Support NeoGAF

[FyreWulff]

Sucks for business travel. I'm pretty sure we have corporate policies in place to never leave your work laptop unattended (or check it in baggage) due to corporate confidentiality and/or theft reasons. And that's not to mention being completely unproductive on 10+ hour flights.

I guess I don't understand what it accomplishes anyway. If you can get a electronics bomb through security, does it matter much if it goes off in the luggage hold instead of the cabin?

my guess is part of this is to make it easier for them to go through the checked luggage and download/clone laptops, etc.

A lot of businesses already spend the money on just sending people to countries with burner laptops.. funny how that was originally for China/Russia, but now companies are doing it for US trips.

 

[BlazinSkatinAxel]

They are going to prevent businessmen from going to Dubai. Nobody is going to check their laptops because they will get stolen.

 

[Dude Abides]

Weird. Is there anything you can do with a laptop that you can't do with a phone if you really want to?

Don't think I can write a brief on my phone.

 

[FrankCanada97]

Interestingly, one of the purported causes of the Egyptair 804 crash was due to the pilots Ipad or iphone, although it seems a little odd that they've done it on size, rather than a blanket ban on all devices.

That plane was cruising at 37,000 ft. Unless the device rendered the pilots unconscious and somehow manipulated the flight controls, it's highly unlikely it caused the crash.

 

[danowat]

That plane was cruising at 37,000 ft. Unless the device rendered the pilots unconscious and somehow manipulated the flight controls, it's highly unlikely it caused the crash.

The summation was that it caused an uncontrollable fire.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

umm ok.

Wouldn't the bad guys just fly in from another country not in the list?

 

[DeviantBoi]

They want the laptops in the checked luggage so that they can go through them without the owners knowing.

 

[Herr Schwarz]

lol, what a bitch move. "We can't stop you from coming in to the USA...but....but give us your mobile phones instead haha!"

 

[RedNalgene]

Wait a sec here. So foreign airlines are part of this ban but US ones aren't, even if they originate from the same airport? But everyone goes through the same airport security, not the airline's security. So how does that make a difference?

Also, I've been through airports on 6 continents, and no offense to Brazil at all, but I didn't even go through a functioning metal detector in Rio. I just walked through a metal detector gate that was actually off at the time, put my bag on a scanner that wasn't manned by anyone, picked up my bags on the other side, and walked onto the plane. So what is stopping a terrorist from flying to Brazil and then on to the US?

I....I just don't understand.

 

[Joel Was Right]

This is sounding increasingly like an underhanded way of achieving the original ban the White House wanted. If journalists can't find evidence that this came from the White House, careers will be ended.

 

[pancakesandsex]

They want the laptops in the checked luggage so that they can go through them without the owners knowing.

That was my first thought too.

 

[nynt9]

Wait a sec here. So foreign airlines are part of this ban but US ones aren't, even if they originate from the same airport? But everyone goes through the same airport security, not the airline's security. So how does that make a difference?

Also, I've been through airports on 6 continents, and no offense to Brazil at all, but I didn't even go through a functioning metal detector in Rio. I just walked through a metal detector gate that was actually off at the time, put my bag on a scanner that wasn't manned by anyone, picked up my bags on the other side, and walked onto the plane. So what is stopping a terrorist from flying to Brazil and then on to the US?

I....I just don't understand.

You're assuming this is sensible. It's not.

 

[numble]

Wait a sec here. So foreign airlines are part of this ban but US ones aren't, even if they originate from the same airport? But everyone goes through the same airport security, not the airline's security. So how does that make a difference?

Also, I've been through airports on 6 continents, and no offense to Brazil at all, but I didn't even go through a functioning metal detector in Rio. I just walked through a metal detector gate that was actually off at the time, put my bag on a scanner that wasn't manned by anyone, picked up my bags on the other side, and walked onto the plane. So what is stopping a terrorist from flying to Brazil and then on to the US?

I....I just don't understand.

It applies to any direct flights to the US from those airports, no US airlines have direct flights from those countries:

The restrictions apply to flights that nine foreign airlines operate directly from 10 airports in the affected countries, officials said. Devices including laptops, tablets and cameras will need to be checked in, though cellphones will be allowed on board.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-ba...rom-some-countries-on-terror-fears-1490090453

The rules affect airlines flying to the U.S. from Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. No U.S. airlines are affected because they don't directly serve the airports subject to the restrictions.

This is sounding increasingly like an underhanded way of achieving the original ban the White House wanted. If journalists can't find evidence that this came from the White House, careers will be ended.

It isn't achieving the ban because it applies to entirely different countries: Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates

The EO ban is on: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

 

[KernelPanic]

my guess is part of this is to make it easier for them to go through the checked luggage and download/clone laptops, etc.

