Reasoning behind airport security rules

[which1]

Just wondering, why is it 100ml max for carry on liquids?

Is it because it is deemed that nothing in that small a quantity could do damage, as opposed to say standard 250ml shower gel bottles?

Also why the specific rules about the size of the see through bag you put it in? Understand why it has to be see-through but why does it matter about whether you use a medium or large freezer bag if the amount you can put in it is the same anyway? And if it's considered safe as long as an item is capped at 100ml, why do they limit how many bottles your are allowed to take in total?

And why does a tablet have to come out of your bag and go in the tray separately but your phone doesn't?

Just generally curious surrounding the rules and reasoning behind the liquids rules.

And before anyone says anything, yes I do do the whole bag thing properly by the rules, and do not fuss about it at the airport etc etc etc but just wondering why those particular rules were chosen.

I have yet to have someone give any sane and reasonable explanation why my friend, who has a Muslim surname, gets stopped all the time at airport security, while I never do.

It really takes so little time to go through now

Not at Stansted, in my experience anyway. It is better in school term time for obvious reasons, but we have been restricted to school holidays for some years now (coming to an end, as my youngest is now 17 so those shackles will be off fairly soon).

The last two UK airports I have used were Stansted (I live near it) and Luton. Security took ages at both, and Luton was also undergoing major redevelopment/upgrade work at the time, which didn't help.

I prefer Stansted just for the convenience of being fairly nearby, but security can take a while on many days. Luck of the draw.

TSA Pre Check is given out at random to a few people on each flight who are low risk - to reduce the security queues, teens are one of the low risk categories. If you want it every time you travel, you have to enroll and pass the security checks

TSA Pre Check is given out at random to a few people on each flight who are low risk - to reduce the security queues, teens are one of the low risk categories. If you want it every time you travel, you have to enroll and pass the security checks

Yes - I think this statement actually sums up the randomness of airport checks. When we fly, usually two of our teens are classed as low risk but one is not. Bizarre.

A friend of mine who is Flight Crew (with full airside pass) has had a Tuna/Cucumber sandwich confiscated. (Paste)

Cockpit crew get hassled over items like nail clippers. (NB: They have a large axe available in the cockpit!)

I’ve had Extra Strong Mints taken off me, four in the end of a roll, as “they’re paste and I shouldn’t have hidden them” (side pocket of bag)

Minimum wage morons with ‘power’ I’m afraid.

I find their utter stupidity, and the whole situation, very worrying, and I’m not reassured at all by this inconsistent poor quality security.

Speaking of 737Maxes and security ...

www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/08/boeing_787_software_bug_hack/

Black Hat A Black Hat presentation on how to potentially hijack a 787 – by exploiting bugs found in internal code left lying around on a public-facing server – was last night slammed as "irresponsible and misleading" by Boeing.

At the hacking conference in Las Vegas on Wednesday, Ruben Santamarta, principal security consultant at pen-testing biz IOActive, told attendees he had found bugs in software used aboard the jetliners.

It is important to note that there are essentially three electronic networks on a 787: the first is home to non-critical stuff like the in-flight entertainment system; the second is used by slightly more important applications reserved for crew and maintenance teams; and the third is used by the vital avionics gear that controls the airplane's flight and reads its sensors.

The software Santamarta probed – a crew information service – lives on the second network. He suggested it may be possible to exploit holes in, say, the in-flight entertainment system on the first network to access the adjoining second network where one could abuse the flaws he found in the crew information software to then reach into the adjoining third network. Once there, one could tap into the avionics equipment to hijack the 787, in theory.

(contd)

No fluids needed ....

...and today one of my teens was assigned TSA Pre but the other wasn't. Same booking. I guess 16 year olds are somehow lower risk than 14 year olds.

I have one of these because it's reusable but some airports still insist I take the toiletries out.

Houston now has upgraded scanners and we did not have to take anything out of our hand luggage. Bliss!

I have a stash of the actual plastic bags they supply in Security, and only use those.

@verticality
Let's not beat around the bush. How many terrorist attacks have involved Islamic terrorist groups in last 20 years? How many terrorist attacks have been foiled by authorities involving Islamic terrorist groups? How many have targeted aviation industry? Might have something to do with it but specifically to your friend its hard to give a reason unless actually there, could be many reasons.

The checks are there to have some hope and deterrence when combating the very real threat of someone taking down a commercial aircraft with 100s of pax on board. If they weren't there and something did happen, how many would argue that enough wasn't done? There is inconsistencies from airport to airport, but there is also a general view that airport security is still strong in the West which it is in general. I would prefer that than some airports across the world where the security is almost non existent and incidents have occurred because of it.