Ink Toner Banned On Passenger Flights, As Security Theater Steps Up A Notch

from the not-even-in-a-clear-baggie? dept

Mon, Nov 8th 2010 5:19pm — Mike Masnick

It appears that security theater has stepped up a notch. Following the recent bombing attempts that used ink toner cartridges to hide bombs, the US is now banning ink toner on passenger flights. They're also blocking any cargo aircraft flights from Somalia and Yemen. While you can understand why they're doing this, as with nearly all responses to air travel threats, it looks like the US is taking a rather blunt sledgehammer to any threat they hear about.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: ink toner, security, security theater, tsa

58 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 5:31pm

Coming soon to Security Theater:

Someone attempts to conceal bombs in a laptop and an iPod; consumer electronics no longer allowed on flights.

Someone gets caught with explosives crammed in their butt; full body cavity searches instated for all passengers.

Someone uses their brain to think about hijacking a plane; passengers no longer allowed on flights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 5:51pm

Re:
Coming soon to a country near you:

Someone gets caught with explosives crammed in their butt; anuses no longer permitted on flights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:00pm

Coming soon to a flight near you.

Someone uses fabric explosives. Clothes are not allowed anymore on planes.

The naked people rejoice.

I don't know where it is going to stop but I'm pretty sure people will start doing business online and using teleconference instead of traveling, this will hurt air travel companies and tourism.

America is no longer the place of dreams is the place of nightmares.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:11pm

Re:
Someone ignites oxygen to cause a fire, oxygen no longer allowed in planes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:22pm

At least we're still allowed to wear underwear.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:26pm

even though the "toner bomber" was a hoax? it amazes me how gullible everyone is. It was another setup the very DAY pat down groping started, to make the public think it is necessary. Underwear bomber was the same hoax, he was put on the plane by CIA without any screening, documented fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Brian (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:26pm

Re:
Aha! Now we know where the next attack is coming from.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gary, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:26pm

These are all half measures, We need to ban passengers from flights. That's the only way to deal with this menace once and for all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Spectere (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:27pm

Someone attempts to conceal bombs in a laptop and an iPod; consumer electronics no longer allowed on flights.

They already inspect laptops from time to time to ensure that they actually function as laptops. Fortunately, I didn't have to do that on my first (and, so far, only) time flying, as my laptop didn't have a working battery at the time. I wonder what they make you go through if you're unable to power the device on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:27pm

Re:
Coming soon to a security theater [airport] near you *

There, fixed that for you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Spectere (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:28pm

Re:
This should have been a reply to the first anonymous comment. I did a derp. :(
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Canucklehead, 8 Nov 2010 @ 6:29pm

Lets hope nobody thinks about explosive clothing, or we'd all have to fly naked as a result.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 7:18pm

Man's best friend
What about having dogs inspect passengers and luggage before they even get to the ticket counter? In the US we have them in the back just going through the checked luggage. While traveling in Europe I can't think of a time I didn't see several working dogs patrolling the terminals. A would be attacker might just tip his hand when he sees a dog get real curious in him. If they are suspicious they can route the person through tighter security.
This ban everything they used one time is getting old. It certainly is boosting my confidence level knowing these guys are getting paid to come up with these idiotic plans. My three year old has better thinking skills.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris ODonnell (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 7:25pm

My wife flew today. She got the full body scan, and then got pulled for a pat down and explosive test. The reason given was that it was because she is diabetic and wearing a pump.

Is she going to secretly replace her insulin with something explosive?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Samuel Walter, 8 Nov 2010 @ 7:32pm

Kudos to the TSA for yet another round of ridiculous "security" enhancements! Do they actually think that banning an item as innocuous as a toner cartridge will thwart future attack attempts and make the planes, the people on it, and this country any safer? This is a stupid move anyway you look at it. It adds unnecessary search criteria and responsibility on TSA screeners, who, by any standard, are less than our sharpest knives. It also adds to the growing confusion over what is and is not allowed on a flight.

What if some college student is moving and wants to check a box that contains his printer? Does he have to make sure that he throws away his ink before take-off? What about business travellers who sometimes carry compact ink-jet printers that work with their laptops?

