Slashdot Mirror
Denials Aside, Feds Storing Body Scan Images
The new generation of body scanners employed at airports (and many other places) can record detailed, anatomically revealing pictures of each person scanned, which is one reason they've raised the hackles of privacy advocates as well as ordinary travelers. Now, AHuxley writes "The US Transportation Security Administration claimed last summer that 'scanned images cannot be stored or recorded.' It turns out that some police agencies are storing the controversial images. The US Marshals Service admitted that it had saved ~35,314 images recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single Florida courthouse.
The images were stored on a Brijot Gen2 machine. The Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group, has filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to grant an immediate injunction to stop the TSA's body scanning program."
All that needs to be said here is that we are dealing with a software-driven platform.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group, has filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to grant an immediate injunction to stop the TSA's body scanning program.
And when that doesn't work, EPIC failed!
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
It's all the young, beautiful 16 to 19 1/2 year-old females who are all alone and need protection from the strong DHS.
Get some enterprising hacker to release those 30k pics. If some schoolkids visited the courthouse, we'll see which is stronger: "think of the children!" or "think of the terrists!"
Since the original request for the system included "the ability to store and transmit" said images, this is no surprise. Any computer that has the "Print Screen" button on the keyboard can copy an image. Since the TSA scanned a 12 year old girl, why aren't child pornography charges being brought up on them?
The TSA (part of DHS) says their not recording images of people entering the airport, but the US Marshalls (part of DoJ) are.
So folks are suing the TSA? It seems to me that you'd actually want to sue the US Marshalls instead.
So, what kind of marker do I need to purchase to leave a few messages of what I think about the TSA on my special parts next time I go through the airport?
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
How can I spot one of these machines? How does it differ in appearance from a metal detector?
... they'll show up at porn sites real soon. You just need one perverted US Marshal with a USB memory stick, the Internet will do the rest.
The US Marshals Service admitted that it had saved ~35,314 images
Wow! That many cute chicks have walked through their scanners?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
The problem is, we aren't going far enough to protect ourselves. These measures, while a considerable improvement over metal detectors, are still a far cry from what we need if we want to be secure. Here is what I propose:
Upon entering any government building, or attempting to enter an airport terminal, all citizens will directed to secure rooms where they will be required to strip off all of their street clothes. These clothes will then be sent for analasys for any chemical agents, explosives, etc. and burned or disposed of if there are any suspicious substances on them. Visitors/travellers will then be issued a standard robe and slippers, after the invasive strip search and full body x-ray.
At this point, if boarding an aircraft, passengers will be led to their seats and have an I.V. hooked into their arms. They will be kept sedated for the duration of the flight, and then wheeled out while still unconcious to recover in specially designated rooms. If there is a connecting flight, then of course staff will wheel them onto that flight, while still unconcious.
Upon exiting the terminal or government building, citizens will have their personal effects returned to them, minus anything destroyed or detained due to suspicious chemical markers or anti-government slogans or anything else the government feels that it is in the citizen's best interest to remove from their possesion.
I know all of this seems like it might be expensive, but hey, isn't it worth it to be safe?
psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo
The party involved seems to be the US Marshals at a court house.
The TSA seems to be speaking only for themselves for airports.
Is this Florida court house also an airport? Or located inside an airport?
Am I having a problem with logic or is it the article?
Shouldn't the poster be GOrwell? Wouldn't it be even more appropriate!
You are not legally obligated to go through one of these if you do not want to. If you refuse to go through this, which essentially amounts to a high-tech strip-search, they have to give you the old-fashioned pat-down.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I had my first millimeter wave radar scan at the Denver airport when traveling last weekend. I thought it was rather interesting, but wasn't impressed by their insistence that I had something in my pockets, until I turned them inside out to show they were empty.
Necron69
From the article:
"For its part, the TSA says that body scanning is perfectly constitutional: 'The program is designed to respect individual sensibilities regarding privacy, modesty and personal autonomy to the maximum extent possible, while still performing its crucial function of protecting all members of the public from potentially catastrophic events.'"
Since when did the Fourth Amendment provide exemptions for "the end justifies the means" situations? (Which is a separate argument altogether).
To claim that an effective strip search without probable cause, hot pursuit, or arrest is in any way not a violation of the Fourth Amendment is a bold and likely incorrect point of view. The issue of consent is probably a critical issue here. Perhaps one doesn't have to travel by air; but when the issue may be to lose one's job for refusing to complete a business trip, perhaps then defaulting on a mortgage, & etc, or to "consent" to a millimeter wave search... That sounds more like extortion.
Not to say that the Constitution has never been violated before, but let us not deceive ourselves as to what we are doing.
