US TSA serves subpoenas for source of leaked security directive

[thewinchester]

DEVELOPING: US TSA serves subpoenas for source of leaked security directive

The US Transport Security Administration has served a subpoena on travel reporter Christopher Elliott requesting he turn over all documents related to, and reveal his source of their security directive issued in wake of failed NW 253 bombing.

We had just put the kids in the bathtub when Special Agent Robert Flaherty knocked on my front door with a subpoena. He was very polite, and used “sir” a lot, and he said he just wanted a name: Who sent me the security directive?

I invited Flaherty to sit down in the living room and introduced him to my cats, who seemed to take a liking to him. The kids came by to say hello, too.


“A subpoena?” I asked the special agent. “Is that really necessary?”


“Sir,” he repeated. “You’ve been served.”

Alright, then. I’ve been served. Here’s the full text of the subpoena:

Full text of my subpoena from the Department of Homeland Security - Elliott.org

OP comment: How does the TSA expect a memo so widely circulated to stay secret? The document had no protective markings or requirements for it to remain secure AFAIK.

UPDATE
31 Dec 2009 @ 1:14AM AWST

Upgrade: Travel Better is reporting that a visit has been paid to another subpoeaned writer, Steven Frischling (writer of Boarding Area's Flying with Fish blog).

Mary Kirby of FlightGlobal's Runway Girl is also reporting that Steven's computer has just been removed from his home and seized under the subpoena.

This is getting silly. More focused on finding the source of the leak then they are improving actual security.

 

[samh004]

Hmm, this could prove to be an interesting case. He’ll certainly have a lot of support behind him.

 

[harvyk]

I foresee that it may be a case of the document being carelessly left around, that or some whistleblower \ journalist protection laws (assuming such protections still exist in the US) being enacted by one or more people.

That said given the nature of the laws (ie being of primary concern for foreign to the US airlines) that the breach was enacted outside of the US, by someone who is outside the jurisdiction of the TSA (eg a security screener sitting in a more or less corrupt country somewhere) they may have a great deal of problems finding the true nature of the leak.