Category: Security

The internet is something many people uses daily. If someone has a question, they google it or use another search engine to find the answer. Simple search engines like these are only the beginning. Google and Yahoo and sites easily accessed by the public is called the surface. Below the surface is the deep web, which makes up over 90 percent of all websites (Kaspersky, 2017). Inside the deep web, is the dark web.

The dark web is a collection of websites deliberately hidden from search engines and uses masked IP addresses. The dark web is mostly innocent and can be helpful for journalists to communicate with each other to share opinions without censorship. There is also illegal content, trading sites, and criminal activity. There are also many online sites known as black markets. The black market is where goods and services are distributed in a way that is illegal. It is not a physical market, but a collective transaction between buyers and sellers. Since the entire point of the dark web is to be anonymous, it is difficult for the police to stop illicit deals and services from happening on the site.

Businesses can be affected through stolen and compromised data, and businesses can also use the dark web to reach a bigger audience. To access the dark web, you need to have a secure and anonymous platform, the first platform called Tor. Tor stands for “The Onion Router”. Tor is a big part of the dark web, and hosts for over 30,000 hidden networks (Woollaston, 2018). Anyone can download Tor and use to access the dark web. It keeps someone anonymous by encrypting data, so no one can see who or where that person is. Although illegal things do happen on the dark web, the government created private browsers to access it.

They used it was a way to build a secure and anonymous network (Veaux, 2018). The U.S Navy implemented Tor because they wanted to protect government communications. They wanted to make it harder for outsiders to distinguish what was a government file and what was regular data data. Even though some people just use the dark web to browse, the seeking and buying of drugs online have soared throughout the years. Many say it is a more anonymous and overall better experience to buy online. This poses a challenge for police, by making it harder to figure out how people get it. Silk Road was a huge online market for drugs, having everything from just marijuana to methamphetamine and cocaine. Silk Road was huge and boomed because of trust and efficiency.

People did not have to deal with shady drug dealers, fake drugs or drugs with fillers. For example, is a Silk Road dealer sold bad drugs, they would be removed from the platform. The higher quality dealers were brought to the top, which prevents people from getting shoddy quality. They grew exponentially because of a few reasons: Forums, PR, word of mouth, and the community. Forums were a place that customers went to discuss drug use and other sites on the dark web. It brought a level of test, social proof, and familiarity. Previously, it was hard to access place and a hard industry to understand, but forums transformed it.PR, or public relations, is the practice of creating goodwill of an organization in various publics.

PR representatives want to enhance and build their reputation through advertising and marketing through the media. Less than five months after Silk Road was created, a story broke through and funneled thousands of potential customers. This added trust and proof as a reputable source covered the site.Word of mouth really helped the Silk Road. It is an elevated risk, high reward. The demand was strong in the market, and so supplied. Combined with the scarcity of other solutions, it led the site to bring people together. There was better pricing, and relationships and trust grew. The Silk Road and drug community have grown together and had a strong bond. They take care of each other because the community is underground and there is no regulation (Pollock, 2017).

Bitcoin is the currency widely used on the dark web. Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency, a form of electronic cash. From the Bitcoin website, it is described as the following: “Bitcoin is a consensus network that enables a new payment system and completely digital money. It is users with no central authority or intermediaries power the first decentralized peer-to-peer payment network. From a user perspective, Bitcoin is like cash for the Internet. Bitcoin can also be the most prominent triple entry bookkeeping system in existence.” Bitcoin transactions are secure, irreversible, and do not have customers’ sensitive or personal information. For this reason, sellers, and buyers on the dark web use Bitcoin as their form of payment.

The IAFIS stands for Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification system. It is managed by the FBI, and is used as a national automated fingerprint identification system. The Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification system has automated fingerprint search capabilities, latent searching capability, electronic image storage, and electronic exchange of fingerprints and responses. By submitting fingerprints electronically, agencies receive electronic responses to criminal fingerprint submissions within two hours and within 24 hours for civil fingerprint submissions. IAFIS is also the largest database in the world containing criminal history for over 55 million people.

Since 1924, the FBI has been the country’s main head quarter for fingerprints, receiving thousands each day. Although many problems of scanning/feature extraction and of matching began to occur. The first AFIS required a whole room and was very costly but in only its first year of operations converted more than 14 million fingerprints to digital format. In 1974 the FBI began to make improvements on the system but went back to using the manual process that would take them 30 to 45 days to process just one fingerprint request. A new process came about that sped the print identification greatly. Where the old process would take multiple days to process the new system could run through thousands of sets in 30 minutes. After the success of AFIS began to spread many other companies began to attempt to mimic the system. In July of 1999 the system was completed to its best form (best updates it has received to this day) and is considered to be officially created then.

The Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification system has services that include ten-print based fingerprint identification, fingerprint services, subject search and criminal history services, document and imaging, and remote ten-print and latent fingerprint search services. A fingerprint identification service is a ten-print fingerprint submission that has ten rolled impressions and ten flat fingerprint impressions. Fingerprints are obtained when an arrest is done in a city, county, state or federal booking area. They are then processed locally and then electronically sent to a state agency system for processing. IAFIS accepts electronic and hard copy submissions of latent fingerprints. Each record is created through the submission of fingerprint images to IAFIS.

Participating states establish and update records through the submission of first and subsequent fingerprint images of arrested subjects. Once these records are established, states provide requested criminal history records for state-maintained records. States involved with the National Fingerprint File, submit only the first arrest fingerprint images on a subject to establish a clearer record within the system. Any subsequent activity related to this NFF record will be the sole responsibility of the NFF states. If a IAFIS fingerprint inquiry identifies a person with a criminal history in one or more NFF participating states, a Criminal History Request is forwarded to the participating NFF state’s criminal history system for the appropriate response. The IAFIS also has remote print and latent fingerprint searches.

The results of remote searches are returned electronically and include a list of potential matches and their corresponding fingerprints for comparison and identification. The IAFIS has even gone to solve cases from years ago. On October 17, 1978 Omaha Nebraska, Police Department responded to a crime scene where a man had been stabbed to death. Law enforcement officers collected evidence, that included latent and palm prints. But the case had gone unsolved. In December of 2008 the Police Department’s Cold Case Unit was asked by Criminal Laboratory Services Section of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement whether the evidence had searched and linked to a suspect. The Police Crime Laboratory searched the latent prints in IAFIS. Soon after the IAFIS responded with a list of candidates, then several days later the IAFIS results had came in which led to the positive identification of the first suspect.

Network Security

Introduction

Nowadays, security is assuming a significant job in the field of IT businesses. A lot of upgrades have been made in current innovation most of the correspondences should be possible by utilizing the systems. Indeed, even we can likewise characterize as security the focal point of our lives in current days. All the significant exchanges should be possible using system security. Because of this, the associations need to give a lot of consideration to giving security to the systems. By giving security to the systems then it will be hard for programmers to hack the touchy data identified with clients, exchange, and so forth. It is significant that associations or enterprises need wide assortments of system security methodologies with the goal that they effectively shield the data from the programmers (Mariusz, 2007).

