Subscribe: The Practical Nomad
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/index.rdf
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
airline  airlines  amazing race  amazing  atilde paulo  dar salaam  dar  data  flight  government  race  time  travel  world 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: The Practical Nomad

The Practical Nomad



Edward Hasbrouck's blog



Published: 2017-05-22T22:09:06-08:00

Last Build Date: 2017-05-09T13:07:47-08:00

 



European Commission to investigate airline reservation (in)security

2017-05-09T13:07:47-08:00

Fifteen years after I published my first critique of the extreme insecurity of airline reservations stored by computerized reservations systems (CRSs) and made available without passwords or access logs on public Web sites, and four months after the continued existence 15 years later of those same vulnerabilities was publicly demonstrated by hackers inspired in part by reading an interview with me on a German IT news site, I've finally found the right unit of the European Commission to investigate my complaint that these CRS practices violate the privacy and data protection provisions of the European Union's Code of Conduct for CRSs. In the U.S., there is no general Federal privacy law requiring businesses to protect personal data about their customers or other individuals. But there are general requirements for this in the European Union(and many other jurisdictions including in Canada), as well as specific requirements for the protection of travellers' personal data in the EU Code of Conduct for CRSs. The European Commission has the authority to enforce the Code of Conduct for CRSs, and the responsibility to investigate complaints of violations. But I have never been able to find any public indication of how or to whom to submit such a complaint. Saying, "You can complain to the European Commission" is like saying, "You can complain to the U.S. government." Exactly how, and to whom, are you supposed to complain? Knock on the door of the White House or the nearest U.S. Embassy? Try that in the U.S., and you are likely to be arrested, if not shot, if you even manage to get within shouting distance of the door. The European Commission has published procedures for complaints against EU member states, but not for complaints against commercial entities such as the CRSs which are regulated directly by the Commission rather than, or in addition to, by the national governments of EU member states. I'm not the only person to have asked this question. In 2011, MEP Martin Ehrenhauser, an independent Member of the European Parliament, submitted a written question to the European Commission asking, "Has the Commission designated a point of contact or established procedures for handling complaints from individuals of violations of the Code of Conduct for CRSs? If so, how has the Commission made public this point of contact and the procedures for handling such complaints? If not, why not?". The eventual written response from the Commission ignored this part of the question entirely, and didn't mention the Code of Conduct for CRSs. More recently, on 20 March 2017, MEPs from three different countries and political groups -- MEPs Jan Philipp Albrecht (Verts/ALE), Birgit Sippel (S&D), and Sophie in 't Veld (ALDE) -- submitted a new question to the Commission: Article 11 of the Code of Conduct for Computerised Reservation Systems (Regulation (EC) No 80/2009 of 14 January 2009) requires that 'technical and organisational measures shall be taken ... to ensure that personal data are only accessible for the specific purpose for which they were collected.' The Commission has the power to investigate and enforce the code under Section 6 of the regulation. Personal data in the passenger name records (PNR) hosted by Computerised Reservation Systems (CRS) are available through CRS-operated public websites, just by using a name and the short 'record locators' displayed on items such as boarding passes and baggage labels. Due to a lack of access logs, data subjects are unable to gather from CRSs, whether their PNR data have been disclosed and to whom. Security researchers demonstrated these and other vulnerable aspects of CRSs at the Chaos Communication Congress held on 27 December 2016. 1. Does the Commission believe that giving access to PNR data on the basis of a name and record locator, with no password nor access logging, is compliant with Article 11 of the Code of Conduct? 2. Does it intend to investigate these vulnerable aspects and possible violations of the code? 3. Has it established procedures for handling complaints from [...]



