Bruce Schneier’s new view on Security Theater
9th April 2008
One thing not taken into account is the negative effects of Security Theater.
For example: The hassles inflicted on passengers by the TSA don’t materially improve security so long as they are barred from doing the most effective thing they could do to prevent hijacking, which is profiling — indeed, they impose extra and unnecessary hassles just to demonstrate that they aren’t profiling and would never dream of doing so — so I refuse to fly. Some people don’t have that option, but a lot of people do, and many (like me) choose to exercise it.
Does this charade make life better for people? I suggest not.
But the reality of how we make security decisions begs an important question– should security professionals focus on real solutions to security problems, or just on making people feel better about security? Unfortunately, there’s no easy answer to this question. It depends on who’s paying the professional’s salary, what they expect, and how rational they area. At one extreme, any professional should certainly want to improve security in real terms, but delivering the perception of improved security may be a practical job requirement.
And there’s the rub. Far too often when politics gets involved — as it is with security and flying — being seen to be Doing Something is more important than actually doing something constructive, and the image is (to those who hold the reins of power) more important than the reality.