurance policy" that they wouldn't be blown
out of the air by intercepting fighters. It's psychologically difficult
enough to splash a camel-humping terrorist, let alone have to splash
60-300 innocent people who are unwillingly along for the ride. The
terrorists knew that this moral issue would weigh in their favor.
> full of fuel) plane would be even easier for them, and almost no
> FAA security measures would stop them. Additionally, on a private
> plane they could load on it explosive cargo without too much effort,
> adding even more punch to the process.
The same goes for rental cars/trucks.
> I do believe we need to figure out how these planes were hijacked,
> and take steps to prevent it from happening again. That said, I
> find it highly unlikely that eliminating curbside checkin will have
> any effect other than to inconvenience travelers.
I agree. Baggage checked at the curb goes through the same procedures as
baggage carried to the ticket counter. It's just more convenient.
---
John Fraizer
EnterZone, Inc
