Subscribe to Public Matters RSS Feed

Public Matters

by: Whit Richardson - Friday, April 3, 2009

*Updated 04/06/09*
Ok, so I'm a blogging fool lately (and the boss isn't even in the office, go figure), but good blog topics just keep arriving in my inbox.

I just read an article about a security review being issued for Pearson International Airport in Toronto by the Transport Minister after he was allowed to walk unchallenged onto the tarmac. That's a big security oops.

A clearly unhappy Baird today warned the Greater Toronto Airports Authority, the airport's operator, to take the security breach seriously.

"There were doors that were unlocked, no security present that would allow anyone from the street to be able to walk in," Baird told reporters. "What I saw was simply unacceptable. And if the Toronto airport authority doesn't share that view, that causes me even more concern," Baird said.

Here's some even harsher words from Senator Colin Kenny who was with Baird during the test of airport security, who said the airport authority needs to get "off its ass" and step up vigilance.

"The bottom line is they have been doing a lousy job in security at the airport," he said in an interview with the paper.

You may recall I wrote an article not long ago about Toronto Pearson in regards to the streamlining of their credentialing system (also there's a video on sdnTVnews with Quantum's Laurie Aaron about the project), and it sounded like the airport was taking measures to improve its security and make it as efficient as possible. Apparently they missed a few steps though.

EDITORIAL UPDATE: Here's a response by from the higher ups at the airport authority.

"Through training, education, changes to policies and protocols, we will improve airport security," wrote Lloyd McCoomb, president and CEO of the airport authority, in a response letter to the public. "I fully expect to hear commentary about people's perception of security at the airport and I anticipate additional criticism from all quarters. I expect to be challenged and I should be challenged."

Sounds like this incident was enough to get the authority up and off their...

by: Whit Richardson - Friday, April 3, 2009

A fatal shooting near Radford University in Virginia caused the school to go into lockdown last night for about five hours, according to the Washington Post. While there are only preliminary reports about the incident, the article said that students were notified via e-mail, text message and voice mail to stay inside and lock their doors. And while all campus security directors hope never to have to use their mass notification system (as I'm assuming this is), it's always beneficial to know that the system is effective at spreading the word during an incident. I'm going to give it a few days before I give Radford a call to see how effective their notification system actually was at reaching out to students, but Radford University isn't far from Virginia Tech, so I'm sure students and staff are especially sensitive to this type of incident.

by: Whit Richardson - Friday, April 3, 2009

It's not very often we get some security excitement here in Maine, so I thought it was worthy of a quick blog entry. Today the Portland Jetport (and yes, that means only small planes fly in and out of the 11-gate terminal) had to be evacuated upon suspicion of an explosive device which was detected in a passenger's carry-on luggage.

As of the latest news report, I guess all is clear and it was just an "unidentifiable electronic device" but the Portland Bomb Squad (we have a bomb squad!) had to use a robot to remove the bag from the x-ray machine. And, they were planning to blow up the bag, but news reports say authorities were seen carrying the bag into a squad card, so I guess that means no fireworks.

Normally, I would grab the sdnTVnews camera and head out to the Jetport for some live reporting, but alas, the camera is in Vegas with the rest of the staff, so I can't bring you any live footage. However, in the spirit of Vegas, the three of us have some bets going about what we think this device actually is. Here's what we're thinking:

- vibrating neck pillow
- electric shaver
- Tickle Me Elmo
- iPod
- blender

I'll let you know after I watch the 6 o'clock local news (which is always a treat anyway).

