News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner. Parent comment

Re:Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner by joshfraser on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @07:48PM (#8205287)
The supreme court ruled 8-1 that strip searches in schools are unconstitutional. How are technology-enabled strip searches at the airport any different?

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner by wdewind on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @08:02PM (#8205326)
> The supreme court ruled 8-1 that strip searches in schools are unconstitutional.

They have not. You'll have to point to a specific case because they have ruled for strip searches to be constitutional under essentially what amounts to probable cause.

Edit: you added the link. If the girl in that story had been using or distributing an illegal drug it would've been a (legally) reasonable search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_v._T._L._O.

> How are technology-enabled strip searches at the airport any different?

Putting aside the question of whether or not MMW scans are actually legally equivalent to strip searches, the government forces you to show up to school. It does not force you to show up to the airport.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner by joshfraser on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @08:22PM (#8205377)
No, "the court ruled 8 to 1 that such an intrusive search without the threat of a clear danger to other students violated the Constitution's protections against unreasonable search or seizure".

How would her having illegal drugs be a clear danger to other students?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner by wdewind on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @08:29PM (#8205405)
No what? Nothing I said disagrees with that.

Can we go back to the part where you explain how scanners at airports are a "blatant violation of our Constitutional rights"?

[ Parent | on HN ]