Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 General Skepticism
 Peer review of security
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

JohnOAS
SFN Regular

Australia
800 Posts

Posted - 03/11/2008 :  23:35:48  Show Profile  Visit JohnOAS's Homepage Send JohnOAS a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Peer review is something that gets a fair bit of mention around here, but I recently read an article that used it in a context that seemed unusual to me.
From "Time to fight security superstition" by Cory Doctorow

Even though our lives increasingly defined by security measures, we can't know whether they are working without public peer review.

...

The superstitions that grip airport checkpoints and banks are themselves a threat to security, because the security that does not admit of examination and discussion is no security at all.

...

Security literacy can only be acquired through continuous practice and evaluation. The more our society punishes those who question security, the less secure we all become.

Peer review in this arena is often described more as "checks and balances". Peer review, in the security and law enforcement arena's is an interesting one. Many organisations in this area are somewhat secretive and paranoid, sometimes understandably so, sometimes it seems, just by way of pissing contests, habit or sheer bloody mindedness.

I think perhaps, this may be an area where the true "peers" may not be the best choice of reviewer. Even if they were to to a good job, public perception may not see it that way. The review should probably be performed by more independent bodies. What do people think? Who should watch the watchmen? (other than Samuel Vimes)

Having worked in related areas, I can understand, and agree with, the desire to protect some of the methodology. I firmly believe, however, that we should be aware of what our governments (and private entities, for that matter) are doing in the name of security, without necessarily revealing exactly how it is implemented.

Recent discussions in the Muslim jihadists thread made look at this article a little longer than I might have otherwise. I thought of tacking this onto the end of that thread, but decided others might be interested in it even without that context.

John's just this guy, you know.

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 03/12/2008 :  05:59:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I always wondered about this-- could some government agency set aside, say, 4 or 5 guys and have them go under deep cover and see if they could come into the US (under doctored papers) and go through the motions needed to carry out some terrorist plot X and see how long until (or even if) they're busted, and then afterwards, go through and look through the various local, state, FBI, BATF, etc. records and see if patterns emerged that should have been spotted.
Go to Top of Page

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 03/12/2008 :  07:24:04   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think they run tests like that (undercover). I remember reading something not to long ago about knives, guns, and "simulated" explosives making it through airport security with ease.

Can't seem to find the article at the moment....


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 03/12/2008 :  09:22:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I agree that "peer review" is not a precisely useful analogy, but we should certainly have a robust and ongoing testing system to probe for weaknesses. Tests do seem to take place, but the very fact that agents are able to easily smuggle simulated weapons through security seems to hint that they're not being done nearly often enough.

One thought: Having friendly foreign agencies test security might be a good idea, in addition to having domestic people doing it. If nothing else, the techniques used might be less predictable.

I'd hate to have such a job, though. Imagine getting caught and thoroughly roughed up before being able to identify one's self.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9687 Posts

Posted - 03/12/2008 :  13:39:58   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by HalfMooner
I'd hate to have such a job, though. Imagine getting caught and thoroughly roughed up before being able to identify one's self.

Indeed. I would insist on a one-million-extra-for-every-rectal-exam clause.



Edited to add:
I got one at the emergency ward when I had my bleeding ulcer. However, I was too distracted by the beauty of the 25-ish old shapely blond female doctor to object.



Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 03/12/2008 13:44:12
Go to Top of Page

bngbuck
SFN Addict

USA
2437 Posts

Posted - 03/12/2008 :  17:04:12   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send bngbuck a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I just read a novel that had this very subject as one of the primary character's professions - Stone Cold by David Baldacci.

As you can imagine, this guy almost gets killed regularly while poking holes in security systems!

Great one-nighter read!
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.06 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000