EDITORIAL UPDATE:
I called it. According to a news report this morning, the "mysterious" electronic device that caused the evacuation and three-hour delay ended up being a "jumble of electronics", including an iPod. Wow, my reporter instincts are impressive. Here's another article about the incident, in case you're really intrigued. Oh, and the good news: The bag's owner wasn't arrested and was even allowed to catch his flight. My bet is he'll never pack his iPod quite the same way, though.

by: Whit Richardson - Thursday, April 2, 2009

I start out every morning listening to Internet radio streams of the news (often WBUR, the NPR station out of Boston, just because). I'm always surprised at how many segments pique my security interest. One was a piece about the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's visit yesterday to San Diego’s Otay Mesa Port of Entry. While there she announced more than $20 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding for Otay Mesa (and I'm pretty sure she's far too serious to recognize April Fools, so Otay Mesa can probably start planning to use that money).

Here's more about funds for border security from the DHS press release:
DHS and the General Services Administration will direct more than $400 million in ARRA funding to the Southwest border, including $269 million for port and other infrastructure projects in Otay Mesa, Antelope Wells, N.M., Los Ebanos, Texas, Corpus Christi, Texas, and Nogales, Arizona. $42 million will go toward Non-Intrusive Inspection Equipment (NIIE) at Southwest border ports of entry, including both low energy and large-scale systems—big enough to scan tractor-trailers. Secretary Napolitano also announced $50 million in SBInet funding to accelerate deployment of surveillance technology and associated command and control technologies in Arizona, including deployment in Nogales and Sonoita stations, and $50 million to pay for tactical communications modernization for the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley Sectors.

In general, I can't believe how many news reports I read about Mexico these days. I know Mexico is certainly a security threat, but it's been a security threat for years. I can't tell if things have truly gotten worse there or if the mainstream news media has once again jumped on the sensationalist bandwagon. It all started with that 60 Minutes piece by Anderson Cooper. Oh, that Anderson, he knows how to mix reporting with a healthy dose of sensationalism. Anyway, I guess what matters is that all this attention leads to continued efforts to secure our borders (and leads to more than just putting up a really, really big expensive fence).

by: Whit Richardson - Wednesday, April 1, 2009

So things are pretty quiet here on the home front. Most of our team is out in Vegas soaking up all things security at ISC West. I've been gathering what I can from our editorial team based on Twitter, blog posts (here and here) and a few quick phone calls between events.

Rhianna said she was surprised at how many end users she had already met on day one of the event (which is largely educational sessions, the expo didn't open until today), which I think is a testament to ISC West's efforts to focus programming on end users. I mean, in the end, that's who everyone wants to see there, right? (And curious reporter-types too, of course).

And despite the fact that I'm slightly disappointed I couldn't attend this year's show, when I hear about the crazy schedule everyone is trying to keep, running from booth to booth (and trying to look calm and collected), taking notes and asking the right questions (often while on camera) as well as socializing after the show can be absolutely exhausting and suddenly the peace and quiet of the office doesn't seem so bad.

But things here aren't exactly breezy. There's multiple newswires to get out alone (which can be intimidating, by the way) and still lots of calls and stories to report. I just spoke to several ports who are finding ways to utilize their existing technology to achieve some of the TWIC regulations. And I expect more to come on that issue, especially since everyone likes to hold back their news until ISC West. So, by the time everyone gets back to the solace of Maine, we'll all be in the same boat trying to follow-up with everything that happened in Vegas. But isn't what happens in Vegas suppose to stay in Vegas?

by: Whit Richardson - Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Just saw an update about the random gate screening measure. USA Today is reporting that the TSA said it began the new measures due to concerns that terrorists will smuggle weapon components through security and assemble them at the airport (or aboard a plane). Despite the fact that the TSA said in earlier reports that this initiative wasn't due to anything in particular, more screening will continue to be a deterrent to terrorists. I'll have to ask those on our staff who are headed out to Vegas for ISC West whether or not they witnessed any gate screening. I'd love to do my own reporting in this case, but, alas, somebody has to keep the ship floating.

by: Whit Richardson - Thursday, March 26, 2009

I hate to always be down on the Transportation Security Administration, but this article just popped into my inbox about a report from the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General revealing that the TSA's known shipper program doesn't provide the security intended. The gist of the program is that airlines will only accept cargo from "known" and verified shippers, however, this report, reveals that the

TSA does not sufficiently define the ways a carrier may verify a known shipper, nor can it validate entries in a database of known shippers.

