|
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
 Posted - 03/11/2008 : 23:35:48
|
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]
|
| 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. |
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2008 : 07:24:04 [Permalink]
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2008 : 09:22:29 [Permalink]
|
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. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2008 : 13:39:58 [Permalink]
|
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 |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2008 : 17:04:12 [Permalink]
|
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! |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Peer review of security