Layered security

Providing a single defense system for our devices cannot protect us from powerful cyber-attacks. These systems might have flaws that will come to the light only when it is attacked. Therefore, to increase security, layers of security defense systems are employed. In this way, the flaws of one security system are rectified by others. A simple example can be sighted to explain what layered security means. People normally install a protection suite for their desktops, and it contains layers of security features like an antivirus application, a firewall application, parental controls, an anti-spam application, and privacy controls (Huang & Zhu, 2020). The layered protection can help defend your desktop from viruses and other malware.

The layered security strategy is not about the implementation of the same security feature multiple numbers of times. The trick is to implement security features that perform different functions. Setting up two different antiviruses on the same desktop is not called layering, it is just causing redundancy and nothing more.

Advantages of Layered Security

The main advantage of layered security is that it guards against any polymorphic malware at any cost. The security strategies thoroughly scan all the files, data, links, or any other attachments that come in emails or via any other sources. Layered security can also protect your IT systems from network-level threats and data breaches.

Disadvantages of layered security

As the security systems developed, the threats increased and became powerful. Powerful enough to vent into any layered security system. The attackers now use advanced-level strategies to penetrate each layer of the security features. The main disadvantage of layered security is that the layering process of security features has become predictable over the course of time (Williams, Galyean & Welter, 2018). The complexity of layered security strategies makes them hard to implement, but whatever may the complexity levels be, the attackers are always updated enough to stay ahead of these complexities.

The integration of layered security features is also a demerit. When each new layer is added, care must be taken to avoid conflict between the features of the existing layer and the new one. This can be a tedious task as the functioning of an existing layer from therefore will depend on the new ones’ flaws and operation.

Defense in depth

This is a much more integrated and complex security strategy than layered security that is employed to protect network systems. In fact, layered security is only a part of the defense in depth. The defense-in-depth strategies address different problems and concerns some of which are the recovery of the system after a disaster or attack, forensic analysis, emergency reporting and response, accounting of the authorized activities, and monitoring of the systems. An important factor in this strategy is taking advantage of the threat delay time. A well-functioning system protected with this strategy will notify the user when a threat or attack is underway. Thus, when notified, you can implement the measures to counteract it and prevent further damages or data breaches.

Advantages of Defense-in-depth strategy

It is not necessary to secure each, and every asset related to a system, only the critical ones need maximum protection and continuous monitoring. If anyone of the systems fails to operate, then there are numerous other systems operating (Rahman et al., 2020). When multiple systems are used to eliminate the damage or threat, the company can be assured that even if one system fails, the whole system is still protected and monitored.

Disadvantages of a defense-in-depth strategy

It is very important to maintain a balance between too simple and too complex. A simple security feature-protected system can be easily attacked whereas people (employees) would not even feel to use the systems due to the complexity. Another disadvantage is the cost incurred during the installation and maintenance of the security feature. A company cannot allow a huge amount just for security features. The implementation alone would not be enough. The maintenance and education of the employees on how to use it can also cost a significant amount. Thus, the companies would need to identify the features they require and what they don’t.

Comparison of Layered Strategy and Defense in Depth Strategy

The layered security and the resistance inside and out are ordinarily used to ensure the systems or organization sites. Both security procedures are generally regular in giving security to associations. Layered security is utilized to verify sites by utilizing various layers. The barrier inside and out is utilized to give greater security as the name itself determines that it gives security in the military setting. The honesty of the system framework is utilized to characterize the blend of data from various systems. Uprightness likewise needs a security technique for demonstrating security. As the name indicates that relatively, it is increasingly secure when contrasted and layered security. The resistance top to bottom augments the extent of the arrangement that reacts well to new conditions (Mariusz, 2007).

Security features are required in this digital era. As the systems and security features are made complex, the attacks are also advancing and attackers somehow managed to be ahead of all these complexities. Thus, spending a fortune on security features cannot necessarily ensure security, but what you need is tailored security features that can secure your important information and systems.

References

1. Mariusz. S. (2007). The Principles of Network Security Design. Retrieved from http://www.clico.pl/services/Principles_Network_Security_Design.pdf
2. Huang, L., & Zhu, Q. (2020). A dynamic games approach proactive defense strategies against Advanced Persistent Threats in cyber-physical systems. Computers & Security, 89, 101660. doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2019.101660
3. Rahman, M., Rahman, M., Wang, H., Tajik, S., Khalil, W., & Farahmandi, F. et al. (2020). Defense-in-depth: A recipe for logic locking to prevail. Integration. doi: 10.1016/j.vlsi.2019.12.007
4. Williams, C., Galyean, W., & Welter, K. (2018). Integrating quantitative defense-in-depth metrics into new reactor designs. Nuclear Engineering And Design, 330, 157-165. doi: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2018.01.008

Unified communications at Boeing

In order to ensure the privacy and integrity of Boeing using UC Security Mechanism are:

1. Deploy a Properly Configured Firewall:

A general rule is to block all unknown traffic into the network and only allow traffic from trusted sources. The UC server should absolutely be behind your firewall. We should only allow internet traffic from our ITSP (Internet Telephony Service Provider) or VoIP provider or the Airport Center only and no other sources should be allowed to use the network traffic.

2. Use VPN for Remote Users:

All Boeing Communication between the pilot, co-pilot, crew staff, satellite towers, and ground control towers should be done using VPN to communicate with the onboard Boeing aircraft. This way attackers wouldn’t know the location and flight status of the aircraft or any other data communications that are being sent to the aircraft or to any of its crew members.

3. Use Strong Passwords:

Use strong passwords to unlock the Boeing flight access and equipment so that only authorized users can be granted access to Boeing flight controls and flight security. Also, share these passwords with the desired staff who need access to cabin and flight controls to serve their purpose and not to others who could harm the purpose.

4. Turn Off Unused Services:

If we are not using a service we should shut it down and this lessons the potential attack surface. For example, if we are using voice, video, and email communications but not using a chat application then it is best to turn off the chat functionally in the UC Server. This improves security and also improve performance as you will have less protocol traffic on the network and your server.

5. Monitor Boeing Call Logs:

Regularly reviewing the system logs we can mitigate the damage by catching the attack and taking action early. In particular, running regular call log reports on Flight calls made by Administrative can help create a baseline for normal activity. This can signal that the system has been compromised and looking at the call logs we can investigate further.

6. Deploy GPS Tracking devices:

The best possible way to detect a Boeing in case of Flight failures or hi-jacks is to know about the position of the flight at a given instant in time which can be achieved by deploying a secret GPS Tracking Control Device which continuously sends aircraft co-ordinates to the Control Tower to track its route.

