On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM, imipak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Schneier coined the phrase, dolt. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theatre
Forwarded conversation Subject: Security Threater: reader comment from n3td3v ------------------------ From: n3td3v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:35 PM To: n3td3v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Security Threater: reader comment from n3td3v Posted on: April 10, 2008, 9:17 AM PDT Story: Bruce Schneier's new view on Security Theater Security threater is good because it scares potential terrorists from being caught. It keeps the terrorists on their toes and worrying all the time. You've got to have security threater in place to deter terrorists or people thinking about it, or in the middle of plotting it. Terrorists as a lot of people know don't just wake up one day and decide to bomb something, you've got to take months and years of planning and . In UK, we have police at our airport with guns standing about to scare terrorists, at our major train stations we've got police standing about as well looking serious. We've got CCTV everywhere as well, and that deters crime and terrorism planning in certain areas where they are, and makes people feel less likely to have their handbag snatched. This has got to be a good thing, not a bad thing. I think security threater messes with the terrorists heads and makes wannabes think twice about it. However, your most serious terrorist will always find a way by these security threaters, but thats not to say they shouldn't be there, and a security threater is fine as long as its not your only line of defense against a threat. Usually airports combine security threater and real security together, and thats got to be a good thing, not a bad thing. We've got to use security threater as a deterrent and reassure the public. The government is playing mind games with the terrorists and thats what security threater is all about. Its primary focus is not to make the public feel safe, its to screw with the terrorists heads, making the public feel better is a secondry effect. If security threater helps to frustrate the easy planning of terrorism, thats a good thing. Security threater: 1. screw with terrorists head. 2. make them feel watched and known about. 3. make them feel they're about to get handcuffed. 4. frustrate planning and reconnaissance. 5. make public feel better. 6. Spot suspicious persons or packages. I don't think we need to read into it any further than that. I read Bruce Schneier's essay on "Psychology of Security" but it doesn't really tell us anything. Security Threater is a lot less of a science than he is making it out to be. Some things need not be as complicated as they're made out to be by him, especially security threater. I think his essay is looking at security threater's effect from the humble travellers points of view/ the general public, not from a terrorist prospective. When you start looking at the effects of security threater on the humble terrorist, you start to reap the rewards from it. Its as if Bruce Schneier has a grudge with the police, the government etc for having security threater in place and making him feel uncomfortable at airports etc. I think Bruce Scheier wishes security was in place, but not visually... to make the public feel uneasy that there is a possibility of something about to happen. Bruce, a visual deterrent is needed to make terrorists uneasy, and I know it makes *you* feel airports etc are under siege all the time, and you probably remember back to the days when it wasn't like it is today, but some things cannot be reversed, and we can't go back to the good old days. Slack up your grudge with security threater, which *i* believe you have and just think about how many more active terrorists we'd have without it in place. I believe without a visual deterrent at our airports and public places where people gather, which inconvenience your eye and bring pollution to your line of sight, we would be in a far worse situation than we are. Security threater works, so let's not bash it through intellectual and sophisticated essays. I know when you goto the airport and public places, all you want to see is hot chicks and flowers and children playing and laughing, but in todays world, we've just got to live with security threater being paramount in countering the terrorist threat, espeically people who think *I wonder how easy it is to carry out a terrorist attack anyway* and thats when they see the police with guns standing about and think twice, and go back to reading porn mags. The bottom line, Bruce Schneier doesn't like security threater... too bad, move on... you'll acclimatise to post 9/11 security eventually. I'm all for a visual deterrent, it works in night clubs to make people scared to start fights, so the same should work elsewhere. You should be supporting it, not bashing it. I feel safer in a night club that beefy guys are standing about, and I don't think as many folks would goto night clubs if there were no beefy guys standing about. I know the beefy guys in the night clubs help prevent fights too by just standing about as a visual deterrent. So, Bruce Schneier, I want to see you supporting Security threater on your blog and the positives of it, instead of the negitive effects it might be having on society and the real difference its doing to combat crime and terrorism. http://www.news.com/5208-10784_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=36752&messageID=397071 ---------- From: Bruce Schneier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:50 PM To: n3td3v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thanks. Can you post this as a comment to my blog so that others can see it? http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/04/the_feeling_and_1.html You can post anonymously if you like. Bruce ---------- From: n3td3v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:10 PM To: Bruce Schneier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't want to go on your website on a comment level. The comment is on Cnet, n3td3v-list, and i post the news article link on full-disclosure today, so I guess folks scrolled down and seen it there. If you want the comment on your site, you post it yourself. No rudeness or disrespect ment. I have a select number of places I feel in my comfort zone to post to, and your website isn't one of them. I think *others* have seen it. Bye for now, n3td3v ---------- From: Bruce Schneier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM To: n3td3v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No problem. Thanks for sending it to me. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/