A lot of businesses already spend the money on just sending people to countries with burner laptops.. funny how that was originally for China/Russia, but now companies are doing it for US trips.

Any good business encrypts the laptop.

More likely it will get stolen so this will discourage people from traveling mot wanting their expensive electronics gone.

 

[YoungFa]

I thought youre not supposed to put your laptops or large batteries in check in luggage because they might explode/catch fire unnoticed.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

They want the laptops in the checked luggage so that they can go through them without the owners knowing.

Yep.

No biggie though, all they'll find on my laptop is fried chicken recipes and big titty porn.

 

[Quonny]

Trump must really hate breakable weapons, damn.

 

[Ravensmash]

Maybe I'm being stupid but...

Why is this not applying to US carriers?

If it was based on a security concern/intelligence then it should be a blanket ban, right?

 

[Pixieking]

Even with what Numble says - clarifying the issue somewhat - it still makes no sense from a security perspective. Travel to Israel, then cross the border into Jordan, returning to the US from Jordan via Turkey. Because it's only certain airlines, and because of the indirect nature of the return, and the hit-and-miss nature of passing through extra-security at Ataturk, it will be entirely possible for someone to take their electronic devices with them in the cabin the entire trip back.

So what purpose does it serve?

Yep.

No biggie though, all they'll find on my laptop is fried chicken recipes and big titty porn.

The two fetishes that go together hand-in-hand.

 

[numble]

Maybe I'm being stupid but...

Why is this not applying to US carriers?

If it was based on a security concern/intelligence then it should be a blanket ban, right?

It is a blanket ban on any US-bound flights originating from 10 airports.

 

[numble]

Even with what Numble says - clarifying the issue somewhat - it still makes no sense from a security perspective. Travel to Israel, then cross the border into Jordan, returning to the US from Jordan via Turkey. Because it's only certain airlines, and because of the indirect nature of the return, and the hit-and-miss nature of passing through extra-security at Ataturk, it will be entirely possible for someone to take their electronic devices with them in the cabin the entire trip back.

So what purpose does it serve?



The two fetishes that go together hand-in-hand.

Under your scenario, the last flight is from Turkey to the US, so there would be an electronics ban on that last flight.

 

[Pixieking]

Under your scenario, the last flight is from Turkey to the US, so there would be an electronics ban on that last flight.

Yes, but... Oh, wait, I see.

This has to be enforced at the point of origin, due to the necessity to check all electronics into the hold. This isn't something that can be done half-way through a trip, since luggage is just moved from one plane to another.

So, this is going to create a shit-ton of work for the airline staff, but... How? Security and checked luggage are two different points in the process, with security coming second. This essentially requires all desk-staff to search hand-luggage, or verify that fliers acknowledge that any electronics left in hand-luggage after the checked-luggage process can be removed (and destroyed?) by security staff.

I mean, it's obviously possible, because it's already in enforcement, but it's all a bit bizarre.

And it still means that any electronic devices that make their way through security in the first airport may get onto the second flight, due to a lack of security barriers in the stop-over airport.

 

[numble]

Yes, but... Oh, wait, I see.

This has to be enforced at the point of origin, due to the necessity to check all electronics into the hold. This isn't something that can be done half-way through a trip, since luggage is just moved from one plane to another.

So, this is going to create a shit-ton of work for the airline staff, but... How? Security and checked luggage are two different points in the process, with security coming second. This essentially requires all desk-staff to search hand-luggage, or verify that fliers acknowledge that any electronics left in hand-luggage after the checked-luggage process can be removed (and destroyed?) by security staff.

I mean, it's obviously possible, because it's already in enforcement, but it's all a bit bizarre.

And it still means that any electronic devices that make their way through security in the first airport may get onto the second flight, due to a lack of security barriers in the stop-over airport.

They can and do check things in at the gate, and there is always a process for that. Travelers with baby strollers and people with excess carry-on items are required to check-in their items at the gate.

 

[Pixieking]

They can and do check things in at the gate, and there is always a process for that. Travelers with baby strollers and people with excess carry-on items are required to check-in their items at the gate.

Ah, true... Though I'll say that I've flown, like, 8 times over the past 18 months, and have only been required to open my bag at the gate once. Every other time, *shrugs*.

 

[MikeHattsu]

They can and do check things in at the gate, and there is always a process for that. Travelers with baby strollers and people with excess carry-on items are required to check-in their items at the gate.

Guess they'll need to stock special bags for electronic items at the gate to store them in on the flight so they don't get damaged and so each item can be identified then....

 

[Grym]

They can and do check things in at the gate, and there is always a process for that. Travelers with baby strollers and people with excess carry-on items are required to check-in their items at the gate.