The other firms also benefit from deploying UC capabilities over converged IP networks are:

• Boeing’s IP network and capabilities enable employees to share information and knowledge more quickly and effectively regardless of their location.
• Boeings use these systems to share expertise with one another just as they could if they were in the same place at the same time.
• The ability to support the converged IP network gives knowledge sharing and has become an important part of Boeings collaboration and knowledge management strategies.
• The company unified communications system enables employees at remote locations to have the same capabilities they have in their home offices.
• Virtual benefits from being able to adjust their interactions to the communication mode. As they are able to transition from instant messaging to a voice communication or desktop sharing session.
• UC systems enhanced the present capabilities to provide real-time information about the current availability and activities of the other Boeing employees to address time-sensitive problem issues about parts, and maintenance issues.
• Boeing has benefitted from increased productivity and efficiency at both the individual and team levels.
• Its UC capabilities and converged IP network has also helped the company to eliminate rise in Web and audio conferencing costs.
• Improved efficiency
• UC can also show which coworkers are available and which are not so for any problem the employees can select the best person available for the problem.

Reduced costs

• Boeing still uses third-party communications services provided by AT&T and if we implement total UC and the cost of communication will decrease significantly.

Increased revenue

• Better efficiency and reduced cost increases productivity and hence produce more revenue.

Better customer service

• UC provides Customer Relationship Management (CRM) which includes real-time communication with the customers which can help in better understanding customer problems and their solutions.

References:

1. Leitner, P. (2005). The lean journey at the Boeing Company. In ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement Proceedings (Vol. 59, pp. 263-271). American Society for Quality.
2. Bower, W., & Kibens, V. (2004, July). An overview of active flow control applications at the Boeing company. In 2nd AIAA Flow Control Conference (p. 2624).

Over the past few years of the expanding digital landscape, there have been many fears of people losing their personal security, especially their data. With many of our operations already automated and digital, is it possible that using apps can put us in jeopardy, especially when it comes to our finances?

Inadequate App Safety

Despite what many people think, app security is not often at the top of a business’ list of priorities, This is because many organizations tend to be pressured by the growing competition to release different software at quick intervals and regular periods so as not to get left behind, which comes at the expense of developing proper security. About 92% of web applications have security flaws or weaknesses, with 70% of websites belonging to companies on the Financial Times (FT) 500 list accessible through the dark web. These can then be easily and improperly accessed as the apps usually don’t have access control measures such as authentication processes.

In 2017 alone, there were 19,954 detected vulnerabilities in 1,865 applications coming from about 259 vendors. In 2016, the number was 17,147, which means there was a 14% increase in detections. Compared to five years ago, the increase is about 38%. So, despite the fact that technology has progressed so far, security still remains a largely unsolved problem in the world of applications. And even when companies do try to patch web applications to cover up vulnerabilities, the average number of days this takes place is 38, as stated by Tech Beacon.

Insecure Apps

While to some this may not be all that alarming, it has severe implications when you consider that several apps today are banking or digital wallet apps. Financial technology industries have long fought to push the era of commerce and banking into the digital domain in the form of e-wallets and online payment systems, and many people use those today to do their shopping, bill payments, and other transactions.

Fintech has proved itself to be an efficient system that can help provide faster and more seamless customer experience and more efficient payments between two parties. One especially commendable achievement of fintech is that it has managed to help solve the financial woes of countries and communities that have informal economies, according to Business Media MAGS, and people who are unbanked and unable to afford the rates in regular banks.

However, if you consider digital security risks, things start to look more dangerous for fintech industries, especially those that make use of mobile or web apps to perform business. With the shoddy reputation of apps, how are you sure that your data can be kept safe?

Fintech Security Problems

With the way that online banking so often works in conjunction with money-transfer technology, customers must have enough trust in the service to hand them a lot of vital information, such as usernames, passwords, and even card numbers for their accounts.

This is a recipe for disaster, as unfortunately there are several fintech providers that skim over double-checking their security mechanisms as many rely on blockchain to provide protection for them since it’s meant to provide automatic protection. However, there are many other levels of operation into which hackers could easily infiltrate. Besides, even Bitcoin accounts and Blockchain ledgers can be hacked or experience a security breach even when it was thought that the encrypted nature of the tech would keep it safe. Thus, additional protection algorithms should be put in place, as stated by Medium.com.

Another possible source of a security flaw in fintech is that systems can make senders and receivers completely anonymous, especially in peer-to-peer transactions. This means that a simple hack could bring money to criminals such as fictitious companies or drug lords.

Possible Solutions

In order to deal with these problems, fintech startup companies should identify digital security risks early on in their development in order to deal with the problems as quickly as possible, instead of shirking them for later. Multi-layered software protection should be incorporated by companies.

Aside from this raising awareness of digital security breaches, especially in our banking and wallet apps, can help us become more choosey about which businesses to select and patronize. Once other businesses determine that customers are looking for more security in their banking options, they will be forced to act toward those goals.

With operations as large as fintech projected to be in the next few years, it’s imperative and unfortunately necessary that more regulations be set up, especially with government intervention, such as the setup of additional data limits and creating more distributed ledgers. The European Union is already working to polish the Payment Services Directive (PSD2) which will help encourage fintech competition while also ensuring user security. Under this program, the banks will be forced to give third parties access to users’ accounts through secure programming interfaces.

Hopefully, fintech companies, both new and old, will turn a listening ear to the security woes of their clients and begin to properly remedy these problems.

Airport security began as a simple walk through a metal detector to halt any terrorist with weapons or bombs. As time progressed, hijackers and terrorists have become more innovative and sneaky with their ways to bring weapons on a plane that a simple metal detector will not detect. 9/11 has changed airport security drastically. Now, a simple walk through a metal detector has turned into a tedious and time-consuming process before boarding a flight. The effects of 9/11 are responsible for the creation of the Transportation Security Administration also known as TSA and many other airport security rules. With the new rules created to protect passengers, people are required to give up certain rights while traveling in an airplane for the security and safety of airplane passengers. Although one may think that these rules are pointless and time-consuming, these rules are greatly needed in airports and allow for safe flights. 9/11 enforced a whole new level of check policies and restrictions for the safety of airplane passengers. These safety restrictions compel passengers to give up certain constitutional rights without their consent.

