ASIC AGAIN!!!

[spacesailor]

That " card "  is controlled by " bureaucrats " .

Or , is that card a fake & not policed .

spacesailor

[Student Pilot]

Issued by a third party contracted to gov? 

[facthunter]

The "C" in ASIC means CARD. Nev

[LoonyBob]

11 hours ago, BrendAn said:

what is your point.

When I held a Shotfirer's Licence, it became clear that the science of explosives was a burnt and buried book to the populace at large. By allowing this state of ignorance to continue, we are all protected from both peaceful idiots who want to do high-energy landscaping, and malicious twerps who want to throw a very loud tanty.

If I were to debate, on an open forum, the pros and cons of homemade IEDs, then that information would be widely available for a long time.

 

None of us should use this forum to present practicable mechanisms for terrorism, because most all of us are likely to come up with better ideas than your average agro gronk.

[facthunter]

Might put  up the price of my VAN?  Nev

[Ian]

ASIC cards as they current stand don't provide the benefits they're meant to. They are simply expensive security theatre.

To make them useful

1. Make them a good credential such as a smartcard not a dumbcard with a photo on it.
2. Make it cheap. A Tesla "key" is about $25, a replacement bank smartcard is free, so a 10 year card should be less than $100
3. Centralise supply and make it a Government service. Not outsourced to well meaning but clueless subcontractors. Because the costs have been externalised by the Government there is zero economic incentive to fix them.
4. Make them cheaper and longer lasting. For example a Government security clearance can be valid for 10 years, why not ASICs?
5. Resource security checks on all relevant airports
6. Resource a phone based app with NFC for checking card so cheap forgeries are easily detectable.
7. Escort all non card holders at all times. This includes foreign air-staff.
8. Incorporate your qualifications and checks such as flying credentials and medicals onto the card and ditch the current paper based system.

There is a non-zero risk associated with aircraft and terrorism which increases with the size of the aircraft. However this risk should be viewed in the context of other systems which can be weaponised such as fuel tankers, water supplies etc. 

 

What we have now is a chancre. 

[KRviator]

On 31/01/2024 at 7:23 PM, LoonyBob said:

If I were to debate, on an open forum, the pros and cons of homemade IEDs, then that information would be widely available for a long time.

 

None of us should use this forum to present practicable mechanisms for terrorism, because most all of us are likely to come up with better ideas than your average agro gronk.

I've long held the opposite view. Granted those of us in flying, or other industries that make us a target could make things easier for your average psycho, but there's enough information out there for any dedicated nutjob to do significant damage without assistance from those of us on the inside of whatever industry. And a lot of it is available from the likes of the NTSB/ATSB or scientific articles & datasheets.

If you're a truly dedicated terrorist group, you're going to have people doing significant research on the pros and cons of each method of martyrdom to get the best bang for your body and there's enough information out there for almost any industry to let you do so - it'll just take a little more time to collate than if we were to discuss it here.

[Area-51]

When an ASIC application is presented there must be evidence of physical existence provided. These have different levels of veracity; a birth certificate is very veracious evidence... a library card is not so veracious but enough to establish an individual's existence within the community as to is an ASIC card; but only if it is valid. If it is an expired card it cannot be acknowledged as veracious and  cannot be presented as proof of veracity when applying for an ASIC

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, Ian said:

ASIC cards as they current stand don't provide the benefits they're meant to. They are simply expensive security theatre.

To make them useful

1. Make them a good credential such as a smartcard not a dumbcard with a photo on it.
2. Make it cheap. A Tesla "key" is about $25, a replacement bank smartcard is free, so a 10 year card should be less than $100
3. Centralise supply and make it a Government service. Not outsourced to well meaning but clueless subcontractors. Because the costs have been externalised by the Government there is zero economic incentive to fix them.
4. Make them cheaper and longer lasting. For example a Government security clearance can be valid for 10 years, why not ASICs?
5. Resource security checks on all relevant airports
6. Resource a phone based app with NFC for checking card so cheap forgeries are easily detectable.
7. Escort all non card holders at all times. This includes foreign air-staff.
8. Incorporate your qualifications and checks such as flying credentials and medicals onto the card and ditch the current paper based system.

There is a non-zero risk associated with aircraft and terrorism which increases with the size of the aircraft. However this risk should be viewed in the context of other systems which can be weaponised such as fuel tankers, water supplies etc. 

 

What we have now is a chancre. 

"To make them useful"

 

"You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" Old saying but apt.

 

Great ideas/suggestions Ian, however it has yet to be established that there is a need for ASIC, in the first instance(as it applies to small regional airfields being accessed by private pilots).  