In addition, the article states that the verification process has been delayed by technical problems and "unresolved policy questions."

The inspector general’s office recommended that TSA provide more guidance to carriers verifying known shippers, and to inspectors who validate compliance with the program.

My TSA source, Ann Davis, has told me that it's this known shipper program (along with the Certified Cargo Screening Facility program, which may be the same thing?) that has allowed the TSA to undertake such an enormous screening task. If there are questions regarding the integrity of the verification process, I would imagine this could prove to be a major hurtle for the TSA and could even start impacting the shipping process. I wonder how much airlines make by shipping cargo on passenger aircraft, and if the cost of trying to comply with screening mandates could soon outweigh the revenue benefits? Just putting that out there.

Anyway, here's where you can find the whole report for your viewing pleasure: http://www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIGr_09-35_Mar0...

by: Whit Richardson - Thursday, March 19, 2009

More news in my inbox today concerning the TSA's ability to meet cargo screening deadlines. A report issued by the Government Accountability Office stated that the TSA may having a hard time getting voluntary participation in its Certified Cargo Screening Program, which has the potential to largely reduce the amount of cargo the TSA has to screen on site. The report also indicated that the TSA has yet to approve effective screening technologies that could help make the screening process more efficient and that the lack of security inspectors to oversee and enforce inspections is contributing to the shortcomings (see our April edition for a full story about this issue, including comments from TSA officials).

Similarly, an article from Bloomberg said that two specific carriers, Delta and American, will have a hard time meeting the screening mandates. According to the paper, Delta is the largest carrier of cargo among U.S. passenger airlines after merging with Northwest Airlines last year, followed by American.

And, after all that, the GAO's testimony in front of the House Transportation Security Subcommittee yesterday, revealed that it's pretty much impossible to verify what percentage of cargo is actually being screened anyway. Yeah, I would say it's tough to not only ensure that there are enough inspectors inspecting, but to also have to inspect the inspectors inspections makes my head hurt.

by: Whit Richardson - Thursday, March 19, 2009

Another interesting security story from USA Today about increased security measures in airports. The paper reports that according to a government memo, airport security officials are randomly selecting passengers at the boarding gate for yet another round of security checks.

A spokesperson for the TSA said this additional screening is an effort to mix up tactics and make it harder for terrorists to monitor how security works. This also seems in line with the TSA's efforts to focus on behavioral profiling. I would think a terrorist would be on high alert during the official screening process, but may let down his or her guard while waiting for and boarding the plane. I think it's a good initiative by the TSA to let people know that security is always present.

by: Whit Richardson - Monday, March 9, 2009

The fatal shooting of a pastor yesterday at a church in Illinois was not only alarming and tragic, but also a reminder that security has a place everywhere. To be honest, I had never really thought about churches needing a security plan. When I think of crime in churches I think of petty theft (keep your hand out of the offering plate!) or perhaps the occasional domestic-type incident, but shootings? An article from CNN discusses some of the security measures churches should have in place. Here's some excerpts:

"The church is really behind the secular world in terms of planning," said Jeff Hawkins, the executive director of the Christian Security Network.

... It's essential that a church must balance having a security presence while still keeping a house of worship open to everyone. "Some churches choose armed guards, some have a much more subtle security presence where you wouldn't even know it's there."

A church should have five security plans in place to deal with evacuation, long-term shelter, medical emergencies, lost or missing children and violent confrontations, he said.

"Every church is different so you need something that is going to work for that particular church's culture and size," he said. "And I think now, especially after September 11, people want to feel secure. They want to know if they bring their family somewhere, it's going to be a safe environment.

I also wondered, who's in charge of putting these plans together? I'm pretty sure most churches don't have CSO on the executive board.

Pages