True. But those are large/visible items. They see a stroller and check it. They see a too large carry-on item and check it. They wouldn't see a laptop or iPad placed in an allowable sized carry-on. Somewhere there needs to be a full re-check unless it is somehow enforced at the originating flight, no?

 

[numble]

True. But those are large/visible items. They see a stroller and check it. They see a too large carry-on item and check it. They wouldn't see a laptop placed in an allowable sized carry-on. Somewhere there needs to be a full re-check unless it is somehow enforced at the originating flight, no?

Ah, true... Though I'll say that I've flown, like, 8 times over the past 18 months, and have only been required to open my bag at the gate once. Every other time, *shrugs*.

I've actually been on several international flights where they had TSA (or TSA-equivalent) go through everyone's bags at the gate. So yes, I think it can be enforced if they want to enforce it.

 

[AppleSeason]

Given that I don't touch my smartphone on flights for fear of needing the battery (even though I started carrying a Powerbank), this would classify as torture. Last trip the whole entertainment system went kaput for a whole 12 hours flight. No movies to watch, and we couldn't even turn on the reading lamps, so not even reading a paper book was possible. I would have gone nuts without my 3DS.


And putting a laptop in the checked luggage is asking for problems. At my previous job one of the laptops that were lent to people doing business trips had to be sent straight for repairs after an impact crushed the charger on nto the screen.

 

[TankRizzo]

checkmate, trump.

 

[Grym]

I've actually been on several international flights where they had TSA (or TSA-equivalent) go through everyone's bags at the gate. So yes, I think it can be enforced if they want to enforce it.

I've never experienced that on my international flights. But you are absolutely right that it is enforceable if they want. I'm just trying to mentally think through the logistics of doing so.

 

[FyreWulff]

True. But those are large/visible items. They see a stroller and check it. They see a too large carry-on item and check it. They wouldn't see a laptop or iPad placed in an allowable sized carry-on. Somewhere there needs to be a full re-check unless it is somehow enforced at the originating flight, no?

you're required to pull those out for a separate bin and they definitely show up on the xray if you don't

 

[Grym]

you're required to pull those out for a separate bin and they definitely show up on the xray if you don't

They were talking mid trip checks. (Starting in a non-ban airport, flying to a ban airport, and then on to the US.) Checking electronics would need to happen in the originating non-ban airport since there is no xray after that. It is either that or beginning to do checks mid-trip at the gate for all those ban country flights.

 

[sazzy]

It's probably payback for those 3 Yemenis who sued NASA for trespassing on Mars.

this is amazing

 

[cruets]

Guess the terrorists will just take a non-Muslim airline and blow those up with their iPads then

 

[FrankCanada97]

The summation was that it caused an uncontrollable fire.

It's an unverified report from an unknown source. This may be a possibility, but until the final accident report is released, it is just speculation.

 

[Izuna]

So petty

omfg is this even based on anything? Racist as fuck

 

[Fularu]

This ban puzzles me

Airflights already prohibit lithium batteries in checked bagages, how are they going to deal with this? Straight up ban electronics bigger than a cellphone?

They wouldn't even let me check in my Artemis G933 headset, it had to be with me in my cabin bag

 

[immortal-joe]

The ban doesn't apply to airports, but airlines.

So basically this benefits the non-Arab airlines.

Methinks the airline coalition might have called someone in the Trump administration for a favor.

 

[ezrarh]

This is just Trump's muslim ban getting more and more weak sauced tbh

ban all muslims!!!111 (oops apparantly we can't do that) ->ban people from 13 predominantly muslim countries!!!111 (shut down by the court) ->ban people from TWELVE predeominantly muslim countries!!!!11!! (shut down by the court) -> AT LEAST WE'LL TAKE THEIR IPADS!!!!!111 (?)

If this is winning then I'll hang on for 4 years.

 

[immortal-joe]

Guys seriously add this to the title:

"No American carriers are impacted by the ban, which involves devices larger than a mobile phone"

This is a business move, prompting travels from these countries to choose the Western carrier.

 

[FrankCanada97]

Guys seriously add this to the title:

"No American carriers are impacted by the ban, which involves devices larger than a mobile phone"

This is a business move, prompting travels from these countries to choose the Western carrier.

Except none of the big three American air carriers offer flights to the banned countries.

 

[numble]

The ban doesn't apply to airports, but airlines.

So basically this benefits the non-Arab airlines.

Methinks the airline coalition might have called someone in the Trump administration for a favor.

Guys seriously add this to the title:

"No American carriers are impacted by the ban, which involves devices larger than a mobile phone"

This is a business move, prompting travels from these countries to choose the Western carrier.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-ba...rom-some-countries-on-terror-fears-1490090453

U.S. officials banned passengers from carrying most electronics larger than a cellphone into the cabin on direct flights arriving from eight countries in the Middle East and North Africa.

