Security:
News ToolsReg Shops |
The Register » Security » World's most stupid security measures named and shamedThose competition results in fullPublished Wednesday 9th April 2003 09:51 GMT Privacy International today announced the results of its competition to find the world's most pointless security measures. The competition, launched in February, attracted almost 5000 nominations from 35 countries. While airlines and airports dominated the competition, nominations arose from almost all areas of private and public sector activity. The winners include JFK Airport, T-Mobile (UK), Michigan Correctional Facilities and the Australian government. The Stupid Security Awards were judged by a distinguished international panel of security and privacy experts, and intended to highlight the absurdities of the security industry. Privacy International's director, Simon Davies, said his group took the initiative because of "innumerable" security initiatives around the world that had absolutely no genuine security benefit. "The extraordinary number of nominations indicates that the situation has become ridiculous," said Davies. "Security has become the smokescreen for incompetent and robotic managers the world over." "The situation has become more than an irritation to the public. It has become an outright danger". The winners are: Most Egregiously Stupid AwardWinner - The Australian government for a "litany of pointless, irritating and self-serving security measures"
Most Inexplicably Stupid AwardWinner - Philadelphia International Airport for over-reaction to a bottle of cologne
Most Annoyingly Stupid AwardWinner - T-Mobile (UK) for pointless and idiotic financial security measures
Most Flagrantly Intrusive AwardWinner - Delta Terminal at JFK Airport for forcing a nursing mother to drink her own breast milk
Most Stupidly Counter Productive AwardWinner - San Francisco General Hospital for "blind idiocy" in its identity checking procedures
Dishonourable MentionThe New Yorker Hotel, New York for aggressive, unnecessary and meaningless security measures. Full details of the awards can be found here. The competition was judged by a panel of well-known security experts, public policy specialists, privacy advocates and journalists. ® Related stories2003 Big Brother Awards: The Winners
Track this type of story as a custom Atom/RSS feed or by email.
|
|
Top 20 stories • All The Week’s Headlines • Archive • Search