The Amazing Race 29, Episode 6

2017-05-04T23:59:12-08:00

Lake Como (Italy) - Venice (Italy) The "streets" of the old city of Venice are mostly too narrow for cars or trucks. Transportation and deliveries are by water along the canals, or by foot and handcart. As one of their tasks in this episode of The Amazing Race 29, each pair of travellers had to maneuver a heavy cart through the pedestrian streets and up and down the steps of the bridges over the canals to deliver a load of suitcases to a hotel. In real life, multiple workers' cooperatives have, for many years, provided porterage between the docks and Venice hotels for tourists who don't want to schlep their own luggage through the lanes and alleys, over bricks and cobblestones, and up and down steps. The cast of The Amazing Race is often given tasks that the TV producers consider characteristic of local work. But this was a rare on-camera reminder that, as organizations like Tourism Concern and the hotel and restaurant workers' union UNITE HERE have long pointed out, some of the hardest jobs in places like Venice economically dominated by tourism are jobs in the "hospitality industry" itself. One reason that the cast of The Amazing Race is able to keep up such a grueling pace of seemingly continuous travel around the world for the month or so each season takes to film is the work done by the employees of the luxury hotels and resorts where they are pampered and fed and get to rest between each leg of the race. As a traveller, I am grateful to the workers (as well as the hosts who help visitors without remuneration) around the world who make my journeys possible, especially in parts of the world where the standards of tourist accommodations and services are far above those of most local residents, including the workers who serve tourists.. That's become less and less visible over the years of The Amazing Race. In the first seasons of the TV show, each episode began and ended with scenes of the racers relaxing at the "pit stop". In later seasons, footage of the "pit stops" disappeared from the broadcast episodes, and was moved first to "DVD extras" and then to bonus streaming segments on the CBS Web site. Using a bland and comfortable hotel as a refuge from culture shock, poverty, noise, etc. can give you a chance to process your travel experiences and recover from temporary sensory overload. But it's a mixed blessing: it can keep you from ever fully immersing yourself or assimilating. Regardless of where you stay, and how well rested you are, you shouldn't expect to enjoy travelling at the pace set by around-the-world racers -- or most guidebooks. I ignore most published estimates of how much time to allocate to particular destinations, or multiply them by a factor of at least two or three, even if they are written by people I know and whose expertise I respect. Articles that purport to explain how many "been there, done that" notches you can cut in your travelling stick in 48 hours or a week or some other amount of time are especially misleading. Successful travel writers are, by professional necessity, experts at checking out as many sites and sights and inspecting and assessing as many hotels and restaurants as possible, as quickly as possible. A guidebook writer's trip is not a vacation, as my friend the consummate guidebook writer (and recently also novelist) Tom Brosnahan illustrates with the story of his honeymoon in the final chapter of his memoir, Turkey: Bright Sun, Strong Tea.[...]