Most people know not to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theatre because it could cause panic and danger. Just like this one example, the right of free speech can be restricted during flight. Yelling “bomb” during a flight can actually be much worse than yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theatre. Believe it or not, airlines have a certain dress code also, that airplane passengers must submit to. According to the first amendment, people are allowed to wear what they want based on their right to free expression. An airline can make a passenger leave if the airline members think the shirt is offensive to the rest of the crew and passengers. Wearing a shirt with profanity and cursing, a woman aboard an airplane coming home to Washington D.C. was asked to leave because her shirt was offensive. There are many cases just like this where passengers are forced to leave planes based on what they are wearing. This policy has grown to become a big issue of whether airlines are legally allowed to force people to leave their flights because their clothing is causing discomfort or offense toward other passengers. Airlines also do not allow passengers to board the plane without shoes. If a flight attendant tells someone to put on their shoes and the passenger does not obey, the passenger is asked to leave the flight. Although these rules and policies may sound pointless and irrelevant, these are rules enforced by airlines. I agree with limiting free speech in this instance. Because falsely yelling “bomb” in an airplane could cause serious danger, I believe that free speech should be restricted in that instance for the safety of others. Although I may not agree or think that a shirt with profanity is acceptable, I do not think that a shirt with profanity should be restricted because it does not harm the public.

In some instances, the Fourth Amendment can be ignored when boarding an airplane. The Fourth Amendment protects U.S. citizens against unwanted searches and seizures in their homes, properties, and any other personal possessions. The Fourth Amendment states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (LII Staff)

The main role of the Fourth Amendment is to protect the citizen’s privacy. In order to board a plane, passengers have always been required to give up their possessions to be searched before boarding. The terrorist attack of 9/11 has caused an increase in security. The Homeland Security Act created as a result of the 9/11 attacks designed numerous amount security measures and policies such as TSA. TSA has grown to become one of the most tedious parts of boarding an airplane. This is due to the extensive measures TSA takes to ensure passengers a safe flight. TSA can search all bags, suitcases, and any other possessions without one’s consent when airport security deems someone as a reasonable threat. To make sure all searches are reasonable, airport security weighs the threat on a few aspects. They weigh the threat on the magnitude of the threat and the search procedure. Along with searching for possessions, passengers also argue that being scanned and patted down is an invasion of their privacy and should not be done by airport security. The “pat-down” procedure is a method used by airport security that allows the security officer to physically use their hands to search one’s body. Although some may say that a pat-down search without consent is wrong and a violation of the Fourth Amendment, a pat-down search is legally justified based on the passengers’ behavior. Airport security has found many items of contraband using the pat-down search which proves this method is an effective procedure even though it may violate one’s privacy.

As for unwanted seizures, TSA can seize anything they deem as a threat. Airport security can dispose of water bottles, shampoo bottles, and snacks. When passengers are searched unexpectedly by airport security, they often turn to the Fourth Amendment and try to avoid the search. Most of these passengers are people who were smuggling illegal items. These victims tried to suppress the truth of what they were carrying by declaring a violation of their right to the Fourth Amendment. I definitely think that the fourth amendment can be temporarily violated while at an airport. Airport security should be allowed to search all suitcases and possessions to check for threats and weapons that a terrorist might be brought onto a plane. Violating this amendment has caused flights to become safer and more secure.

As crazy as it sounds, airlines limit what kinds of pets are allowed to travel with and what kinds are prohibited. American Airlines and Delta Airlines, two well-known American airlines, forbid short-nosed dogs on their flights. Because short-nosed dogs experience trouble breathing, airlines forbid animals like these. Breathing would even worsen when the dog flies to a higher elevation. There have been over one hundred deaths according to the Agricultural Department of the United States. Also, some airlines will not transport pets as “checked luggage”. This restriction is due to several instances where a cat was found frozen to death in a plane’s cargo hold. Although airlines allow service animals to board a flight with its owner, some animals have been restricted. American Airlines restricts several emotional support animals, such as beaver, to prevent people from sneaking animals on airplanes. These several restrictions have caused airlines, like Pet Airways, to emerge. Pet Airways specializes in traveling with animals on airplanes. I agree with restricting certain animals on flights. Being high above sea level. can cause breathing issues in some animals which can lead to death. Passengers can either fly with their dogs if it meets the airlines’ requirements, or they have to find a private flight that will allow pets to travel with them.

An airline can force a person to exit their flight based on whether they have good hygiene or not. The American people have a right to shower or not and are not forced by the government to take care of themselves. It does not happen often, but some airlines can force people off the flight because the person smells bad. If someone were to complain about another passenger’s body odor, they could potentially get that passenger kicked off the flight. If enough passengers complain that one’s body odor is making them uncomfortable, an airline can force that person to leave the flight. I do not think whether you have a body odor or not should determine if someone is allowed to stay on an airplane. Smelling bad may cause discomfort to other passengers, but it does not require one to be denied entry to his or her flight.

Although some of these rules created by airport security may sound pointless, they are there for one reason: to protect passengers. Airport security has evolved throughout time to create the security passengers know today. Airports and airplanes are attractive places for hijackers and bombs because of the number of people present. Without airport security, there would be a rebirth of hijackings and other methods of using aircraft as weapons. There were many attempts of hijacking prior to 9/11, but 9/11 served as a “wake-up” call to airport security. This infamous event strengthens airport security. With all the searches and screenings people have to go through in order to get on a plane, it is nearly impossible for a terrorist to board a plane nowadays. Terrorists took advantage of the weak security system, but now, they are not able because of the effective security precautions. Before one complaints about waiting in line to be screened for security, they should remember the real reason the airports use security and the effects security has on air travel.

Negligence is when a defendant abandons the basic standard care owed to a claimant, so their actions become a foreseeable threat and can be held accountable in court. A claimant can prove negligence only if the defendant holds a legal duty over them by either the principles developed by case law or a special relationship between the parties e.g. doctor/patient, security guard/citizen, etc. The claimant needs to be owed a duty of care whilst the defendant needs to have breached their legal duty by failing to exercise that care leading to their injury and damages by causation which is not too remote.

In this case, official security guards play a key role in the university of Wessex, Karl has a legal responsibility to ensure the safety and security of students and buildings and to prevent crimes like theft and physical fights by safeguarding and surveillance. The security guard’s role is to control and calm the large crowd down whilst keeping students safe and guarded. Injuries caused by security guards can lead to critical litigation. Security guards are duty-bound to perform their responsibilities in a non-negligent way. Therefore, based on the laws of a particular jurisdiction, security guards can end up facing a personal injury claim if their conduct amounts to negligence. To establish whether Karl owed Kiran a duty of care can be determined with Lord Atkin’s ‘neighbor principle’ developed in Donoghue V Stevenson where the manufacturer breached his duty owed to his neighbor by supplying dangerous products, hence a standard duty of care is owed all neighbors who are ‘affected by our acts or omissions’. (UKHL100 House of Lord) In Caparo V Dickman, no duty of care was owed as there was not sufficient proximity between Caparo and the auditors. (Cooke, Tort law 1) Caparo test allows the court to assess there is a duty of care owed to Kiran as the large crowd emerging meant that accidents were foreseeable and increasing the risk of injury and harm to Kiran and there was indeed sufficient proximity between Kiran and the security guard as he knocked her over and caused her fall, therefore, is it reasonably fair and just as he breached his owed duty of care to students since Karl is the authoritative figure in the relationship.

