Lap top and tablet ban
What happens if you buy a laptop or ipad in the Duty Free shop in departures?. You have already gone through security so are you allowed to take those on the aircraft?
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lossy city
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's in the cloud the NSA likely knows about it. Probably 100% certain if the cloud server is physically in the US, or if it is a US company. If it is a 'secure non-US' server (if that even exists) then they will see the data when it's downloaded.
Perhaps the US constitution protects US citizens resident in the US, but others are not protected.
Perhaps the US constitution protects US citizens resident in the US, but others are not protected.
The only way this would work (and they way it's currently implemented in ME) is: bag searches at the gate. (Except at airports with gate-security as opposed to general security, but I don't know of many of those in Europe.)
Generally where we are arrivals and departures levels are segregated anyway, and in the event of specific security tightening on US bound flights there has indeed been the implementation of bag searches at the gates for those flights....I guess we will find out in the next few days what is in store for us in Europe and what the level of disruption will be.
According to TrueCrypt regarding creating a hidden volume in, say, a UFD or SD:
Hmm, I'd like to know if that can be broken.
(My bold)
Plausible Deniability
In case an adversary forces you to reveal your password, TrueCrypt provides and supports two
kinds of plausible deniability . . . .
. . . . .The principle is that a TrueCrypt volume is created within another TrueCrypt volume (within the free space on the volume). Even when the outer volume is mounted, it should be impossible to prove whether there is a hidden volume within it or not, because free space on any TrueCrypt volume is always filled with random data when the volume is created and no part of the (dismounted) hidden volume can be distinguished from random data.
In case an adversary forces you to reveal your password, TrueCrypt provides and supports two
kinds of plausible deniability . . . .
. . . . .The principle is that a TrueCrypt volume is created within another TrueCrypt volume (within the free space on the volume). Even when the outer volume is mounted, it should be impossible to prove whether there is a hidden volume within it or not, because free space on any TrueCrypt volume is always filled with random data when the volume is created and no part of the (dismounted) hidden volume can be distinguished from random data.
(My bold)
Generally where we are arrivals and departures levels are segregated anyway
This is Trump's administration way of getting back at the Middle East carriers who are doing so well on North American routes. The ban seems to be aimed at all ME carriers. I bet he doesn't ban iPads on Russian carriers.
Trump Bans Laptops And IPads From Dubai Flights To USA - Emirates, Flights, Use, UAE Ban Around Town - ShortList Dubai
I'm surprised he hasn't done anything with PIA yet.
Trump Bans Laptops And IPads From Dubai Flights To USA - Emirates, Flights, Use, UAE Ban Around Town - ShortList Dubai
I'm surprised he hasn't done anything with PIA yet.
There are recent news reports of a Trump meeting at the White House a few days ago, in which aviation risks were amongst subjects discussed with certain guests, and partly specific to (a) certain area(s) named at the meeting (but unnamed in press reports).
This would suggest that there are indeed security reasons.
It would make sense for the US to share any intel on this with just about everyone since they alone cannot police things all around the world . What concerns me is -what reciprocity will there be , ie all pax traveling to Europe should face same restrictions as westbound pax and all US domestics the same . As has been pointed out on here the US doesn't need to import terrorism as it has enough of its own and detonating bombs on a flight from JFK to LAX is just as plausible as LHR to JFK and the US have been horrible caught out by the delusion that domestic flights are not a problem and seem to be slipping back into that mindset
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seem to be a number of subsequent posts on here (this was from 21st March) similarly speculating that this ban might be for commercial rather than security motives.
There are recent news reports of a Trump meeting at the White House a few days ago, in which aviation risks were amongst subjects discussed with certain guests, and partly specific to (a) certain area(s) named at the meeting (but unnamed in press reports).
This would suggest that there are indeed security reasons.
There are recent news reports of a Trump meeting at the White House a few days ago, in which aviation risks were amongst subjects discussed with certain guests, and partly specific to (a) certain area(s) named at the meeting (but unnamed in press reports).
This would suggest that there are indeed security reasons.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trouble with that is that the more you reveal about exactly what you know to more parties, the more you also reveal about how you found out. Ultimately, if you reveal to all concerned everything you've found out, your adversary may be able to determine your source by identifying who had access to the information you received. Then you don't get any more information from that source.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm surprised he hasn't done anything with PIA yet.
However the EK flights via MIL and ATH to the US do not have the additional security screening or the lap top ban.
Insanity, unless it's purely commercial.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, and I'm shocked when I see places where they are not segregated. You're then depending on security at some foreign departure airport
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lossy city
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that this is being expanded, e.g. to allow EU-Canada-Canada flights without additional security in Canada.
Flights from the US get random treatment: sometimes they are allowed directly into the sterile area, but sometimes not. (And some airports e.g. FRA don't have enough sterile gates, so everyone gets dumped into non-sterile airside.)
Stuff like this is why a lot of people I know avoid connections in the UK, US (and for now Canada).
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest from IATA from my usual source:
Sorry I don't have the letter.
On 17 May 2017, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is scheduled to meet with the European Commission and a select number of Member States to discuss measures addressing the current security threat posed by personal electronic devices (PEDs). It is anticipated that this meeting will be followed shortly by an announcement of the expansion of the current PED restrictions to additional airports in Europe and potentially elsewhere.
[NOT] Attached is a letter from IATA Director General Alexandre de Juniac to John F. Kelly, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary, and Violeta Bulc, Commissioner for Transport for the European Commission.
