On the contrary. Administrations have a great track record of running incredibly complex systems since 150 years. With pen and paper. And rubber stamps.

And that even surprisingly reliable.

It's just neither cheap or fast. The big screwups usually happen when they are trying to become that. Or "efficient"

But so does using a physical sim-card.

SIM-locked phones are as old as SIM-cards. No difference here.

Well yes, culture is the problem. But not necessarily just a pro-gun culture. Canada and Switzerland have that, too.

It's a "I'll solve every conflict with violence"-culture and "Look at me and I'll shoot you"-culture that is the actual problem. Look at the US current politics. And - as you mentioned - a "Well, too bad we can't do anything here. Thoughts and Prayers"-culture

Pro-gun-culture is merely a big enabler.

Yes.

But you always can do more and spend more money.

And now put yourself in the shoes of the guy responsible for security: Spend more money and be seen as doing your job, or have your head on the chopping block for "not doing enough" when something happens?

It's the tiger repelling stone. If you don't need to kill tigers, you need to show some other proof of work.

Does it also teach students not to eat doritos or play the clarinet?

Well - it happened anyway.

Which just proves the parents point: Outlawing something will not stop it from happening. You need laws to make it MORE DIFFICULT to do.

Make it hard to own guns and you have one mass shooting in 30 years. Make it easy to have them und you'll end up with 30 per month.

And cameras don't make it harder to commit a crime. It just may or may not make it easier for the police to catch you - after the fact.

Nah. That is taken care of.

Just shot the "fake robbery" guys on sight and it will not catch on. People are getting shot for less by the police. And if you're taking that risk anyway, you may as well go all the way and grab some cash.

The problem is different: Green light or not, no camera will come down from the ceiling and stop or mitigate a robbery in process. There is a slight advantage of getting surveillance video out on the street slightly faster, but that needs to be faster than the criminal needs to be off the street. If you can't catch him right running out of the door and you need to go through witnesses, existing mugshots or face ID, you're still stuck with the usually crappy surveillance cam footage. Not much difference if you can track down a suspect after 5 hours or 5 days.

Or could it be that law enforcement puts more manpower into catching a suspect when it can be done with a wild car chase instead of desk work 2 weeks later? Any hold up that can't be solved within 12 hours is filed as cold case?

The only reason why this will seem work at the beginning is that robbers will see this as a choice between a regular and slightly easier target. If every business had that green light, robberies would be split up evenly between all stores again. It's the 101 of home security. You don't need it to make difficult to break into your house - just slightly more difficult than your neighbor. (Or you don't need to outrun the lion. Just the other guy)

Yes. But these documents are checked BEFORE you get to the security check, not AT the security check. You're going through checks at 4 layered perimeters. Security (the x-ray and metal detector thingy) is usually No. 3. And they don't check your documents there.

But that means that not only one or two, but THREE independent checkpoints failed.

Incompetence is not criminal.

Those are not two discrete Domains. Tech doesn't exist in a vacuum. And security, including physical security, is part of tech.

But then you wouldn't publish either that a Red Team has been able to infiltrate your business.

But still, for that vector of attack 1:5.7 million is REALLY bad.

We are not talking about counterfeit documents or boarding the wrong plane. He didn't have any documents. And he passed through 4 layers of security (ticket, passport, security and gate check) where 3 are document checks, 2 of them supposed to check the validity of ticket/passport, and the first one specifically supposed to check the PRESENCE of those documents.

Yes, a fake boarding pass may not be checked until boarding at the gate and even may not be detected in rare cases until there is no seat on the plane. That's a scenario where I would say "well, s**t happens" once per year.

Well, you are assuming that those checks are actually working as intended and not just security theater.

I can confirm that they have the same checks in place in Heathrow. They are not working, that's different from not having them.

I agree here. I have a photo of the departure display that actually says "Departure Gate will be announced 20 minutes before boarding" AND "Please be aware of up to 20min walking time to the gates"

Well, thanks for that.

I agree. That's what it looks like. But wouldn't that hab been disclosed as soon as he was brought off the plane? Even if it takes an hour to confirm, that should have been before and included in a press release.

So probably an "independant" pen tester.... or failed social media challenge, Or just a plain idiot who got lucky (Well, there may be an overlap here...).