The Amazing Race 29, Episode 5

2017-04-27T23:59:02-08:00

Dar es Salaam (Tanzania) - Alesund (Norway) - Oslo (Norway) - Milan (Italy) - Lake Como (Italy) There's more than one way to travel -- or to accomplish almost any travel task. That's one of the lessons of this season of The Amazing Race, in which each of the travellers met their partner only at the starting line of the race around the world. To the extent we can judge from the edited version of "reality" on the TV show, this season's cast of racers hasn't fared much worse at travel teamwork or argued with their partners' much more than the pairs of racers in previous seasons, who auditioned for the cast as pairs and had months to prepare for the race. That suggests that while the racers in previous seasons may have "trained" for the race, they didn't focus as much as they should have on teamwork practice rather than just individual fitness. On the other hand, several of this season's racers seem to be making goodd use of their experience in the military and/or in emergency services, which often require collaboration and division of labor, under stress, with partners one didn't choose. With experience, most travelling couples come to an informal and often unstated understanding about who is better at which travel tasks, or at least about who should lead when. When you pair up with a stranger you meet on the road -- to share transportation or other services, for mutual support, for companionship, for protection, for a holiday romance, or for whatever other reason -- it takes time to figure out who should lead which steps in the travel dance. The result can be some hesitation and stumbling, as you both try to take charge or both wait to see if the other will do so. It's also natural, if you haven't travelled with someone who does things differently, not to realize that there are other ways to do them than the ways that seem natural (to you), or to which you have become accustomed. That can lead to launching into Method A while your partner launches into Method B, without understanding why you are going in different directions. If you don't recognize that there is more than one possible approach, neither will you recognize the need to ask your partner, "How to you think we should deal with this problem? How should we start?" We saw this when the racers had to follow a map on a scavenger hunt through the streets of Alesund, Norway. Michael assumed that the way to orient himself with respect to the map was to consult his compass. I always carry a compass for this purpose, and Michael wasn't the only racer this season who brought a compass and was shown trying to use it. Liz assumed that the way to orient herself with respect to the map was to observe the relative position and direction of landmarks sighted in the real world and shown on the map. Both of these are valid orientation strategies, and each has its uses and limitations. A magnetic compass can't be relied on inside a metal-bodied vehicle or under overhead electrical lines such as those that power electric locomotives, streetcars/trams, or trolleybuses. A GPS compass won't work in the canyons between highrise building where it doesn't have a line of sight to the satellites. Orientation by landmarks isn't always feasible or reliable in a landscape of similar terrain and/or similar-looking buildings in all directions. On the streets of Alesund, both techniques were workable, but neither Liz nor Michael seemed to recognize that there was more than one way to figure out which way to go to follow their map. Their different approaches were equally valid, but they wasted time arguing about which to rely on. Michael and Liz rehashed the same argument later in this double-length episode when they were getting off a water taxi on Lake Como and trying to decide which path to follow along or inland from the lakeshore. Have there been travel challenges that you assumed could only be dealt with in one way, but for which you discovered your travelling companion had a different but equally valid approach? The water [...]



The Amazing Race 29, Episode 4

2017-04-20T23:59:15-08:00

Stone Town, Zanzibar (Tanzania) - Dar es Salaam (Tanzania) I've written before, when the The Amazing Race passed through Tanzania, about my own visit to Dar es Salaam and Zanzibar in 2008. If we judged places by events, we would have left with bad impressions of Dar, Zanzibar, and the trip between them. In Dar es Salaam, it was hard to finding a decent affordable hotel during the visit of U.S. President Bush and his entourage and army of camp-followers. My cellphone was stolen out of my shirt pocket by a pair of sidewalk snatch-thieves impersonating staggering midday drunkards on a downtown street. We wasted time at a consulate applying for visas to Eritrea, which we hoped to visit later on the same trip, and were told that our visas had been approved, only to find out weeks later that our visa applications had been denied. When our ferry (one of the same ones the cast of The Amazing Race 29 took back and forth) from Dar arrived on Zanzibar, corrupt officials checking passengers' papers tried to tell us that we had underpaid for our visas to Tanzania, and needed to pay the difference to them on the spot, in cash (they generously offered to accept either U.S. dollars or Euros), without a receipt. It was one of only two times I can remember being shaken down for a bribe in decades of travel around the world. We called their bluff, declined to pay, and were allowed to go on our way after an hour or so in a sweltering little guard shack at the ferry landing when they found someone wealthier and more vulnerable -- a Chinese trader -- to target. But this didn't get our time on Zanzibar off to a good start. A few days later, we had just settled down for a restful vacation within a vacation at a beach resort on the east coast of Zanzibar when we learned of a death in the family, and had to agonize over whether we could, or should, try to make our way back to the U.S. in time for the funeral. But none of these mishaps kept us from enjoying our time in Dar es Salaam, Stone Town, and elsewhere on Zanzibar. You should never judge a country (including, of course, the USA) by its border guards, bureaucrats, or criminals. Dar es Salaam was and still is relatively untouristed: Most foreign tourists in Dar are only passing through en route to or from wildlife preserves in the interior of mainland Tanzania, or Stone Town and the beaches of the island of Zanzibar. In 2008, Dar es Salaam gave me the impression of a being more relaxed and accessible than other big African cities I've visited, or than I would have expected from its population. Strolling through the center, it felt more like a small town than a mega-city. That may have changed: What I noticed first in the establishing shots of Dar es Salaam in the latest episodes of The Amazing Race 29 was a skyline of highrise buildings and construction cranes that didn't exist a decade ago. It was an important reminder that the pace of change is typically far greater in the "developing" parts of world than in already "developed" regions. The corollary, of course, is that it is more important to have up-to-date information in planning a trip to Africa (or anywhere else in the "developing" world) than a trip to Europe, and more likely to be misleading to rely on other travelers' memories (or our own!) of what a city like Dar was like a decade ago than what a European or U.S. city was like twice that long ago. It was also a reminder that Africa is increasingly citified, even though the overwhelming majority of foreign tourists go to Africa to see its non-human animals, not to meet its people, and stay away from big cities as much as they can. In population, Dar is one of the fastest-growing cities, perhaps the fastest-growing city, on the world's fastest-growing and fastest-urbanizing continent. Growth like this doesn't mean just more of the same, but qualitative change in the urban environment and, often, in the demographics and culture of its people. You might not agree with the political spin of this[...]