As a security guard, Karl has a legal responsibility to protect students instead he breaches that duty, causing injury to Kiran’s knee. Simple accidents like carelessness or thoughtlessness can open a security guard up to liability for negligence. While he did not intend to injure or otherwise hurt the student, he had a duty to calm down the crowd in a non-negligent manner. By unintentionally knocking down Kiran causing her to fall and get injured, Karl breached his duty to maintain the safety of students. A reasonable person could foresee that due to the pressure of one security guard attempting to control a massive crowd of students, there are risks of accidents and pushing students. So, whether Karl is liable would depend on the brutality of Kiran’s cut on her knee, a deep cut requiring medical attention would qualify Kiran to claim compensation based on the negligence or breach of duty. In Harris V Pizza Hut of Louisiana security guards breached their duty by eating lunch whilst robbers shot claimants, hence security guards face legal implications by failing to show care(Hodgson Tort law 1)

In law, ‘trespass to the person’ refers to deliberately intervening with an individual’s body or freedom. It is considered a civil injustice where someone can be held liable in tort for battery or assault hence defendants may be required to compensate their victims rather than face jail time. The defendant must cause direct and instant injury to the claimant where they are tortious per se without evidence of harm. Trespass to a person reimburses the claimant for direct and intentional harm whereas the duty of care compensates a claimant for which is unintentional and indirect e.g. accidental injury. Spencer approach Kiran by staring at her and sending her 10-20 unwanted, unreciprocated texts and then also with intimidation and threatening he will do something dangerous if she refuses to let him have her. Kiran can get a restraining order against Spencer due to the harassment act 1997, ‘which is not legally defined but gives an indication of the types of behavior that may be displayed in a stalking offense; following a person, contacting, or attempting to contact, a person by any means, loitering in any (public) place’ (The Crown Prosecution Service, GOV) Wilkinson V Downton where the wife faced great distress after a practical joke was used to enforce ‘tortious liability’ on those who caused anxiety and distressed to others.

In Collins V Wilcock [1984] Golf IJ describes assault as ‘an act which causes another person to apprehend the infliction of immediate, unlawful force on his person’ where a woman was undesirably touched by a policeman (Glazebrook, P. R The Cambridge Law Journal Vol.45) hence assault laws protects Kiran who is fearing battery and who are touched without consent. As opposed to a battery, the unethical nature of assault remains not in the undesirable physical abuse, but in the predictability of abuse. Spencer must have performed willingly with a complete intention for Kiran to ‘apprehends the application of unlawful force’; Whilst Kiran ‘reasonably apprehends the immediate and direct application of unlawful force; So Spencer ‘has no lawful justification or excuse’ (Horsey & Rackley, Tort Law, 1) Assault needs to have passed the test of reasonable apprehension where Kiran should anticipate infliction of battery and defendant has to be in the position ready to do inflict physical force like In Stephens V Myers, where the defendant threatened the claimant with violence also with a clenched fist. But Spencer cannot carry out an illegal threat as ‘I don’t know what I’ll do’ is too ambiguous and vague to lead to assault. But afterward, he stalked her and visited her premises, unlawfully, as another security guard breached his duty to care and violated the university’s security policy the university opened to liability since one of their students, Spencer committed battery. Johnson V Fourth Court Appeals, Sue was raped and beaten in her apartment and she sued the security guard on duty the night of the incident. The jury ‘found the guard negligent and his conduct a proximate cause of the assault’. (Supreme court of Texas) Hence the security guard not only failed his duty by giving the code, but he also failed to protect students from external harm in the building.

The criminal justice act 1988 section 39 classifies battery as the intentional and direct application of force where spencer would be ‘liable to a fine not exceeding level 5 to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months’’. Spencer committed battery as he acted intentionally by pushing Kiran which led to imminent apprehension of such contact and harmful or offensive contact. A battery is an intentional tort, unlike an act resulting from negligence which is unintentional, by accident. Kiran suffered physical, irreversible brain damage, mental and emotional causing her distress and anxiety. In A v UK 1998, the defendant beat her son with a garden cane. The defendant was ‘’charged under s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 for an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. ‘(Art 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights)So Spencer will be liable for battery against Kiran even if his intention was not to cause brain damage.

The ambulance telephone operators can also be held negligent as they breached their duty and risked life by not clarifying the address.

Overall, Taylor’s threatened to tell Karl’s boss, which Wessex university according to UK law if security guards are behaving reasonably within the bounds of their employment, employers can be held vicariously liable. Only when an employee commits an act so shocking and horrendously unwarranted to be considered beyond the limits of their duties can an employer successfully avoid vicarious liability. But Kiran can argue in many cases victims will claim that security guards have not been correctly trained, which can also open employers to liability. Therefore, Wessex university may be at fault for creating hazardous situations (large crowds) and failing to ensure the safety of students, they are responsible for failing to protect Kiran in various ways as the incidents happened on university premises due to university staff. In Thompson V Rose, Rose faced stabbing by another student Thompson hence sued UCLA for violating their duty of care towards her, but the California Supreme Court finally overruled, confirming that universities do owe a duty of care to students. (California Supreme court) But Wessex university can argue Kiran should have reported Spencer’s threats then Wessex university could take extra precautions to ensure that their students are protected from foreseeable dangers.

Abstract

This paper will look into the different situations facing the TSA, since it was created on November 19, 2001. Before 911 each airline and airport had its own security measures, but after 911 the government and the airlines agreed that it was not effective and something has to be done about it. TSA was created since its creation there have been many problems going on with the TSA.

History of the TSA

The Transportation Security Administration was formed after the tragedy of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the twin towers in New York City, The Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and a field in Pennsylvania where the passengers took over a plane heading for the Capitol. In the wake of the terrorist attacks, it was believed by many in the Federal government that a single Federal agency should be responsible for airport security, as well as all other modes of transportation, in particular, mass transit and the nation’s seaports. Alexander. It was also believed by many in the political establishment that a federalized transportation security apparatus would be considered more professional, and as such would be more capable of handling any situation that may arise. The phrase used by many members of Congress was ‘you do not professionalize until you federalize’ when in actuality all that was accomplished by federalizing the airport security force was to add 27,000 new dues-paying members of government employee unions. CTI 2011 pg13

On November 19, 2001, President George W. Bush signed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 into law, and it created a new government agency and a new set of bureaucratic hurdles. Before 9/11, airport security was the responsibility of individual private security companies, which operated independently at airports across the nation. The TSA is now the exclusive security force at more than 450 airports, with a total cost to the public of more than $1.0 trillion since 9/11. It is now the sole government entity responsible for protecting our skies and keeping us safe. Berger

We now have the spectacle of humiliating pat-downs, invasive searches of our belongings, body scanners, and shoe removal. We even have that occasional comedic scene of seeing an elderly individual have to take off their prosthetic device so it can be scanned. We have all seen the occasional commitment of sexual harassment when an adolescent girl has to be patted down by a male screener because there are no female screeners that are available. The stories about how the TSA is abusing the flying public are endless, but it is all done in an attempt to make the public believe that this federal agency is doing everything possible to make the traveling public safe. Berger