Improving a system that has no benefit, just adds more complexity & cost (window dressing).

As for "non-zero risk" - pretty much everything we do in life has a risk attached. Focusing on one extraordinarily low risk and throwing the legislative might of the Government at it  ($5K fine if you don't comply) is a level of stupidity, that is worthy of a second rate commedy.

 

 

[Markdun]

 Ian, your suggestions are based on there being a security problem that the ASIC card addresses; there isn’t. As you say it pointless ‘theatre’.  If the problem is that it is just theatre and the burden ($ & valuable time) placed on those required to have them, then the solution is much easier; abolish them.

 

Some decades ago I headed a team that reviewed the Radiocommunications Act. One of the things we looked at was licensing compliance for VHF & HF radios in aircraft and boats which at the time required each aircraft to have an apparatus licence & the radio operators to have an appropriate operators licence. An annual fee was charged for the apparatus licence.  Compliance for aircraft was less than 2%; and for boaties it was around 60%; so of-course the fees didn’t cover the cost of the clerks employed by the regulator.  We could have recommended massive hikes in fees & employed a team of compliance ppl and prosecutors to address the non-compliance (as is standard practice nowadays).  Instead we introduced a scheme (agreed by the gov & parl) that meant no licence was required as long as the radio equipment met the regulator’s standard and that operators complied with the regulator’s rules for use, ie. no swearing etc….. a bit like the USA’s FAA part 103.  My message is don’t be afraid to push for abolishing useless laws and rules.

 

 On the topic of security I note in recent weeks it has been outed in the federal parliament that the AFP has seen a massive increase in police numbers but are only managing to bring a very few charges against alleged wrong doers (despite daily reports of public servants and Ministers breaking federal laws).  And it seems that violent terrorist crimes are so scarce that the AFP have to generate bad guys to justify their existence by grooming and encouraging autistic children to become terrorists.

[Ian]

1 hour ago, Area-51 said:

When an ASIC application is presented there must be evidence of physical existence provided. These have different levels of veracity; a birth certificate is very veracious evidence... a library card is not so veracious but enough to establish an individual's existence within the community as to is an ASIC card; but only if it is valid. If it is an expired card it cannot be acknowledged as veracious and  cannot be presented as proof of veracity when applying for an ASIC

Actually a birth certificate in an of itself is not veracious. It is easy to manufacture one. It is the fact that it can be referenced against an existing Government database which provides the strong binding to an identity. But that is a slow and cumbersome process.

Similarly an expired ASIC card can be used to verify someone's identity, it just depends upon what you're trying to achieve and the level of assurance you require.

 

However a smartcard, through cryptographic operations can be veracious through real time cryptographic operations. That is a claim relating to identity can be verified in real time by anyone with a device such as a mobile phone.

 

An ASIC card is a dumbcard, it has a couple of holograms that can be cloned, is issued by groups which don't have great physical or electronic security. There are multiple levels though which the process could be compromised either electronically or through social engineering.

 

I think that in a risk assessment it would be probable that one of these issuing authorities has already been compromised or will be compromised and the identity documents exfiltrated.

[Ian]

17 minutes ago, Markdun said:

Ian, your suggestions are based on there being a security problem that the ASIC card addresses;

There is a risk. Airplanes have been used as weapon by terrorists.

As a control, whether strong identity checks around airports actually mitigates this risk is up for debate. It does have some appeal. With strong identity checks and other processes you can minimise interactions between high risk individuals and groups and your critical infrastructure.

 

What I'm saying is, in it's current form the ASIC card is pretty much worthless, it doesn't provide a strong identity check, is costly, burdensome and the other processes are missing.

 

I suspect that the main driver for the ASIC card was simply customs, border protection and drugs at major international airports. The rest is just collateral damage.

[Markdun]

Cars & trucks too.  No need for a RSIC ie. Road.   Also keep in mind that requiring a licence like the ASIC is a fancy way to allow gov authorities to impose a penalty on you without a court order…something required by the Cth Constitution.

[Ian]

As I've stated, I don't mind obtaining and carrying one if they create something useful.

A smartcard that works as a long term credential containing

• photo id
• Your licence with ratings etc
• Provides access to all airports instead of the stupid pin codes.

It should be cheap or near zero cost and last for more than two years.

 

I've worked in industries with many processes of differing efficacy over the years. I am willing to put up with processes that work to control dubious risks if they're lightweight, however heavyweight processes which don't actually work at all are a different matter. ASIC in it's current form is just that. Either make it useful or ax it. 