Chicago airport police attack passenger on Republic Airlines plane

2017-04-19T08:23:29-08:00

[Schedule of "United Airlines" flights from Chicago O'Hare to Louisville on April 9th] Many of my readers, and NPR listeners who heard me interviewed on WBEZ in Chicago last week about air travel and class, have been asking for my take on the airline passenger dragged off a plane by police at O'Hare Airport on April 9th. Inquiring minds want to know why four members of the crew for another flight were trying to board a flight that was already full and otherwise ready to depart, why the airline was willing to remove paying passengers to make room for the deadheading crew, whether an airline has the legal right to remove a paying passenger who has already been given a boarding pass and seated, who called the police, and what authority the airport police had in this situation. I've held off on posting this while I tried to find out more about the back story and identify who was really responsible. But since none of the airlines involved have chosen to talk to me, despite my diligent efforts, and many questions may be answered publicly only at trial (or never publicly if the likely lawsuits are settled out of court), here's my educated guess as to what happened and who's responsible. There's plenty of blame to go around: The as-yet-unnamed police, who worked for the city of Chicago and were accredited as law enforcement officers although through an agency independent of the Chicago Police Department (more on that below), deserve much more serious sanctions than they have received to date. So does the city of Chicago for its continuing failure to hold any of its multiple police forces accountable or rein in their bigotry and brutality. (Full disclosure: I write this as a former Chicago resident and victim of "minor" but routine Chicago police torture who still feels the pain of my police-inflicted injury occasionally, more than 35 years later.) United Airlines -- the airline most passengers thought was operating the flight -- shares significant blame, especially for its initial choice to defend the actions of the police who roughed up the passenger and of the gate agents (who may or may not have worked for United) and/or the flight attendants and pilots (who definitely didn't work for United) who called in the police. But some of the responsible companies have yet to be sufficiently shamed, and some may not yet have been publicly named. For starters, this flight wasn't operated by United Airlines. It had a United Airlines flight number, but it was a Republic Airlines flight operated by Republic Airlines pilots and flight attendants and under the operational control of Republic Airlines management. This wasn't the sort of bait and switch code-sharing that occurs when a flight is labeled with multiple flight numbers. This is a different but equally deceptive form, in which an airline puts its flight number -- i.e. its brand label -- on a flight actually operated by a contractor. The contractor's identity is disclosed to ticket purchasers or passengers as inconspicuously as the law allows, if at all. Typically, the flight crews and gate agents handling these flights are required to wear United uniforms, even when they are employees of a ground handling service or a contractor airline like Republic. Regular travellers on some routes come to realize what airline actually operates the flights on that route. But as the schedule at the top of this article shows, "United Express" flights with United flight numbers from Chicago O'Hare to Louisville are operated by three different contractors: Skywest, Republic Airlines, and Trans States Airlines. In this situation, it's unlikely that any but the most sophisticated passengers noticed which airline would be operating their flight, even if that information was somewhere in the fine print. If you choose to fly on United Express on this route, you are taking pot luck (especially in case of any change of schedule) on which of three airlines will actually operate your flig[...]