Failures of the TSA

In the years since the TSA has been in operation, it is estimated that there have been an estimated 25,000 recorded breaches of security. In the decade since its formation, the TSA has failed to catch a single terrorist attempting to board an aircraft. For many Americans, the invasive measures that the TSA takes in the name of security are out of proportion to the risks that they are trying to prevent. The possibility that another 9/11 type of incident happening again is quite low because the same series of events that led to the 9/11 tragedies do not exist. The terrorist knows that we are on the lookout for individuals with box cutters who are traveling cost to cost with a one-way ticket. Despite the low-risk levels, the traveling public is subjected to a series of draconian rules that do very little for security. The question is the same- Does all this enhanced airport security makes us safe? SDH

• In January 2010, it was reported that a TSA agent left his post unmanned, allowing the boyfriend of a passenger to simply walk through the security checkpoint unchecked. The man walked past all of the checkpoints and proceeded to the gate to kiss his girlfriend goodbye. This resulted in an airport shutdown that delayed flights and grounded passengers. SDH
• In January 2012 the TSA conducted covert testing of access control to the secure areas of the airport. The testing found that the security checkpoints were vulnerable to incursion by an uncleared individual into sensitive areas of the airport. Roth
• In October 2012 the TSA reported that it has fired 25 screeners who were caught sleeping while on the job. SDH
• On February 2013 TSA agents failed to detain an undercover federal agent who carried a fake bomb in his pants onto the airport. SDH
• On April 2014 A teenager breaches airport security stows away in a wheel well of a San Francisco jet and flies to Hawaii, undetected. SDH
• In September 2014 the TSA agents conducted covert testing of the baggage screening process where it was discovered that the equipment used for explosive detection had failed to properly detect the presence of explosives, nor could they determine if the system was operating at the correct detection level. Roth

These and many other failures have fueled the critics of the TSA. To many, airport security is more about public relations than it is about security because the strict policies and procedures followed by the TSA are meant to calm the fears of the traveling public who are terrified of the potential of another 9/11-type attack. SDH

Criticism of the TSA

For critics of the TSA, and for the traveling public, there is a consistent belief that airport security is not making us safe.

One of the primary criticisms is that security measures are inconsistent because fewer than 70 of the nation’s airports have enhanced security features like full-body scanners. Moreover, many airports allow you to choose between the body scanner or going through the metal detector. There is also inconsistency in how and when pat-downs and individual searches are conducted. At some airports, the elderly or disabled in wheelchairs are subject to extremely invasive searches, while at other airports they simply go through security with just a simple search.

The inconsistency insecurity also leads to bottlenecks at the security checkpoints. The spectacle of long lines clogged with travelers taking laptops out of their carry bags, people taking off their shoes, and elderly and young children waiting to be scanned have all the indications of a tragedy waiting to happen. All we need is an intrepid terrorist that sees the chaos caused by the long lines at the security checkpoints to simply detonate a bomb to cause mass casualties.

There currently are too many parts of an airport that is virtually untouched by security and as such can easily be breached by a terrorist. In many airports around the world, visitors are screened before they are allowed onto airport property, and in most cases, you have to show a ticket or have evidence that you are on official airport business. At American airports, the ticket counters, shopping concourses, and restaurants are open to the public with little attention paid to who is in the common areas of the airport. Poole

To many critics, intelligence is more effective than the current security measures. The best security policy would be to have a process where we detect susceptive individuals, detain individuals who may pose a threat, and we deny entry to anyone who is a certifiable security risk. Instead of having a proactive system, the TSA employs a politically correct series of procedures and policies that serve to alienate the traveling public instead of enhancing security. The lack of intelligence hunting permeates all levels of national security. Remember that the 9/11 hijackers were unknown to intelligence, even though they were doing things that should have alerted many security agencies within the federal government. Roth The 2002 shoe bomber was allowed to board a flight from Paris to Miami, even after being questioned by the French police Roth. I guess a nervous Brit with a bomb in his shoes did not spark the interest of French police. The TSA response is to have everyone take their shoes off so they can be scanned for possible explosives. The 2009 underwear bomber was known to the intelligence community, yet was not put on any No-Fly list and was allowed to fly from Nigeria to Detroit with stops in Amsterdam and with a bomb strapped to his leg and no one gave him a second look. Roth, I am surprised the TSA is not making the traveling public put their underwear in the basket so it can be checked for explosives.

While the TSA and the current security apparatus have many flaws and critics it has nonetheless done its duty to keep the traveling public safe. The issue for those who care about security is one of efficiency and effectiveness. How efficient are we in using the limited resources available for security operations versus how effective are we in stopping the potential terrorist threat? Given the failures that surround the TSA, both these issues are constantly being discussed, and most importantly how to fix the situation.

Ideas to Fix the TSA

When the TSA was created in 2001, the Congress and the Bush administration did so with two massive conflicts of interest: the TSA serves as both the provider of aviation security and as the regulator of aviation security. When it comes to the screening of passengers, baggage, and cargo the TSA is regulating itself. Poole CTI 2011 pg30

For the TSA to fix its ongoing conflict of interests, it should divest itself from its duty as an airport screener. The TSA should regulate and oversee security operations at the airports but should leave the responsibility for all aspects of airport security to each airport. Poole. The TSA should also return the job of airport screening to the private sector, where airports would be free to hire their airport security or contract with TSA-certified security firms. CTI 2011 pg8

The cost of airport security should be paid for by the primary users of the airport: the airlines and the passengers. By returning the cost of security to the airports, the federal government would save billions of dollars in airport security costs that are currently not covered by aviation taxes. It will also make airport security a much more visible cost to both the airlines and the flying public that would have to pay for it. CTI 2011 pg11

If these changes were to be made, it would shine the light of truth on the extremely expensive, government-run one-size-fits-all bureaucratic airport screening process that is currently in place. By returning to airports’ control over their security apparatus, we would empower them to be effective, efficient, and resourceful in the application of airport security. We would also be moving them to a more risk-based approach to passenger screening with the flexibility to detect and prevent any security risk that may come their way.

Conclusion

The creation of the Transportation Security Administration was a massive bureaucratic mistake that will not be easy to correct. While the quality of airport screeners before the attacks of 9/11 was low it was not the cause of the tragedy. The real failure was of the government itself, the first failure of the government was in having a security policy that did not take into account a passenger’s history or law enforcement information that should have alerted someone in airport security that these suspicious individuals warranted enhanced security scrutiny. The second failure of the government was its compartmentalization laws that prevented one law enforcement agency from talking to another agency about a potential security issue. Before 9/11 if an agency like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had information that a potential terrorist is operating in the United States, they could not alert the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the situation because federal law prohibited inter-agency information sharing.