The restrictions apply to flights that nine foreign airlines operate directly from 10 airports in the affected countries, officials said. Devices including laptops, tablets and cameras will need to be checked in, though cellphones will be allowed on board.

The rules affect airlines flying to the U.S. from Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. No U.S. airlines are affected because they don’t directly serve the airports subject to the restrictions.
...
Officials said the measures were designed to target specific airports, not specific airlines.

Don't spread fake news.

 

[gutterboy44]

This has to be about searching electronic devices easier. If your computer is in your luggage, they can take their sweet time gaining access. If it is on your carry on, you are going to get pushback from the person you are searching. I don't know the specifics, but I've always assumed your checked luggage falls under the, "we can do whatever the fuck we want with it" agreement. I have personally had my belongings fucked up by customs. All my clothes wadded into balls, electronics left out of their protective cases and just generally jumbling all my shit. Knowing what we know from IC leaks, there are backdoors and encryption is not the end all be all. If Bannon and Co. got briefed on the tools that still exist, they probably connected the dots and said, Ok, we can gain access to most consumer electronics, we want to skim all intel we can from every muslim, how about we gain access to all their laptops and other electronic devices without a big show of it, get them to put it in their checked bag and ICE goons can use toolkits to pull data from the devices. I would normally stop here to qualify how ridiculous this type of speculation is, but with Trump admin, the sky is the limit. I expect a journalist will install some tamper tracing software on their laptop and travel from one of those countries soon and prove their device was accessed while in their luggage within a week of this thing going live.

 

[Grym]

I just checked some travel sites for flights from Abu Dhabi to NYC. It looks like you can take Delta or United or American Airlines flights. Or does this only apply to nonstop flights? So just Eithad Airways flys direct from Abu Dhabi to JFK. Or are those legs into/out of the ban country run by local airline even though they are legs of a, for instance, Delta flight?

 

[numble]

This has to be about searching electronic devices easier. If your computer is in your luggage, they can take their sweet time gaining access. If it is on your carry on, you are going to get pushback from the person you are searching. I don't know the specifics, but I've always assumed your checked luggage falls under the, "we can do whatever the fuck we want with it" agreement. I have personally had my belongings fucked up by customs. All my clothes wadded into balls, electronics left out of their protective cases and just generally jumbling all my shit. Knowing what we know from IC leaks, there are backdoors and encryption is not the end all be all. If Bannon and Co. got briefed on the tools that still exist, they probably connected the dots and said, Ok, we can gain access to most consumer electronics, we want to skim all intel we can from every muslim, how about we gain access to all their laptops and other electronic devices without a big show of it, get them to put it in their checked back and ICE goons can use toolkits to pull data from the devices. I would normally stop here to qualify how ridiculous this type of speculation is, but with Trump admin, the sky is the limit. I expect a journalist will install some tamper tracing software on their laptop and travel from one of those countries soon and prove their device was accessed while in their luggage within a week of this thing going live.

US Customs already has the right to detain your electronics on entry to the US, even for US citizens.

 

[MikeHattsu]

I just checked some travel sites for flights from Abu Dhabi to NYC. It looks like you can take Delta or United or American Airlines flights. Or does this only apply to nonstop flights? So just Eithad Airways flys direct from Abu Dhabi to JFK. Or are those legs into the ban country run by local airline even though they are legs of a, for instance, Delta flight?

Only nonstop it seems.

 

[FrankCanada97]

I just checked some travel sites for flights from Abu Dhabi to NYC. It looks like you can take Delta or United or American Airlines flights. Or does this only apply to nonstop flights? So just Eithad Airways flys direct from Abu Dhabi to JFK. Or are those legs into the ban country run by local airline even though they are legs of a, for instance, Delta flight?

The American carriers usually have a code share agreement with member airlines of their airline alliance.

 

[rackham]

As someone who's been to the Middle East twice, I was looking for another reason to not go.

 

[gutterboy44]

US Customs already has the right to detain your electronics on entry to the US, even for US citizens.

Right, but by moving them from carry on to checked, you can change the optics of it. There is a big difference of someone being told, give us your laptop, handing it over and having it searched then agents doing it behind closed doors for every single person. Nothing else makes sense. The restriction criteria is so arbitrary and doesn't make a lick of sense in terms of security. Your carry on is inspected already.

The even simpler solution is its another fuck you to muslims and is intentionally arbitrary.

 

[immortal-joe]

Except none of the big three American air carriers offer flights to the banned countries.

Sure, but other western nations do. British airways and Lufthansa comes to mind.