The Amazing Race 29, Episode 3

2017-04-13T23:59:02-08:00

São Paulo (Brazil) - Dar es Salaam (Tanzania) - Stone Town, Zanzibar (Tanzania)

(image)

[A travel writer on "vacation": working on my laptop in the shade of a palm tree at a beach resort on the east coast of Zanzibar. I'll have more on The Amazing Race 29 in Dar es Salaam and on Zanzibar next week.]




The Amazing Race 29, Episode 2

2017-04-06T23:59:17-08:00

Panama City (Panama) - São Paulo (Brazil) My feelings about São Paulo are considerably more mixed, and in some respects more favorable, than you might infer from some of my past mentions of the megalopolis. On the good side, São Paulo is one of those urban agglomerations that is so large, so important, and so distinctive (in some respects) that a visit is essential to a well-rounded picture of the world. You might realize that São Paulo is the most populous conurbation in the Southern Hemisphere, but did you know that is also essentially tied with New York and Mexico City as the most populous urban area in the Western Hemisphere? Despite that, it's utterly, astonishingly, off the international tourist map. When foriegners think of a Brazilian city, they think of Rio de Janeiro, even though greater São Paulo has more than twice as many people as Rio, and an even greater share of economic power. There are lots of foreign business visitors to São Paulo, but few foreign tourists and especially few foreign backpackers. Local people ("Paulistas"), whether rich or poor, are unlikely to relate to you as a "tourist". Because they have few occasions to deal with foreigners, ordinary Paulistas of all classes are also unlikely to speak English or understand any foreign language other than possibly Spanish, which they will typically answer in Portuguese. Brazil is its own self-contained world, and the language barrier is high. Many of the reasons for the lack of foreign tourists in São Paulo are related to "class war", which in Brazil is more than a figure of speech. Street crime is epidemic and often violent, unlike in some parts of the world where it is largely confined to theft and other property crime. Of the places I've been, only the USA and South Africa have rivaled Brazil for the risk of violent crime against ordinary foreign tourists. São Paulo sprawls, and upper-class Paulistas (i.e. those who, like their counterparts in the USA or among white South Africans, call themselves "middle class" even if they are in the top 10% of national wealth) get around mainly by private car. Except for the limited number of destinations served by the Metro system (which is priced out of reach of the poor), urban public transit is slow and uncomfortable at best, dangerous at worst. Like Los Angeles or Gauteng (metro Soweto/Johannesburg/Pretoria), the urban areas with which it is most comparable, São Paulo can be impenetrable without a local host to drive you around and introduce you to the many parallel worlds being lived by different classes of people behind different walls, whether those of the favelas or those of the "gated communities" of the rich. All that said, the Paulistas we met were wonderfully generous, hospitable, and open to us about their lives and the city they love. We couldn't have asked for more of a welcome. Travel can be at its best when looking at foreigners and foreign places enables us to better understand ourselves and the places we call "home". São Paulo is sui generis, but it also focused my attention on relationships of class and urban geography that influence the terrain of travel in many places while often being hidden from tourists' notice. In that anthropological sense, and as a mirror in which to look at the way class shapes cities in the USA, I've never been anywhere as thought-provoking as São Paulo. I highly recommend City of Walls: Crime, Segregation, and Citizenship in São Paulo, by Teresa P. R. Caldeira, which makes these comparisons between São Paulo and Los Angeles explicit.[...]