When it comes to the issue of transportation security, the failures of the past should only serve as a teaching example of what not to do. What we do as a nation to protect our transportation infrastructure is the most important duty we have going forward.

Defining Food Security: A Multidimensional Perspective

Food security defined many times by various organizations and researchers but the most common definition of food security introduced by FAO (1996) is “Food security, at the individual, household, national, regional and global levels [is achieved] when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”. This definition identifies four main dimensions of food security: Availability, Access, Utilization, and Stability. Food availability focuses on the supply side and is defined by the level of food production, stock levels, and net trade. A sufficient supply of food at the national or international level doesn’t in itself guarantee household-level food security. Considerations regarding deficient food access have resulted in a very bigger policy specializing in income, expenditure, markets, and costs in achieving food security objectives. Food utilization is generally understood as the way the body makes the nutrients in food. Adequate energy and nutrient intake by people are the results of excellent care and feeding practices, food preparation, diversity of the diet, and intra-household distribution of food. Combined with sensible biological utilization of food consumed, this determines the nutritional standing of people. Even if the food intake is adequate today, if no adequate access to food periodically exists, this situation is still considered as food insecure status. Adverse weather conditions, political instability, or economic factors (unemployment, rising food prices) might have a consequence on the food security condition.

The Sociocultural Significance of Food

Since every person must eat, what people eat becomes the most powerful symbol of who they are (Fox, 2003). Although the primary use of food is to satisfy hunger and physiological needs (Lowenberg et al., 1979; Mennell et al., 1992), food has increasingly exerted many roles in human life (Conner and Armitage, 2002). Food is essential in all societies. Gathering, hunting, fishing, and agriculture have always been activities that provide the majority of the rural population’s livelihood. With job diversification and urbanization, these activities have also become important sources of income, alongside the food processing and marketing that has developed to feed cities (Brisas, 2019). But food functions are not limited to meeting biological needs, even though this is a fundamental one. Food is the first means of social interaction through meal sharing (Fischler, 1998). Food can function as a symbol of social unity (Tian, 2001). Food consumption in the general context is recognized as a collection of contextual and evolving social practices, where food no longer merely serves as sustenance but also a way to relate to other people in social, cultural, and political terms (Oosterveer 2006 as cited in Mak et al., 2012). Food is also a cultural symbol (Edles, 2004); it is one of the cultural traits that humans learn first from childhood and one that consumers change with the greatest reluctance at older ages (Gabaccia, 1998; Cervellon & Dube, 2005). Although the hierarchy between food functions depends on the society in question, all of them, including food-insecure ones, are concerned about the origins of their food and its sensory and symbolic quality. This means that food does not deal only with nutrition and health but also with well-being and the way human beings live together and interact with their environment (Brisas, 2019).

Global Population Growth and Food Demand

Based on the United Nations Population database, the world population is expected to increase from 7.7 billion in 2019 to 8.5 billion by 2030 (Bendjebbar et al., 2019b), also the world’s population is projected to hit 9 billion by 2050 (Godfray et al. 2010; Onwonga, 2019; Bendjebbar et al., 2019b; Blanford & Demenois, 2019), and an increase of over 50 percent in agricultural food supply will be required to meet the growing food demand (Mueller et al. 2012; FAO, 2013; Paul et al., 2009; FAO, 2009; Onwonga, 2019), without worsening poverty and deforestation (Blanford & Demenois, 2019). Global food demand in 2050 is projected to increase by at least 60 percent (Alexandratos & Bruinsma 2012) above 2006 levels (FAO, 2016), and also FAO forecasts estimate that to meet increasing food demand, cereal production in 2050 will need to be about 70 percent higher than 2006 levels (FAO, 2006; Vermeulen et al., 2012). Despite the many efforts directed toward reducing hunger, demand for food and other agricultural products is anticipated to both grow and shift in the coming decades due to population and economic growth and an increase in people’s purchasing power (Pretty et al. 2006; FAO, 2016; Onwonga, 2019). Reducing the contribution to the greenhouse effect while ensuring food security for a population that is also growing rapidly is a fundamental planetary challenge for agriculture, which will have to adapt to new contexts (Blanford & Demenois, 2019). Unfortunately, food crises are not only part of the history of humanity; they are an actual issue in many countries and regions. Attempts to eradicate hunger square measure as recent as human civilization (Fraser and Rimas 2010; Vernon 2007). Food security is one of the main goals of development policies, and access to enough healthy food is always known as one of the significant aspects of sustainable development (Nejadrezaei & Ben-Othmen, 2019). In recent decades, the global distribution of hunger has shifted significantly as a result of varied rates of achievement in hunger reduction across regions. However, there are still more than one billion food-insecure people in the world with an additional two billion people prone to hidden hunger or malnutrition caused by the deficiency of micronutrients and protein (FAO, 2016; Onwonga, 2019). Even though sufficient food is being produced worldwide to attain food security, there are a significant number of undernourished families (Islam, 1995 as cited in Nejadrezaei and Ben-Othmen, 2019).

Challenges to Achieving Global Food Security

Population growth means an increase in food demand and greater pressure on natural resources such as land and water (Bendjebbar et al., 2019a; Bendjebbar et al., 2019b). Challenges such as growing competition for natural resources, natural disasters, poverty, illiteracy, and diseases would likewise pose threats to food security, thus intensifying the hunger crisis (Wu et al. 2014; Onwonga, 2019). Agricultural development is critically important to improving food security by enhancing food supply and reducing malnutrition (HLPE, 2016; Anyatewon et al., 2016; Nejadrezaei and Ben-Othmen, 2019). Strengthening agriculture based on poverty reduction and food security is an essential step toward achieving international development goals. A sufficient quantity of healthy food is a critical element of efforts to achieve a sustainable reduction in poverty and hunger. It is also an emphasis that development will not be sustainable unless it concentrates on the many causes of hunger and poverty (German Society for International Cooperation, 2011; Nejadrezaei and Ben-Othmen, 2019). Agricultural development roles include: increasing the quantity and diversity of food; driving economic transformation; and providing the primary source of income for many of the world’s poorest people. Many studies in different countries over the years revealed that both agricultural development and economy-wide growth are necessary to improve food security and food nutrition and the first strengthen the second (HLPE, 2016).

Addressing Food Insecurity: Global Efforts and Challenges

A sufficient quantity of healthy food is a critical element of efforts to achieve a sustainable reduction in poverty and hunger. According to Sen (1981), poverty and food security are closely related. The challenges of food insecurity and the manner in which they can be addressed are global concerns. Governments throughout the world have strived for means to address global food security either through the development of Millennium Development Goals or United Nations protocols. A permanent end to hunger and malnutrition cannot be achieved in isolation; achieving Zero Hunger calls for realizing the totality of the 2030 Agenda in ways that benefit everyone, everywhere (United Nations 2016 as cited in Nejadrezaei & Ben-Othmen, 2019).

