Changes in Air Travel Screening: Underlying Problems Remain

by Jordan Yerman | August 11, 2007 at 11:48 am
333 views | 0 Recommendations | 0 comments

Photos

I hate LAN

I hate LAN

see larger image

uploaded by Alitni

A proposed revamp of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security air passenger screening program offers improved privacy protections, but the agency still has a ways to go, said one privacy advocate.

DHS on Thursday announced initial plans for an overhaul of its Secure Flight program, with the agency no longer no longer assigning risk scores to passengers or using predictive behavior technology, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff said at a press conference. But the Transportation Security Administration, part of DHS, will have direct control of checking domestic passenger lists against terrorist watch lists, instead of the airlines, Chertoff said.

"Unfortunately, as a lot of travelers know, this process sometimes leads to inconsistencies in how the list is checked and how it's maintained by the airlines, and the result of that is frustration for travelers," Chertoff said.

DHS has "made progress" on privacy issues, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of privacy advocacy group the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). DHS is right to focus on matching passenger names to terrorist watch lists instead of trying to predict behavior, he said.

"Instead of open-ended profiling ... the revamped Secure Flight focuses on the problem at hand," he said.

But privacy problems remain, Rotenberg added. Air passengers still cannot see the reasons why they're targeted for extensive searches or kept off flights, and they cannot correct bad information on the terrorist watch lists, he said. "The problems with the watch list are still valid and are not going away," he said.

"[F]rustration for travelers" is one way of putting it. "False arrest" is another. The elephant in the room here is why, if someone is deemed so dangerous as to be denied the right to travel would not simply be arrested outright. If there's not enough evidence to question someone as a suspect in a crime, then surely this watch list is composed of red herrings. Also, keeping the reasoning behind one's appearance on the list a secret even from the accused is just plain fishy. If you want to "defend freedom", it's best not to turn people's lives into Kafka novels.

Advertisement

Comments (0)

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from