 

I'd encourage everyone to knock on their local members door with an ASIC to explain why they are shit.

 

[kgwilson]

After 15 pages of posts it is obvious that there will never be consensus.

 

I think the system is absolute rubbish, is the only one of its type in the world, is a burden on recreational pilots, is ridiculously expensive, serves no useful purpose and supports an industry created by the government for a perceived and unverified risk. I refuse to get one. I've never been asked for it at Coffs (I know the controllers and also park by the Aero Club miles from the RPT apron area) but have at Ballina & was told I couldn't go in to the cafe but did anyway. I don't have a class 2 any more so my PPL is invalid but as I now fly an Ra-Aus registered aircraft I self certify saving another overly bureaucratic and expensive process

[facthunter]

England invented Bureaucracy, India perfected it and WE wouldn't know if it hit us on the head.  Nev

[spacesailor]

mardum.

Why do we have to be tested for,

 each & every frequency we use & licence .

just another money making grab ? .

spacesailor

 

[Ian]

The whole paper based licence system is archaic, and having instructors tack rating on the back just dumb.

One step removed from stone tablets.

[spacesailor]

Oops.

I lost a letter .

Sorry .

Markdum .

spacesailor

[Markdun]

I think you will find the Chinese invented bureaucracy centuries before Britain existed.

 

Spacey, I don’t understand your question. If you use a radio that meets the standards (C ticked??) on the correct frequency bands you are not charged for each frequency.  As far as I know you still pay zero to use an aircraft VHF.  You are meant to pay a fee for aircraft or marine HF but I don’t know why other than there is potentially a bigger risk of causing intference. However if you want exclusive use of a particular frequency you need to pay a rental fee for the use of the public asset (radio frequency)….a bit like mining companies are meant to pay for the publicly owned minerals they remove from the ground.  And just like mining some big corporates pay effectively zero despite their exclusive use of valuable frequencies (broadcasters)

as do Defence.

 

Mark

[spacesailor]

I meant.

You pay a fee , sit a test, & hopefully ' issued ' with the licence to operate that " allocated " frequency band .

The next category,  you sit almost that same test for another frequency band .

So now you have two licences ,H F & VHF . ( marine) .

Sit the same nominal rest again to gain ' Aviation VHF " air to air " . But not for " ground to air . Sit another test to gain another licence,  for ' ground controllers licence. 

All on top of your " Amateur Radio transmitting " licence .

spacesailor

 

 

 

 

[Markdun]

The Amateur radio organisation opposed abolishing the tests (inc Morse) so my recommendation that you just have to comply with the ‘rules’ was rejected. Two reasons: they like having an exclusive club; & some make money from training ppl for the test…. a bit like why BFRs aren’t every 5 years for RAA. Marine VHF operators licence was abolished for VHF, but several years ago volunteer marine rescue orgs were pushing to re-establish licensing…again so they could make money by training ppl to pass the exam, not that there was a problem with radio use (yeh, yeh we’ve all heard the ‘mayday, mayday, mayday, the boat’s full of water and we’re sinking’ and the response, ‘mayday boat , can you advise location and number of ppl oboard’ ). These are the same ppl who are unable to use the digital select calling on marine VHF (nearly all of them have this now, & it’s great because you can call a ship, including have their radio make an alarm on their bridge…you always get a response!) through lack of skill, who don’t turn their HF sets on to monitor emergency freqs despite publishing that they do, & get in a real tiz if you don’t report in within 15 minutes of your ETA on a 100nm plus sailing leg (and refuse to have an equiv of sartime) so I now dont ‘log’ my sailing with them. I’ve never heard of an operators test for aircraft vhf except as part of a PPL or RAA certificate. The Radcoms licence reqt for aircraft vhf was abolished.  There is one weird thing though, when I installed a VHF AIS transponder on my boat (marine equiv of ADSB) the Radcoms ppl required me to have an HF radio operators licence (I have one but they lost their records!), but this is not required for ADSB. To install the AIS you connect power and a standard VHF antenna. The hexadecimal code is pre-programmed, like a PLB/EPIRB. Go figure.

[spacesailor]

Complicated. 

Is what I think .  If you do pass a " radio transmitting " licence.  It should be good for ' most ' transmitters .

spacesailor

[Jabiru7252]

This is a typical question for the foundation Ham Radio License...

 

There was a time when being a 'Ham' meant you knew all about radio, radio wave propagation bla bla bla. Not any more ☹️

[Area-51]

"A".... 😕
 

Sorry, sorry... "B", selecting "B", lock it in eddy...

Edited February 19 by Area-51