The Future of Food Systems and Sustainability

The Global Report on Food Crises 2018 (Food Security Information Network, 2018) shows that about 124 million people across 51 countries and territories faced crisis levels of acute food insecurity in 2017, thus requiring urgent humanitarian action. This is while current food systems are generating adverse outcomes such as land, water, and ecosystem degradation, biodiversity loss, excessive greenhouse gas emissions, and persistent malnutrition and hunger and fail to eradicate poverty, particularly of rural populations in the Global South (FAO, IFAD, & WFP, 2015; Foresight, 2011; Godfray et al., 2010; WWW-UK, 2013). The notion of food systems is central in this context, in the sense that it is at the crossroads of global environmental, social, and economic challenges such as resource scarcity, ecosystem degradation, and climate change (Freibauer et al., 2011; Garnett, 2014; Gladek et al., 2016; IPES-Food, 2015; Lang, 2009; Searchinger et al., 2013; WWW-UK, 2013; Forrest, 2017; Nejadrezaei & Ben-Othmen, 2019).

While adaptation is the priority in agriculture in order to achieve global food security, adaptation actions in agriculture are also well placed to provide co-benefits in terms of environmental sustainability, nutrition and livelihoods, and specific opportunities to achieve co-benefits (Dinesh et al., 2017). Future food systems will have to provide food and nutrition security while facing unprecedented sustainability challenges; this underlines the need for a transition to more sustainable food systems (Vermeulen et al., 2012; World Bank, 2015). The challenge of assuring food security is significant and needs attention now. It cannot be met without a renewed commitment by scientists, farmers, national policymakers, and international donors (Ayres and Mccalla, 1996 as cited in Nejadrezaei & Ben-Othmen, 2019). Ensuring populations’ food security without degrading land and water resources, eroding biodiversity, and contributing to climate change are among the most significant challenges of development. (Nejadrezaei & Ben-Othmen, 2019).

So, agriculture is at the intersection of three major challenges in the context of climate change; food security, adapting to the impacts of climate change, and reducing emissions (Dinesh et al., 2017).

Airport Security Has Improved Over the Years

In today’s society, Many people complain about anything and even disagree on the safety of their needs. Such as asking them a simple question about where they are heading too. These people are often seen at the airport facility, this is where people complain. The strictness of airport security does improve air travel safety and many people think that airport security is very ineffective, but over the years the security measures have improved as it is now. As I said earlier, many travelers complain, the airport company and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) have heard the complaints, and they try their best to satisfy the traveler. Now the TSA has allowed anybody to carry small liquids in their luggage, their work doesn’t violate our privacy, and it’s time-saving with newly improved scanners.

After the events of September 11, 2001, the government took action for national security and Congress passed the Transportation Security Act which led to the creation of the Transportation Security Administration. Since this creation, airport security has been very strict, and the TSA has decided to use full-body scanners. This brought discomfort to the travelers because this machine scanner exposes their body image. Consideration, I know from this moment since the machines have bothered many people, no one would want to deal with this security measure and feel embarrassed because of the images. Also, these machines do cause health risks because of scanner radiation. It’s natural to feel fear because no mother would want their children to risk their health or even pregnant women because this horrific machine and very ineffective because it failed to detect a weapon. Now, everything has changed and has drastically improved because the TSA does try its best to satisfy the traveler’s complaints and have a safer environment. “Airport Security,” an article on Opposing Viewpoints, explains that “TSA also tested a new system called PreCheck” (2). This has proved that the TSA does listen to the reports and they removed the machine and replaced it with the PreCheck which is very safe to go through, only shows a generic avatar image just like a stick man person, and uses radio waves to detect devices that are explosives and weapons. This is the reason why airport security is improving they are protecting everyone and trying their best to satisfy travelers.

There was a moment when the TSA took security measures at an extreme level and even exaggerate because they didn’t allow to bring any kind of liquids on the plane because there are liquids that look like a regular drinks, but the truth is that those liquids could be explosive chemicals. Many people often believe that this isn’t going to solve the problem of terrorist sneaking in, but in reality, the TSA is working its best and the outcome of its job is efficient because they are trying to avoid another terrorist attack since “al Qaeda would love to attack again”(Thiessen 1). The officers even sacrifice their time to provide security for the traveler, even when there are holidays, especially Thanksgiving. Who would want to be at home and enjoy Thanksgiving dinner? I would. In addition, the TSA has allowed us to carry small drinks in our carry-on luggage just in a small container that does go more than 3.4 ounces. Anyone can keep their favorite drink flavor without throwing it away. That’s why I believe that the airport security measures are very efficient and also trying to give us limited privileges instead of taking away just like carrying drinks.

When someone hears the word “body scanners,” they often think that their privacy is being violated. We have seen how airport security didn’t have an option whether go through a body scan or a pat down. Many of the people believed that this was a violation of their privacy which was true and it was time-consuming. Now, everything has changed. Since the new machines have been installed in all the airports and it doesn’t violate our privacy. When a person is walking through a machine scanner and if the machine doesn’t give a red light, there’s no need to get a pat down (DeSanctis, 2). In addition, anyone can choose to get scanned by a machine or have a manual pat down. Even if a woman traveler wants to be manually searched by women, they can request that with no problem.

In summary, the airport security measures have improved and their work is very efficient. When an airplane takes off from the airport, the travelers and their families feel confident because they know that the work of the TSA is effective. So organizing the screening process to pass the security measures are quicker than the prior years. Their measures don’t violate our privacy, instead, they want each traveler to feel comfortable. I believe that their work has made our air travel much safer than before.

Outline

• Many people think that airport security is very ineffective, but over the years has improved as it is now.
• Airport security is very efficient and has allowed carrying liquids instead of throwing away
• Doesn’t violate privacy and it is time-saving

Work Cited

1. “Airport Security.” Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2015. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/PC3010999021/OVIC?u=dalt32105&sid=OVIC&xid=5b7a509c. Accessed 5 Nov. 2018.
2. DeSanctis, Marcia. “Passenger Screening Policies Are Efficient and Worthwhile.” US Airport Security, edited by Margaret Haerens and Lynn M. Z ott, Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010858214/OVIC?u=dalt32105&sid=OVIC&xid=7bcecbc0. Accessed 5 Nov. 2018. Originally published as “Airports, Security, Titanium and Lingerie,” Huffington Post, 20 Nov. 2010.
3. Thiessen, Marc A. “Airport Security Is Critically Important and Vastly Underrated.” US Airport Security, edited by Margaret Haerens and Lynn M. Zott, Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010858207/OVIC?u=dalt32105&sid=OVIC&xid=c1d7f1ff. Accessed 5 Nov. 2018. Originally published as “Let’s Give Thanks for the TSA,” National Review, 23 Nov. 2010.