You can see where this is going.In a few months when the some terrorist walks right through screening while the TSA is doing one if its famous random searches of some elderly white woman, and he's carrying a pen or magic marker packed with Semtex, they'll forget about the toner cartridges and ban magic markers and pens. Homeland Security, and particularly the TSA have created a security and screening framework that is nothing more than smoke and mirrors intended to lull the masses into feeling safe.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 7:58pm

Sorry to be a dick, but "ink toner" is just "toner." Ink toner doesn't make any sense. Ink is a liquid and toner is a powder. No such thing as ink toner.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Samuel Walter (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 8:07pm

Re: pointless
Why would you bother posting such a trivial detail regarding semantics? I think it's safe to say that, the majority of TechDirt readers are at least as tech-savy as to understand the difference between ink for an ink-jet printer, and toner for a laser. I mean, I know Tron is coming to theatres soon and all, but this isn't 1983 and nit-picking over the nuances of printers and their mediums does not make you l33t. It makes you an ass.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cynyr (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 9:13pm

Re:
nderwear bomber was the same hoax, he was put on the plane by CIA without any screening, documented fact.

[Citation Needed]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cynyr (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 9:15pm

Re:
How much space do I need to make a LCD screen show what looks like a bios loading screen and paint a MS login screen?

Answer, not much. Stick it in one of those 19" screen desktop replacements, and how much space is left for things that go boom?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 9:18pm

I'm dreading the day that terrorists figure out how to use bioterrorism and render these pointless secuirty scans....er...pointless.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 9:22pm

Truthfully this is going to far ...
"While you can understand why they're doing this, as with nearly all responses to air travel threats, it looks like the US is taking a rather blunt sledgehammer to any threat they hear about."

In the name of airline security I think I should give a couple dozen more ways to take down airplanes ...

Oh wait if I do that it would require MRIs of all passengers, a 24 hour waiting period, and people to fly naked. The whole naked thing might be fun though.

If you give up freedom for security you lose both.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
pixelpusher220 (profile), 8 Nov 2010 @ 9:33pm

Re: Re:
well that should solve the problem with TSA personnel on board anyway
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2010 @ 11:11pm

Re:
But that still leaves a massive security hole! The pilots! What will happen when those satanic raporists want to destroy our American way of life by flying their deadly sky-carriages into a Dunkin' Donuts? Donuts are synonymous with American freedom and liberty!

And of course once we've taken care of the pilots and have unmanned semi-autonomous commercial flying vehicles traversing our atmosphere for no particular reason, you might think that the ever-vigilant TSA could rest on its laurels then right? Surely the American freedom-loving citizens will be safe once they're off the planes and submitting to their hourly patriotic voluntary mandatory cavity-probings in the comfort of their own Barcaloungers right? No! It is only then that we will come face to face with the true threat, the very face of evil!

The Bees...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChimpBush McHitlerBurton, 9 Nov 2010 @ 12:48am

Re: Re:
"...anuses no longer permitted on flights."

Does that include TSA employees?

CBMHB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shing Shong, 9 Nov 2010 @ 12:55am

Re: Re: pointless
Sammy:

Why would you bother responding to that post? I think it's safe to say that the majority of TechDirt readers are smart enough to know it was pedantic. I mean, I know The Bridges of Madison County came out on DVD recently, but this isn't... oh never mind, just suffice to say you are a whiny little pussy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 12:58am

Re:
Someone uses their brain to think about hijacking a plane; passengers no longer allowed on flights.
No, no no! You silly person you TOTALLY missed the chance for a "Man with Two Brains" reference there..... :-)

Alternatively, "Excuse me sir.... would you mind placing your brain in this bomb-proof jar before boarding the flight?" ... "Duh... wha?"*drool*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 1:00am

Re: Re:
OK I'll bite at the feed-line....
If assholes aren't allowed on flights any more, surely international politics will crumble totally?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChimpBush McHitlerBurton, 9 Nov 2010 @ 1:01am

They put bombs in suitcases, don't they?
No more luggage on flights. Period. JUST SAY NO. ZERO TOLLERENCE. READ MY LIPS... MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. THE TERRORISTS WIN. ALL YOUR AIRPORTS ARE BELONG TO US!

(gawd I want to keep going, but...)

CBMHB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
observer (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 1:12am

Re:
Only if you can prove it's not made from nitrocellulose....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 1:17am

Re: Man's best friend
Thinking like a terrorist for a moment:

For the sake of argument say that security scanning is now very effective, with xray and backscatter machines and sniffers and dogs and pat downs. Say that it's now practically impossible to smuggle an explosive device onto a plane without getting caught.

