Just after posting the article about new safety measures on US aircraft I found an interesting post on New York Times "Jet Lagged" blog titled "Airport Security Folies"

Here after a short excerpt of Patrick Smith article

" Six years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, airport security remains a theater of the absurd. The changes put in place following the September 11th catastrophe have been drastic, and largely of two kinds: those practical and effective, and those irrational, wasteful and pointless.

The first variety have taken place almost entirely behind the scenes. Explosives scanning for checked luggage, for instance, was long overdue and is perhaps the most welcome addition. Unfortunately, at concourse checkpoints all across America, the madness of passenger screening continues in plain view. It began with pat-downs and the senseless confiscation of pointy objects. Then came the mandatory shoe removal, followed in the summer of 2006 by the prohibition of liquids and gels. We can only imagine what is next…."

Continue reading it on NYT website 

On my own opinion, Airport security today is a mix between relevant and must have security measures on a side but also theatrical, annoying and ridiculous measures. Some of these measures are time consuming, put passengers and crew on their nerves for no safety added value. What does really justify them?

• Government "zero  political risk" (if something happens they will be able to tell that all possible protection measures were already taken) ?
• Fear factor = better military/law enforcement budget ?
• Security private experts / companies have highly increase their financial income since September 2001. They certainly not ready to give this golden egg away.
• Did I speak about million dollars detectors and scanners manipulated by low trained personnel ?    

but do you think air travels are safer to face well prepared, organized and motivated enemies ?

Tags: 2007, 2008, air, air travel, aircraft, airport, art, ATT, attack, batteries, blog, detector, enforcement, fon, ia, ict, im, jet lagged, lan, law, LED, lithium, MIT, new york times, nomadcom.net, nyt, organize, passengers, post, risk, safe, safety, screen, security, spare, terror, train, Travel, web, website, what is, wp, www, XP

British secret services MI5 warned UK businesses about Chinese hackers.

MI5 director-general wrote to 300 UK firms including Banks and law firms to warn them about "electronic espionage attacks" conducted by "Chinese state organizations".

IT Security company Sophos reports that 30 per cent of malware are "made in China". Trojan horses are designed to rob login credentials of anything including email and games. 

China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) was already blamed in September 2007 for attacking governments computers of France, Germany, New Zealand, Australia and United States, including Pentagon systems.

Trojan horses often target computers with unpatched vulnerabilities and without proper level of security deployed.  

The Chinese government has denied any involvement in the attacks and pointed its finger to unidentified hackers.

The question is now to discover if malware "made in China" are really powerful and smart of if attacked computers were the result of a serious lack of security and preventive protection measures.

Source: The Register 

Tags: 2007, art, ATT, attack, blog, ces, computer, computers, design, espionage, event, game, ia, im, King, lan, law, login, malware, nomadcom.net, nyt, power, sco, security, services, spy, spy cyber china espionage "cyber spy" attack warning MI, the register, uk, wp, www

I found the article below on "The Register" site and asked myself the following question: 

If connecting to Internet using an open and unsecured wifi access point is considered as a crime, why authorities do not apply the same principle to other services (mainly electricity and water) we often use without any formal agreement of the owner ?

 " More than half of computer users have illegally stolen Wi-Fi connections, according to The Times - but only 11 alleged offenders have been arrested in the UK, as the police seem to think those deploying Wi-Fi should be more careful about securing their connections.

The data was collected from a "Have Your Say" survey on the website of security-specialist Sophos: apparently 54 per cent of the 560 people who responded admitted nicking bandwidth from insecure Wi-Fi routers.

This might say more about Sophos customers than the general population, and extrapolating the results to every computer user in the country is probably a crime against statistics: so that's exactly what The Times has done.

…

Anyone caught stealing a Wi-Fi connection can be fined up to a grand, even if it's left unsecured, so make sure you ask nicely next time you're looking to log on, and if the person next to you has never stolen a Wi-Fi connection then we have to assume that you have. "

What is your opinion about accessing open wifi ? Do you think it is a crime ?

Source: The Register

Tags: 2007, access, agreement, art, blog, ces, computer, connection, connections, crime, customer, electricity, enforcement, free, ia, im, internet, internet access, King, lan, law, list, MIT, nomadcom.net, police, population, security, services, statistics, survey, the register, thief, thieves, uk, user, water, web, website, what is, wifi, wireless, wp, www