From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Fri Jul 26 2002 - 14:18:22 MDT
On Friday, July 26, 2002, at 02:43 pm, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
> Therefore, as a
> matter of simple inference, I conclude that advanced investigation
> (including procedures cumbersome to the subject) of grandmas is less
> likely
> to yield a positive result than a similar investigation of a young,
> restless
> male. Do you find anything wrong with this reasoning?
Not at all, except that you changed the topic. We aren't trying to
decide if there will be less grandmas caught by airport security. On
that, you are entirely correct. What we are trying to decide is if
grandma's bag can be allowed to receive less security screening based on
the assumption that it cannot be used to carry a bomb. On that
assumption you are dead wrong. As Hal's posted report showed, this
merely opens up an obvious route for the next bombing. Even if grandma
wouldn't carry a bomb, terrorists could try to use grandma's bag.
> Unless you define what you mean by profiling I will drop this subject.
As your topic line suggests, profiling is "group based judgment".
Profiling is when you have missing information about a person, such as
background checks or organizational ties. You then pull group-based
information from a profile to fill in the missing information. You then
have a partly fictionalized record for the person that may or may not be
accurate. You then feed this "information" to others so that they can
make security decisions based it. Making security decisions on profile
information instead of actual information is called profiling.
Profiling is a standard technique developed by the FBI to develop
"profiles" for people when actual information is not known.
Maintaining accurate records on people containing verified facts and no
guesses is NOT profiling. The "profiles" maintained by El Al are
accurate individual records. They do not use "profiling" or "group
based judgment". Developing a database on a person, using background
checks, clearance investigations, credit reports, police reports, and
other actual records is NOT profiling. The "profile" here is an
accurate record and not a projected probably "profile".
Again, I must ask. Why are some people pushing so hard for group-based
judgments? Don't we agree that screening all bags would be best? Is
there really a need to screen some bags to a lesser extent than others?
These repeating arguments for group-based judgments always seem
contrived toward some specific agenda, but don't seem to address any
real need in the real world. We can screen all bags equally without
weakening security with profiling or group based judgments.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:41 MST