The Amazing Race 29, Episode 1

2017-03-30T23:59:21-08:00

Los Angeles, CA (USA) - Panama City (Panama) This season of The Amazing Race has a cast composed entirely of "blind date" travelling couples who met their partners for the first time at the starting line of the reality-TV race around the world. Whatever lessons the remainder of the season may have in store about romance (or breakup) on the road, success or failure at the travel tasks in this first episode of the "blind date" season didn't appear to have much to do with the racers' unfamiliarity with their teammates' strengths, weaknesses, or travel and relationship styles. Road navigation was what separated the winning and losing teams this week. The racers never got more than an hour's drive from Panama City, but team after team got lost for several hours at a time. Why was it so hard for the racers to find their way, even with maps in hand and in a place where the road signs are in English and/or Spanish? It's tempting for television viewers to blame the blind date couples' navigation problems on their lack of experience working with their partners as teams. But the TV producers love arguments between teammates, and would likely have shown them to us if they had been the cause of teams being delayed or eliminated. Some of the racers blamed a general lack of street signs. I've read that road signs are absent from many intersections in Panama, even junctions of significant rotes. But I don't find this an adequate explanation for the racers' difficulties. Many of this season's racers have experience in the military, where one has to be prepared to navigate without road signs or in places where the signs are all in an unfamiliar alphabet or writing system. The racers had paper maps. With a map, an automobile odometer, a compass (something anyone on "The Amazing Race" or travelling independently ought to be carrying), and some practice, it's possible to do a fair amount of navigation by dead reckoning. The problem, I suspect, is a lack of practice at dead reckoning. Let this be a lesson to my readers who aspire to compete on "The Amazing Race". That, in turn, may be a consequence of an "Amazing Race" rule that has made the "reality-TV" show increasingly different from real-world travel: Members of the cast aren't allowed to bring cellphones, GPS receivers, or other electronic devices with them on the race around the world. That wasn't such a big deal in the first season of "The Amazing Race" in 2001. There were a few cellphones (Nokia Communicator) and handheld PDAs that could connect wirelessly through a cellphone (I had a Psion Revo Plus) with touchscreen Web browsers. But none of these devices had integral GPS receivers, and the iPhone (which popularized the concepts Psion pioneered) wouldn't be introduced for another five years. Even for early adopters of these devices, international cellphone roaming was prohibitively expensive. Neither travellers nor locals, anywhere in the world, were expected to rely on pocketable electronic devices for navigation or other travel services. In the early seasons of "The Amazing Race", teams sometimes gained an edge by borrowing a cellphone. But they weren't lost without one. Fifteen years and twenty-eight seasons of "The Amazing Race" later, the ubiquity of entry-level Android smartphones has led to substantial decline in non-smartphone products and services for travellers and atrophy of the skills -- such as map-reading and dead reckoning -- to make use of them. Paper maps still exist, but today the people who are willing to pay for the most detailed, accurate, and up-to-date mapping -- wealthy people, delivery and emergency services, and even the military -- want maps in digital formats, and that's where all the effort is going. Printing paper maps has always been expensive, especially since the more frequent the updates, the smaller the press run and the greater the cost per copy[...]



Tips for travellers about the "Muslim laptop ban"