Posit also that security checks take a certain amount of time, and the checkpoint have limited staff. It seems likely therefore that at a busy airport there will be a long queue waiting at the security checkpoint.

Therefore, doesn't it seem likely that the queue at the airport is now a better target than the plane?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 1:53am

Re: Re: Man's best friend
Therefore, doesn't it seem likely that the queue at the airport is now a better target than the plane?
.... Or a train... or a train station (oh, wait, that one's been done hasn't it July 7th 2005 London).. or a bus (yep that too)......or a famous hotel.. or a large shopping centre... or a well known building (Ok they flew a plane into one. Pure grandstanding - a bomb would have been just as effective).... or a.....

Yes folks the answer really is to spend your time locked in your house strapped to your bed with your government issue anally fitted mind probe on. 'Coz that's the only way it's going to happen... oh and then you assume anyone outside is a terrorist and shoot him on sight.... and that includes the police doing the shooting. You get through a lot of police that way but hey, that's the price you pay for freedom right? and at least it helps the population problem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chunky Vomit, 9 Nov 2010 @ 2:46am

They need to come out with "Airplane! 2011, the TSA chronicles."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 3:42am

Re:
I'm just happy nobody has thought to put a bomb into their luggage. Then luggage will be disallowed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 4:49am

Re: Re: Re: pointless
Shing Shong:

Why did you bother posting a reply to Samuels reply to the AC about the difference between toner and ink? Suffice to say that most Tech Dirt readers are used to pedantic correctophiles. How often is the first comment to a Tech Dirt article someone correcting Mikes spelling or such? I mean, I know that the earth's magnetosphere is weakening over the south western Atlantic but no need to nit pick the nit picker.
He might have OCD anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jake, 9 Nov 2010 @ 4:52am

Re: Re:
Overkill. You can fit enough C4 to punch a hole in an airliner in the space where the CD drive goes, and I've got an ancient IBM Thinkpad 750-series in the back of my closet that could comfortably accommodate a couple of sticks of dynamite in the battery compartment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 5:00am

Re:
As a dirty old man it would be quite pleasing to observe some and most discusting to have to view others.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 5:28am

Re: Re: Re: Man's best friend
> Pure grandstanding - a bomb would have been just as effective

They already tried that. The exact same pair of buildings they later flew two planes into shared a common garage. They put a large bomb on it. Blew a huge hole several floors deep in the garage.

The buildings survived just fine with minimal damage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gary (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 5:54am

Every time this happens, they say we cant let the terrorist win. Seems to me they are are winning when I can even ship a toner cartridge
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 9 Nov 2010 @ 6:09am

Wait! My Toner!
Who is travelling on a commercial flight with a toner cartridge?

That is always one of the things I pack:
1) Toothbrush
2) Underwear
3) Toner
4) Sun glasses

The only reason I can think of to carry a toner cartridge with me is if I was carrying a laser printer with me. Another one of my travel staples. I always have trouble fitting my Xerox Phaser 6128 in the overhead compartment.

The TSA does love to make headlines though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dan, 9 Nov 2010 @ 6:31am

Re: Re: Man's best friend
People are not allowed in any public places.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 6:31am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Man's best friend
The buildings survived just fine with minimal damage.
Was aware of that. I didn't say what sort of bomb though. The purpose of a terror attack is to terrorise - i.e. induce FUD in the target "audience" and a desired response (such as a knee-jerk removal of the freedoms the terrorist doesn't like very much). Plenty of ways to acheive that in a building without having it collapse spectaularly and completely on TV - that's what I meant by grandstanding.

I'm not an american but I'd suspect that the original WTC bombing had a good portion of the same effect at the time, and that if a similar event happened now the political grandstanding that would occur afterwards would meet the purpose just as well. We are, after all, talking about toner cartridges and ink cartridges in this article and that seems to be working just fine on the FUD front.

Of course, if you believe some of the conspiracy theories about the WTC, it was suggested that it may have been a bomb anyway.....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean T Henry (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 7:50am

Re: Re:
They have and thats why they scan all luggage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean T Henry (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 7:53am

Re:
Laptops they maker you remove them and scan they separately if you do not remove the laptop before they will remove it and wipe down the bad and laptop and place the cloth in an analyzer to check for explosive residue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 8:38am

What's missing in the fun discussion of naked passengers and toner cartridges is that people will die as a result of this and other stupid policies.

