PDA

View Full Version : Passenger data deal for US and EU


Ned
10-08-2006, 12:21 PM
I don't know how anyone else feels about this deal, but to me it feels like hogwash! I don't see any "real" difference between what the US wanted in the first place, and what they got. The US government is still getting the 34 pieces of data it had sought on every passenger, and getting it within 15 minutes of takeoff.

That data includes the credit card information for the card used to purchase the ticket. They're also going to get every passenger's dietary preference, if any, among the data. I understand why they want the credit card data, but the passenger's dietary preference? Knowing what kind of food passengers are going to eat on the plane is going to stop terrorism? Give me a break!

On the more important issue, how is push technology (the sender decides what to send and sends it) going to actually make the passenger information more private and safer than pull technology (the receiver goes into the database and retrieves the data)? I ask that knowing the "push" method will prevent the US government from looking beyond the 34 pieces of data in the airline's computer. I ask that, because when it comes down to it, not only is the US government (Homeland Security) going to get all the passenger data they've requested, they're still going to be able to disseminate it to all the other agencies to whom they wish to send it. Homeland security will then push it to those agencies, not allow those agencies to pull it.

The crux of this problem is that once the "other" agencies have it, the information has then been so widely disseminated that control of that information, preventing privacy intrusion, becomes close to impossible. Furthermore, the agreement doesn't cover those agencies to prevent any other entities from pulling data from the information. So, when it comes down to it, the new agreement between the US and the EU does nothing to actually protect the data and passenger privacy in the long run, the most crucial issue.

Finland's Justice Minister Leena Luhtanen said, This new agreement will provide a possibility of giving passenger data to the US authorities while guaranteeing sufficient data protection." It's amazing how far from the truth Justice Minister Luhtanen's statement is.

Originally posted by BBC News
Passenger data deal for US and EU

The US and the European Union have struck a new deal for sharing airline passenger data, after lengthy talks.

The interim agreement will replace a deal struck down by the European Court of Justice in May, which allowed the US its own access to passenger data.

Under the deal, the EU will "push" the data - 34 pieces of information per passenger - to the US, replacing the current "pull" system.

The US has sought information about air travellers since the 9/11 attacks.

EU officials described the deal, which came after nine hours of negotiations by video conference, as a "very important result" for the EU.

The previous deal lapsed on 1 October when both sides failed to agree on terms for a renewal. The new accord will expire at the end of July 2007.

Negotiations over a permanent deal will begin during an EU diplomatic visit to Washington in November.

Justice ministers from across the EU are scheduled to meet later on Friday to discuss the deal, which could be formally approved next week.

New safeguards

EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini said new mechanisms had been agreed to distribute data from airlines to the US.

This new agreement will provide a possibility of giving passenger data to the US authorities while guaranteeing sufficient data protection

US officials will no longer be able to "pull" the information - which includes details on credit cards, passports, telephone numbers and even meal preferences - direct from airline computer systems, but will have it "pushed" to them.

The information will be sent to the US Department of Homeland Security, which will "facilitate" any wider distribution among other US counter-terrorism agencies, Mr Frattini said.

Civil liberties campaigners had argued that the amount of information collected is intrusive and that data protection once the details are in the US is weak, the BBC's Jonny Dymond reports.

It was the data protection issue that led to difficulties between the US and the EU.

The US wanted the information made available automatically to a number of different domestic agencies, but the EU wanted to be sure that if the information did move between agencies then it would remain secure, our correspondent says.

Addressing these concerns, Mr Frattini said the new deal allowed easier distribution of data, but would not allow "unconditional direct electronic access" by agencies such as the FBI...

Fines concern

...Carriers who fail to provide information are liable for fines of up to $6,000 (£4,030) per passenger or withdrawal of landing rights.

Announcing the deal at a news conference in Luxembourg, Finland's Justice Minister Leena Luhtanen, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, said the new agreement was the best solution for all sides.

"This new agreement will provide a possibility of giving passenger data to the US authorities while guaranteeing sufficient data protection," she said. Go to Passenger data deal for US and EU (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5412092.stm) to read the entire article.

AaronK
10-08-2006, 12:25 PM
I still see one flaw in all of this...

The information needs to be in the US hands by 15 minutes after takeoff. Why does this information not have to be there before the plane leaves the gate? Pull them off before they need to divert.

Ned
10-08-2006, 01:08 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AaronK @ Oct 8 2006, 12:25 PM) 39057</div>
I still see one flaw in all of this...