2017-03-24T12:27:21-08:00

The "Muslim laptop ban" goes into effect today: The U.S. government has ordered airlines to prevent passengers from bringing laptop or tablet computers or other electronic devices "larger than a cellphone" (whatever that means) on their person or in carry-on baggage on direct flights between 10 airports in countries with predominantly Muslim populations in the "Middle East" (West Asia) and North Africa and the USA. These items will still be allowed on these flights in checked luggage, where either lithium batteries or explosives pose a greater danger because in-flight fires are harder to detect or put out in the cargo hold than in the passenger compartment. According to a report by Kaveh Waddell in The Atlantic (in which I'm also quoted), "The ban was communicated to the relevant airlines and airports at 3 a.m. Eastern on Tuesday, in the form of an emergency amendment to a security directive. From that point, the airlines and airports will have 96 hours to comply." Many others including airline pilot Patrick Smith ("Ask The Pilot") and experts interviewed by the Guardian (here and here) and the Washington Post have made the point that the Muslim laptop ban uses "security" as a pretext for trade sanctions (no US-based airlines serve any of the airports subjected to the laptop ban, which include the hub airports of airlines with which US-based airlines have been fighting a trade war) and Islamophobic harassment (the affected flights are those on which the largest numbers of citizens of countries that President Trump tried to ban from the US, but which the courts have at least temporarily enjoined him from excluding from the US, are likely to arrive). Aside from making the US government look more bigoted and stupid, it remains to be seen whether the Muslim laptop ban will affect travellers' choices of airlines or force carriers like Turkish Airlines to lower their fares even further to offset the disadvantage (especially for the most profitable business travellers) of not being able to work (or play games) on laptops in flight. But what does the Muslim laptop ban actually mean for travellers? What are the rules? There are no "rules", in any normal sense of that word. Airlines have been given orders by the DHS, in the form of "Security Directives". But those orders are secret. Airlines can, and often do, make things up out of ignorance or to serve their own profits, and blame them on the government. In this case, the orders are probably real, and certainly disliked by the airlines to which they apply (although welcomed by their US-based competitors). But, "The government made us do it," is a great excuse for anything airlines want to do -- especially when it's impossible for passengers to tell if it's true. Is this legal? Nobody knows. It's almost impossible for travellers to challenge the orders given by the government to the airlines. Airlines have standing to challenge these orders in court, but none of them have done so. It's one more example of the craven complicity of airlines in government harassment and infringement of the rights of travellers -- including airline complicity in, and failure to challenge, President Trump's Muslim ban. But how can I tell what I will be allowed to carry on? You can't. Even before the Muslim laptop ban, and regardless of what the government requires, airlines reserve the right to make you check your bags, including whatever you planned to carry on. Their tariff and conditions of carriage, as of the time your buy your ticket, give you a contractual right to have a certain amount of luggage transported to your ticketed destination. But they don't guarantee that any of your luggage will be transported in the passenger cabin, or even on the same plane, just as they don't guarantee that you will be transported on the original schedule or routing. As long as you and you[...]



Testimony in Alaska on the REAL-ID Act

2017-03-21T13:06:35-08:00

I'm testifying today (by teleconference) at two hearings in the Alaska State Legislature on state bills related to the Federal REAL-ID Act.

In 2008, the Alaska State Legislature enacted a state law prohibiting any state spending to implement the REAL-ID Act.

Now, in response to Federal threats to interfere with Alaskan residents' freedom of movement if the state government doesn't upload information about all state license and ID-card holders to a national ID database, the state legislature is considering bills to authorize that spending and implementation.

It makes no sense for Alaska to call for repeal of a disliked Federal law of dubious Constitutionality, and simultaneously to authorize state spending to comply with that law, without first getting the courts to rule on whether the (unfunded) mandate for state action or the threatened sanctions against state residents are Constitutional.

Details and links to the proposed legislation and my testimony at PapersPlease.org: Alaska and the REAL-ID Act




Palantir, Peter Thiel, Big Data, and the DHS

2017-03-14T22:57:55-08:00

[On the sidewalk in front of Palantir founder and Trump supporter Peter Thiel's house at 2920 Broadway in San Francisco.] On Saturday, I joined an ad hoc group of picketers outside the Pacific Heights mansion of Palantir Technologies founder and Trump supporter Peter Thiel (photo gallery from the SF Chronicle, video clip from KGO-TV; more photos from the East Bay Express). San Francisco and Silicon Valley are among the centers of opposition to President Trump and his fascism, especially as it relates to restrictions on movement, border controls, immigration, and asylum. Bay Area technology companies and their better-paid classes of employees like to think of themselves as building a better world that reflects the distinctive values that have attracted dreamers and futurists to this region -- as it attracted me, 35 years ago -- from across the country and around the world. But some of these companies are key developers and providers of "big data" tools for the opposite sort of "Brave New World". As Anna Weiner reported in the New Yorker ("Why Protesters Gathered Outside Peter Thiel's Mansion This Weekend"): David Campos, a former member of the San Francisco board of supervisors, who emigrated from Guatemala, in 1985, stood on the brick stoop and raised a megaphone. "The reason we're here is to call upon the people who are complicit in what Trump is trying to do," he said. Clark echoed the sentiment. "If your company is complicit, it is time to fight that," she said. Trauss, when it was her turn, addressed Thiel, wherever he was. "What happened to being a libertarian?" she asked. "What happened to freedom of movement for labor?" Edward Hasbrouck, a consultant with the Identity Project, a civil-liberties group, took the stand, wearing a furry pink tiger-striped pussyhat. "The banality of evil today is the person sitting in a cubicle in San Francisco, or in Silicon Valley, building the tools of digital fascism that are being used by those in Washington," he said. "We've been hearing back that there are a fair number of people at Palantir who are working really hard at convincing themselves that they're not playing a role -- they're not the ones out on the street putting the cuffs on people. They're not really responsible, even though they're the ones who are building the technology that makes that possible." It's easy to rationalize the creation of technological tools by saying that they can used for good as well as evil. But you can't separate the work of tool-making from the ways those tools are being used. Palantir workers' claims to "neutrality" resemble the claims made in defense of IBM and Polaroid and when they were making and selling "general purpose" computers, cameras, and ID-badge making machines to the South African government in the 1970s. None of this technology and equipment was inherently evil. But in South Africa, it was being used to administer the apartheid system of passbooks and permissions for travel, work, and residence. The same goes for "big data" today. To understand what's wrong with the work being done by Palantir for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, it's necessary to look not just at what tools Palantir is building but at how and by whom they will be used; not just at the data tools but at the datasets to which they are applied, the algorithms they use, and the outcomes they are used to determine.[...]