I'm a young fit woman, not travelling alone, and was not wearing bulky or loose clothing- so why the selection?
Amazing... you managed to ask and answer your own question in the same breath.
Seriously, make the perversion jokes if you must, but I don't think most Americans have any idea what's even being discussed here.
The TSA should allow a small sample, say 5 each male and female, various ages, of un-filtered un-redacted (but anonymous) full-resolution images available for a trusted third party to post on their website. It could be a newspaper, a travel mag, Consumer Reports, whatever, but an unbiased supervisor needs to be responsible for the authenticity.
There's not even enough information available here to have an informed debate, just a few down-sampled 'privacy filtered' press images.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Has it gotten to the point where refusing one of these is considered probable cause for a traditional strip search yet?
Does it matter?
This is too painless. Give people the version that whacks them with the clue hammer. “What the hell, my rights are being violated.” Damn right they are. This scan is no different from having you walk into an empty room, disrobe, and slowly turn in front of a silvered window. The only difference is that it doesn’t feel as degrading. It should.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
We need an undershirt with metalic paint (or anythign that shows up as high contrast in those scanners) in big block letters that says "Fuck You TSA."
I'd love to see a new market for Anti-TSA underwear.
Child porn is what you have that they don't like, it's not what they have that you don't like.
That's a nice story, but let's look at reality: when government fails, the people responsible aren't fired and the budget isn't cut -- most often they are rewarded with even more power and revenue. In the business of government, failure isn't a reason to stop spending or consolidating power into the hands of the elite few. It's the exact opposite: a justification for more spending and more power over the people. The reason for failure is never that the idea was bad and unjust in the first place; the reason is a lack of power and revenue.
There's a reason why the US government of today dwarfs the US government of only 100 years ago, both in revenue and power over the people -- and it's not because they have a policy of cutting losses clean. In the business of government, failure is opportunity.
...recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single ***Florida courthouse***
Showing up in court is not a decision one makes. When you get a subpoena, you end up in court one way or another.
I'm waiting for somebody to "Strike A Pose" and do "Cheesecake Shots" on these scanners and its guaranteed to make the rounds on the net.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Every time we get the old line "we won't do that because it will infringe on your rights" from politicians, government agencies, law enforcement and all the likes, it should be a red light to all that they will most certainly abuse whatever it is and overwhelming infringe on your rights. Why we continue to put up with politicians that don't represent us and sell us down the river is astounding. At least recently people have woken up to the fact that the government and the politicians in it love to gain power over the masses in some sort of control freak way for anything from making money off it to appeasing corporate campaign contributors all for their own gain.
The government needs to be once again a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
If these machines are running Windows, we have even bigger problems.
they cannot use software to make the display be like those displayed in Arnold's Running Man movie.
It cannot be hard to remove the human part of the picture and leave the rest... and just "animate the human"
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
You are not legally obligated to go through one of these if you do not want to. If you refuse to go through this, which essentially amounts to a high-tech strip-search, they have to give you the old-fashioned pat-down.
for now
We need more Federal oversight of screen capture capability. Let's pass a new Citizen's Transportation Privacy Reform Act that makes it unlawful to sell keyboards with a 'Print Scrn' button. Then we create a new Single Seller Keyboard agency that makes it unlawful for anybody to purchase a keyboard from a private entity. Free government keyboards for all! It's the only way to protect the country from the privacy abuse of the TSA.
It won't be found by a backscatter machine. So the point is moot. The images only go skin deep, and no deeper. My daughter has a bunch of metal in her, and it doesn't see any of it.
Nice try though.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Oh sure, you say that know, but when the first vagina grenade goes off on a crowded plane, what will you say?
The problem here is body scanners wouldn't detect a vagina bomb in the first place. They only penetrate roughly 1/10th of an inch below the skin. Ironically, the explosives sniffers WOULD detect it but typically aren't being used in areas "protected by" body scanning devices.
Oh sure, you say that know, but when the first vagina grenade goes off on a crowded plane, what will you say?
These scanners would not detect a grenade inside someone. Either the vaginal or anal cavity would 100% shield a grenade from these scanners. They are LESS secure than the metal detectors....
There are lots of reasons Federal Employees might store images.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Are you even serious? It's not like the TSA is chock full of professionals, here. They're mall cops with less training, which is bad and worse. We know the computers are connected to the network because they have to be able to receive the images (they're "viewed at a remote location"). What makes you think the operators don't go play some Flash games during downtime? Or do the same things everyone does at work with their PC? I work on a government campus and the security/police force are caught doing naughty things with their computers all the time. Why would the TSA be any different?