The information needs to be in the US hands by 15 minutes after takeoff. Why does this information not have to be there before the plane leaves the gate? Pull them off before they need to divert.
[/b]
Hi Aaron,

This new agreement is a temporary one, sought to head off fines and a loss of landing rights for EU based airlines flying into the US. Negotiations to reach a permanent agreement are set to begin in November. The US is seeking pre-departure notification for all air and ship travel to the US in those negotiations.

The US had been seeking notification 60 minutes prior to departure, however, the airlines have complained that this doesn't make sense as it will include information for passengers who don't actually fly and would miss stand-by passengers. The airlines are seeking to provide notification 15 minutes prior to departure. The plane would still be at the gate, or would have just left the gate, but still be at the airport.

Furthermore, some of the international air carriers have already said that if they notify the US 15 minutes prior to gate departure, they would be willing to build into their schedule a 15 minute holding period for the US government to notify them to remove a passenger(s) prior to takeoff. I would think this 15 minute holding period would be at the gate, with the doors closed to save on fuel. Passenger safety briefings could be accomplished during this time and the airports could cooperate by saving the planes' place in line for takeoff to accomodate the holding period and not add even more travel time for the passengers.

nobody122
10-08-2006, 02:17 PM
Occasionally when I travel to the USA on certain carriers, I will choose my meal preference as Muslim (Emirates does a great Muslim meal), sometimes Japanese, Asian, whatever. That combined with a credit card that has multiple tickets at all times charged to it, plus an travel schedule that has me all over--does that mean the usa will mark me as somebody that is a trouble maker?

tdew
10-08-2006, 03:07 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(nobody122 @ Oct 8 2006, 02:17 PM) 39066</div>
Occasionally when I travel to the USA on certain carriers, I will choose my meal preference as Muslim (Emirates does a great Muslim meal), sometimes Japanese, Asian, whatever. That combined with a credit card that has multiple tickets at all times charged to it, plus an travel schedule that has me all over--does that mean the usa will mark me as somebody that is a trouble maker?
[/b]

I would think that since you are a frequent traveler, that too will be part of your profile.
No system is perfect and there have to be allowances for the inconsistencies we all exhibit.
How else can we explain some of the strange "music picks" that have been specially chosen for Me by an online service?

UrbanSpaceman
10-09-2006, 12:47 PM
Okay, remind me again--how is this going to make me safe and prevent another plane blowing up? How is this going to prevent someone from bringing a bomb on board, or placing one in a checked bag?

What good is knowing who is on the plane when we do not know what is on the plane? Why you may not like his music or him, why should we prevent Cat Stevens from coming to the US?

And what about the terrorist-to-be who will be making his mark on that plane that day (and make a large oil and metal stain on the ocean 37,000 feet below the plane he blows up)? How will we catch him before he detonates the bomb?

And why do those who are removed from the plane not always locked away? What heineous act can someone do that keeps them from flying but does not get them arrested?

mercwyn
10-09-2006, 01:17 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(UrbanSpaceman @ Oct 9 2006, 10:47 AM) 39122</div>
Okay, remind me again--how is this going to make me safe and prevent another plane blowing up? How is this going to prevent someone from bringing a bomb on board, or placing one in a checked bag?

What good is knowing who is on the plane when we do not know what is on the plane? Why you may not like his music or him, why should we prevent Cat Stevens from coming to the US?

And what about the terrorist-to-be who will be making his mark on that plane that day (and make a large oil and metal stain on the ocean 37,000 feet below the plane he blows up)? How will we catch him before he detonates the bomb?

And why do those who are removed from the plane not always locked away? What heineous act can someone do that keeps them from flying but does not get them arrested?
[/b]

You raise some good questions that need to be addressed and I don't know the answers to most of them. However I can give you some insight to the last one. Based on a number of incidents around the country one of the easiest ways to get on a "no fly" list is to be an outspoken critic of the Bush Administration with specific attention to those who go after the TSA in court.

ARTraveler
10-09-2006, 01:38 PM
It's the "15 minute" thing I don't get. Yes, technology is practically instantaneous, but given the number of takeoff's, what group of individuals are going to be able to look at and analyze the data to know there is a reason to delay, divert or call back the flight in that short length of time?

After having a client detained for a similar name on the no-fly list and the bureaucratic bumbling that ensued, this does not re-assure me. I vote for the 60 minute timeframe!