President Trump, Populist Politics, and the Prospects for Privacy

2017-01-27T06:10:04-08:00

(image)

I was on a panel on Wednesday at the Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection conference in Brussels on the topic of "Populist Politics and the Prospects for Privacy".

Through no fault of the organizers, who were extremely accommodating of my last-minute proposal for this panel after the US elections, we had less time than we had hoped for. There's video of the session, but I was rushed and probably not always clear.

(image)

[My pussy hat -- the symbol of the Women's Marches last weekend after Trump's inauguration -- was popular at CPDP. Photo by kind permission of Wendy M. Grossman. Thanks to Suzanne and another Wendy for knitting and giving me the hat!]

By popular request, below the jump is a summary of the main points I tried to make.

(For those interested in more detail, I've posted my notes on issues I would have liked to raise, if we had more time. I've also posted a separate article at PapersPlease.org on President Trump's executive order repudiating the EU-US agreement on transfers of PNR data from the EU to the US government.)




Unresponsive "comments" from Amadeus

2017-01-18T00:17:45-08:00

Exactly three weeks after a public demonstration of the insecurity of public Web gateways to computerized reservation systems (CRSs) -- a threat to travellers that I've been writing, speaking and telling the CRS operators about for more than 15 years -- one of those companies has responded to my request for comment, but without answering any of my questions.

Here, in its entirety, is the statement I received late Tuesday from Amadeus (which hosts PNR data for airlines and travel agencies and operates the CheckMyTrip.com for viewing PNR data), followed by my comments:




The REAL-ID Act and the TSA proposal to require ID to fly

2017-01-14T16:58:45-08:00

Much of my work for the last decade as a consultant to the Identity Project (PapersPlease.org) on travel-related civil-liberties and human rights issues has focused on requirements to obtain government permission and/or show government-issued ID credentials in order to travel by common carrier.

No law in the USA requires you to show ID to fly, as I have explained to state legislators and Washington think tanks.

The TSA tells travellers they have to show government-issued ID to fly, harasses those who decline to do so, and sometimes has them arrested by local police on trumped-up (will that word now have new meaning?) charges.

But people with no ID at all fly every day. "We have a procedure for that," the TSA says whenever its demands for ID are challenged in court.

Now the TSA has proposed -- in a backhanded way calculated to evade public or Congressional debate or judicial oversight -- to impose a new official requirement for all airline passengers either to show government-issued ID or to certify that they live in a state that the DHS deems sufficiently compliant with the REAL-ID Act 2005. This ID requirement would be an additional prerequisite before the TSA will give them "permission" to pass though its checkpoints or board airline flights.

For more on what's wrong with this proposal, see the comments filed this week with the TSA by the Identity Project and this post from the Identity Project blog.