The letter urges both governments to consider alternative, short-term measures to address this security threat rather than an expansion of the existing ban. It includes our projections on the negative impact such an extension would have on passengers, airlines, and the economy generally.
While IATA will continue to advocate for these less obstructive measures, member airlines (particularly in Europe) should have contingency plans in place for the expansion of the existing ban
[NOT] Attached is a letter from IATA Director General Alexandre de Juniac to John F. Kelly, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary, and Violeta Bulc, Commissioner for Transport for the European Commission.
The letter urges both governments to consider alternative, short-term measures to address this security threat rather than an expansion of the existing ban. It includes our projections on the negative impact such an extension would have on passengers, airlines, and the economy generally.
While IATA will continue to advocate for these less obstructive measures, member airlines (particularly in Europe) should have contingency plans in place for the expansion of the existing ban
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Age: 74
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This will make Chromebooks and other net-connected empty-shell computers the tool of choice for biz travellers. Rent one or buy a cheap one as soon as you touch down.
This is actually at the behest of the UK Foreign Office. Intelligence suggested that certain (in fact most) departure countries security etc was fine, while others were suspect. However the Foreign Office would not accept that, saying it would cause all sorts of diplomatic upsets to classify a certain country as not good enough, lead to diplomatic lobbying, reprisals, non-invitation of the UK Ambassador to diplomatic cocktail parties, etc. So the alternative was treat all countries the same.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dublin
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Schengen doesn't seperate, France trusts Germany to have the right process and vice versa. The UK trusts no one and rescreens everyone, even the Irish. Both have merit, the UK was a bigger terrorist target although France must be wondering when it will all end....
The UK re-screens the UK.
If I transit LHR from MAN I am re-screened.
This despite MAN having the most pernickety screening staff this side of Ben Gurion.
Last edited by pilot9249; 17th May 2017 at 23:44.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lossy city
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've not flown UK-LHR-Int'l in a few years, but same terminal connections (e.g. GLA-LHR-Europe via T5) definitely had no screening back then.
Connecting between terminals always requires re-screening since all passengers get mixed regardless of origin, but at least T5 didn't require re-screening for same-terminal domestics. (I can't remember if there are domestic flights into any other terminals?)
Connecting between terminals always requires re-screening since all passengers get mixed regardless of origin, but at least T5 didn't require re-screening for same-terminal domestics. (I can't remember if there are domestic flights into any other terminals?)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest update:
On 17 May 2017, officials from the European Commission (EC) and the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) met in Brussels to discuss issues related to aviation security and safety, with a particular focus on a possible expansion of the restrictions on the carriage of large electronic devices to include flights from Europe to the US. Representatives from seven states (FR, DE, UK, ES, IT, NL and Ireland) representing the majority of the traffic to the US also attended the meeting.
The key takeaways from the meeting are:
· The EC provided an update on the actions already taken by the EU to address security across Europe.
· DHS indicated it is considering expanding the restrictions to European airports, but that no firm decision to do so has been made.
· DHS will base its decision to expand the restrictions on what technology is available at European airports to detect threats and on known intelligence of people travelling through Europe to the US with the intention of committing attacks.
· If a decision is made, States will be given advance notice (approx. 3 weeks) before the restrictions are actually applied.
· DHS gave no indication as to the scope of the expansion throughout Europe, whether additional measures would be implemented, or whether it is considering expanding the restrictions to additional regions around the globe.
· US and EU officials are scheduled to meet again in Washington, DC the week of 22nd May; and the issue is expected to be on the agenda when President Donald Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker meet before the G7 Summit on 24 May. No decision to expand the restrictions will be made before the G7 meeting.
· The EC indicated that a ban on the EU side to mirror the US is not being considered.
· The EC also recommended that the industry should prepare for an eventual expansion and develop and share contingency plans.
· The EC raised the issue of safety and requested that it be discussed further before an expansion is implemented.
Obviously, the US decision to expand the current restrictions on large electronic devices is very fluid. We will continue to monitor this issue closely and will be sure to provide an update as soon as any additional information is available.
The key takeaways from the meeting are:
· The EC provided an update on the actions already taken by the EU to address security across Europe.
· DHS indicated it is considering expanding the restrictions to European airports, but that no firm decision to do so has been made.
· DHS will base its decision to expand the restrictions on what technology is available at European airports to detect threats and on known intelligence of people travelling through Europe to the US with the intention of committing attacks.
· If a decision is made, States will be given advance notice (approx. 3 weeks) before the restrictions are actually applied.
· DHS gave no indication as to the scope of the expansion throughout Europe, whether additional measures would be implemented, or whether it is considering expanding the restrictions to additional regions around the globe.
· US and EU officials are scheduled to meet again in Washington, DC the week of 22nd May; and the issue is expected to be on the agenda when President Donald Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker meet before the G7 Summit on 24 May. No decision to expand the restrictions will be made before the G7 meeting.
· The EC indicated that a ban on the EU side to mirror the US is not being considered.
· The EC also recommended that the industry should prepare for an eventual expansion and develop and share contingency plans.
· The EC raised the issue of safety and requested that it be discussed further before an expansion is implemented.
Obviously, the US decision to expand the current restrictions on large electronic devices is very fluid. We will continue to monitor this issue closely and will be sure to provide an update as soon as any additional information is available.