While watching the news (fox 41 News ). They had a brief segment that talked about how many airports are using a new technique to scan people for weapons, etc...Check-out the article it's pretty interesting and scary at the same time. I can honestly say, after reading this article I will probably think twice about flying, and what has the world come to since 9/11...This article clearly shows that people have little regard for ones privacy..And although, I believe in flight safety and security, this new technique or device seems to be quite humiliating if you ask me..
Questions?
What is your thoughts/concerns after reading this article?
Do you agree this goes against the privacy act?
Airport body scans reveal all:
(http://www.livescience.com/technology/090401-airport-scan.html)
New airport security scanners could become a popular alternative to body searches, but have also prompted some privacy concerns.
Whole-body imaging technologies can see through clothing to reveal metallic and non-metallic objects, including weapons or plastic explosives. They also reveal a person's silhouette and the outlines of underwear.
That hasn't stopped security officials from implementing them. The U.S. Transportation Security Agency (TSA) started using whole-body imaging at six airports this year, and plans are in the works to expand it to airports in several more U.S. cities later this year.
The TSA has tested two technologies, including "millimeter wave" (MMW) technology which bounces radio-frequency waves off people to construct a 3-D image within a few seconds. TSA also temporarily leased four "backscatter" units which use X-ray scanning, although the MMW method is currently faster.
Early this year, TSA began implementing MMW as a primary screening technology next to metal detectors at airports in San Francisco, Miami, Albuquerque, Tulsa, Salt Lake City and Las Vegas.
Airports in 20 U.S. cities, such as JFK in New York City and LAX in Los Angeles, have used or plan to use MMW tech this year. Other countries have also begun using or evaluating MMW for airport screening, including the UK, Netherlands, Japan and Thailand.
The MMW and backscatter scans intentionally blur facial features, and the security officer viewing images sits in a remote location where he or she cannot identify the passengers, said Lara Uselding, a TSA spokesperson. She added that the systems also delete scanned images after the viewings, and have "zero storage capability."
That has not stopped privacy advocates from asking how much passengers may unwittingly reveal in whole-body imaging.
"Body scanners produce graphic images of travelers' bodies and are an assault on their essential dignity," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project. "The safeguards announced by the TSA do not convince us that the technology is acceptable, and we question the supposed voluntary nature of these scanners."
TSA pointed out that passengers can currently choose between the MMW screening and the more traditional body search conducted by a security officer with a wand. The new screening tech actually proved popular in testing conducted in January 2009.
"More than 99 percent of passengers selected for Millimeter Wave screening opted to use the technology instead of the traditional pat-down procedure at Los Angeles International Airport," Uselding said. "We saw the same percentage for use at JFK with MMW."
A body scan that leaves no record might be less invasive than background searches which look through computer records containing personal passenger information, said Bruce Schneier, chief security technology officer for British Telecommunications, who has published several books and testified on security issues for the U.S. Congress.
However, Schneier raised two main issues: whether security officials are doing the right thing to address security issues, and whether they're doing it right. His concern is that high-tech airport screening has become too focused on specific threats.
"I dislike security that requires us to guess a target and tactic," Schneier told LiveScience. He added that airport screening represents the last line of defense against potential threats, whereas spending more money on intelligence gathering has benefits whether terrorists are targeting an airport or shopping mall.
"Security is a tradeoff," Schneier said. "Every dollar we're spending on airport security is a dollar not spent someplace else."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
When I first heard about these I thought it was a bit too much!! The thought of someone doing one of these full scans on me kind of creeped me out! However, if by doing one of these scans they can catch someone who was going to possibly put my life in danger...well then I could probably get over it.
I have mixed feelings on this subject. I want to feel safe when I travel, yet I feel that a lot of this is going overboard. However, I have flown 4 or 5 times since 9/11 and I have to say my experience was nothing like what is reported in the media. We even flew out of the country. We were not searched, questioned, looked at, followed, nothing!!! And I saw no one being hassled. All we did was walk through a metal detector and send our bags through the x-ray machine. We easily could have gotten anything we wanted to on the plane. This accord everytime, no matter what airport. I guess my point is is that if they are going to do it, do it to EVERYONE. No profiling!!
Wow. This article takes to heart that cliched advice of always wearing clean underwear, although I guess if all they can see is the outline, maybe it should be amended to pretty underwear.
My reaction was much like Jill's: it creeps me out, but if it catches someone.... On the other hand, I wonder who is going to get to be selected for this screening. Is it random selection, like baggage screening is supposed to be? Is it something that happens if something questionable or unusual is found in your carry-on or you set off the metal detector? Or is it just if you look suspicious?
I would be more supportive if the selection was random or based on genuine questions/concerns (not profiling!), and if this was actually proven to catch things and/or act as a deterrent.
Post a Comment