We have a friend with a common enough name that it's landed him on the No-Fly List. As a result, it creates major hassle when checking in for flights, since he cannot check in online and checking in with an agent at the airport usually requires the presence of a manager. Thankfully, the new rule to include middle names on tickets has helped slightly, but the No-Fly List continues to be a headache.

So how do people end up on the No-Fly List? What exactly is the process? It's something we've wondered for a while, and happily the AP mustered their sources for a glimpse into the steps that makes Joe Smith (a sample average name) into Joe Smith, suspected terrorist and No-Fly List entry.

The awesome infographic, after the jump. ]]> JetSetCD 2010-03-16T11:45:58-05:00 http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/3/15/10350/3789

According to the results of TripAdvisor second annual huge travel survey, around 79% of travelers are totally fine with Full-Body Scanning.

But with all of the news reports and even the Pope speaking out against them, it feels like there is greater resistance than that. Apparently the thought of having getting through security quickly and without a fuss trumps people's privacy issues, and also the idea of having a possible bomb-wielding terrorist onboard is enough to scare people into putting up with the full-body scanning machines. But this isn't the only surprising response that Tripadvisor found.

More statistics, after the jump]]> JetSetCD 2010-03-15T11:58:06-05:00 http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/3/15/85815/3492

Remember back in January when that romantic fool crossed through security at Newark Liberty International Airport to give his honey a little smooch? Well, last week he pleaded guilty to defiant trespass. His lawyer was quick to point out that it’s really no big deal, and that it is even considered a crime in the state of New Jersey. No hard time for this guy, but we’re sure there are a few people that were stuck at the airport that day that would have liked to see him picking up trash on the NJ Turnpike.

The sneaky kisser—Haisong Jiang—is really sorry about the whole incident and is prepared to pay up. He’ll be slapped with a $500 fine, some court costs, and he will be assigned to 100 hours of community service. Right now the community service specifics haven’t been figured out, but he’s hoping it will be at a hospital or soup kitchen. ]]> kjb 2010-03-15T10:42:19-05:00 http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/3/12/152947/134

Tech writer and blogger John Battelle started something of an Internet snarkfest earlier this week, when his iChat to his two little girls, done during the middle of a United flight, was shut down by a security-minded steward. While using in-flight wifi for air-to-ground communication was in bounds, cameras were apparently verboten. Upon pressing for an explanation, Battelle was shown a United policy manual banning "two way devices," which the steward understood as video chat. Punchline courtesy of Gawker: "other in-flight wifi uses were OK, since terrorists don't tweet or email."

On one hand this has the feel of one of those urban legend TSA regulations, like the occasionally enforced TSA ban on security checkpoint photography that doesn't actually exist. On the other hand it might be like TSA's post-Christmas attack freakout regulations, which were real but stupid. "We're turning off the in-flight GPS so you won't know when we're close to landing, even though we're sitting you down exactly 60 minutes beforehand and you'll hear the landing gear lock about 20 minutes out." So which was it?]]> Omri 2010-03-12T16:30:04-05:00 http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/3/3/13539/95185

It's an idea that's been batted around by the TSA and airport security for at least five years now: Why don't airports get shoe scanners to eliminate passengers having to take off their shoes at security? And in those five years, despite brief testing periods at airports like LAX and TLV, not one airport has stepped up to buy a slew of the machines and make shoe scanning mandatory. Why? Because it won't make a difference in the long run. And here's why:

· It's something full-body scanners should take care of

The words on everyone's lips these days, post-Christmas crotch bomber, are "Full-Body Scanning," and thus we're not surprised that the argument for separate shoe scanners is back. But if a full-body scanner is doing its job of scanning your full body, why would we need shoe scanners? Well, if you look at one of the machines, you'll see that the scanning doesn't go down to the floor. Perhaps they should just add a special attachment that does, so that airports aren't spending millions more dollars buying new machines and making space for those. ]]> JetSetCD 2010-03-03T14:11:37-05:00 http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/3/1/232031/9854

It's been too long since last time we really delved into the full-body scanning controversy, aside from that brief bit about the Pope hating full-body scanners. And now that more and more of the pricey, privacy-invading machines are being ordered up and delivered to airports, we thought it was about time to take another look at where you'll be encountering the massive gadgets.

The newest airports to the full-body scanning game are Chicago O'Hare and Boston Logan, with Boston welcoming their first of three scanners only yesterday. O'Hare is expecting to get their this week as well, and it will go into Terminal 1 with United, which means a significant amount of O'Hare flights will be screened throught them since this is United's home base. But although the scanners have arrived, they won't be operational and pushed on the passengers for another few weeks as employee training finishes and the things get plugged in.

Vive le full-body scan! More international airports join in, after the jump]]> JetSetCD 2010-03-02T11:44:59-05:00 http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/3/1/15620/16083

The Internet works in strange and wonderful ways. In 2006, Bill Schneier posted a travel hack on his security blog, musing that photographers who check expensive camera lenses can put empty guns or starter pistols in their luggage to secure their equipment. Since TSA classifies them as firearms they trigger a bevy of special screenings and tracking. The trick was picked up last January by productivity uber-blog Lifehacker, and from there spread across the blogosphere and even into legacy media. Over the weekend it landed in our Twitter inbox with a "verify this" request, and here we are.

Does this work? Absolutely. When you check luggage at the counter you're asked to declare if you have a firearm. If you indicate that you do, a TSA agent is called over to flag your baggage, hand-screen it, and confirm that the firearm is packed correctly. That means, minimally: unloaded, kept in a separate hard case, and secured by an unbreakable lock. The upshot is two-fold. Flagged luggage is extra-tracked to the point where Schneier says the risk of loss is "virtually zero." In the meantime, since your bags have already been screened, you're entitled to lock them and TSA has to contact you before breaking the locks.

So can you do this? Sure. Should you do it? Highly questionable...]]> Omri 2010-03-01T15:33:39-05:00 Search Jaunted string http://www.jaunted.com/search/