How?

Because more and more people are going to refuse to put up with these blatant 4th Amendment violations and choose to drive rather than fly. Given that driving is more dangerous than flying, some of those people will be killed in accidents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 8:59am

TSA final "Not Allowed" item:
"All items made of atoms (matter) are banned." It's pretty hard to make a bomb without atoms, and that will be the final item on the ban list... until some fool places a anti-atom (anti-matter) bomb on the aircraft. I wonder how many ounces the TSA will allow for that one?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Killer_Tofu (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 9:06am

Re: Re: Re:
And charge you a whole lotta extra money for the privilege.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Killer_Tofu (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 9:16am

Re: Truthfully this is going to far ...
The whole naked thing might be fun though.

Trust me, it wouldn't be. As a young adult male I can say that it seems there are very few attractive females on planes by percentage compared to everyone else you would have to look at as well. At least this seems to hold true for the places my company has flown me over the last five years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 9:53am

Re:
I think this is why they don't give peanuts on flights anymore, because turrists were using them as biobological weaponry!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 9 Nov 2010 @ 9:54am

Re: Wait! My Toner!
"""Who is travelling on a commercial flight with a toner cartridge?"""

DUH! Turrists are!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 10:44am

Killing people is not a goal of a terrorist. If that was the goal, they could just have their terrorist buddies that live in the US go to Walmart, pick up some guns and go shoot up a school, mall or post office. Obviously here in the US, that happens already. Why are terrorists not focusing on that right now? Doing so would not keep Americans from traveling to other countries. That is one of their goals, getting us out of their country. Doing so wouldn't stop us from financing countries they don't like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shing Shong, 9 Nov 2010 @ 12:00pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: pointless
Just to be clear: I was not Nit-Picking the Nit-Picker...

I was Nit-Picking the Nit-Picker Nit Picker.

...that's entirely different.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 1:33pm

So you think security theater isn't effective? Even with 9/11, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, OK City and others, the chances of actually being killed are very small. 9/11 happened and people were afraid to fly. That hurt our economy which is why GWB came out and said "go out and buy things" (and Obama made fun of him for saying that but now he is saying the same thing.)

So little chance of being killed by terrorists but still people were in fear. Throw in the security theater to make people feel like they are actually safe (and they are) then people are not afraid to fly, travel, see the sights and get back to living.

Course, now the problem is people are afriad for their jobs, so they are not spending.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 2:08pm

What would security theater do if a woman stuffed an over-sized bra with explosives?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2010 @ 5:57pm

AC, you miss the point of "security theater". Security theater is not about protection, they have real things that attempt to keep bombs off planes (and some things that don't work too well.) Security theater is about making people comfortable flying. Currently, the chances of being on an airplane that is attacked or blown up is very slim. You are safe. Security theater helps to get rid of the fear of terrorists.

Funny thing is, the bigger the pain in the butt something is, the better the effect of security theater.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2010 @ 1:23am

Re:
Security theater is about making people comfortable flying.
That's actually worse. It's dumb enough to do this kind of thing if you think it actually protects people, but to willingly abuse civil liberties for the sake of "theater" strikes me as heading for horrific. (OK I know ink cartridges are not a civil liberty, but I'm talking generally).

It's also a constant source of worry to me that some sheeple might swallow this kind of farce. I mean, these people get to vote too, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2010 @ 5:40am

Re:
None of those guys had working bombs. The shoe bomber's shoes wouldn't have detonated because the fuse was a piece of shit that would have burnt off. Same with the underwear bomber. They tried using SIM cards to activate bombs ,and that doesn't even work reliably on planes.

Not a single terrorist was stopped by TSA, hell the previous examples prove it. Those who want to commit terrorism will always be one step ahead. The only way to stop them is at their nascent birth in the world of terrorism, and you can be sure that the TSA aren't there to stop them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2010 @ 6:31am

AC, of course TSA didn't stop them, that isn't the point of "security theater".

The point is to give the general public a warm and fuzzy about flying (even if security is a pain in the butt, in fact, being a pain in the butt is the point.)

Security theater is more about a show to make consumers feel safe and also to a point, to deter terrorists.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
syed, 31 Oct 2014 @ 7:31am

quite interesting to know how ink toner cartridges r used to hide bombs....people with worst minds will always find a way to create terror...just saying!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]