Backscatter X-Ray Machines Easily Fooled
Pinckney writes "A paper by Leon Kaufman and Joseph W. Carlson in the Journal of Transportation Security asserts that x-ray backscatter machines are not very effective (PDF) even in their intended role. While carelessly placed contraband will be detected, the machines have glaring blind-spots and have difficulty distinguishing explosives from human tissue. As they write, 'It is very likely that a large (15–20 cm in diameter), irregularly-shaped, cm-thick pancake [of PETN explosive] with beveled edges, taped to the abdomen, would be invisible to this technology. ... It is also easy to see that an object such as a wire or a boxcutter blade, taped to the side of the body, or even a small gun in the same location, will be invisible.'"
This obviously means that we are going to need better technology. We'll need technology that will be able to give us a full color representation of your completely nude body, but only if you're a hot chick. - Your Friendly local TSA Agent
...will automatically detect suspicious areas of the image and rescan them slowly at high power.
Or they'll just go to transmission x-ray scanners concealed in the metal detector frame.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Passengers and cargo are a security risk. Prohibit them from boarding planes, and everyone will be safe.
(Pilots are also a security risk. In the future all planes will fly autonomously, controlled by AIs.)
(Programmers writing the AIs are also a security risk. You know what? Scrap those planes, they're not carrying anything anyway.)
the former head of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff helped sell them to the government and the government mandated them and removed everyone's rights.
American anthem playing in background.
Not to sound like a broken record (does that phase mean anything to people or did I just show my age), but I'm not sure why this surprises anyone. It's not about security. It's about security theater. And until the TSA fundamentally changes the way they do things, it always will be.
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Yup, experts have been warning about this all year. Meanwhile, explosives detectors (you know, the ones removed from airports last year because they were too much trouble to maintain) seems to be a banned topic in the news.
Unfortunately the TSA now has too much invested to suddenly admit it probably wasn't a good idea to stop using the more effective machines that are less invasive (they were the round swabs on luggage) replaced with the less effective machines that are more invasive.
Why didn't the TSA test this technology first to make sure it works? I mean, it's not like cloth tape and a flattened explosive are unprecedented or amazingly cunning bits of circumvention! Why not hire 20 nerds and give them a week to figure out if they can sneak something truly dangerous through the scanner? As long as they can do so reliably, wait for the next version of the machine and test again. Only when it works should you place the order!
Considering how a lot of you look naked, that would be enough to force anyone to give up terrorism.
The Boston Globe reported today that a the mutilated body of a teen boy found last month in a Boston suburb probably fell out of the wheel well of an airplane he is believed to stowed away on. Several articles of his clothing were found scattered along the flight's approach to Boston's Logan Airport.
Earlier this year in Japan a body was discovered in the wheel well of a flight originating at New York's JFK. Investigation later revealed that the unfortunate hadn't stowed away in New York, but in Lagos Nigeria *two months earlier*.
What does this tell you about all this body scanning hoopla? We're building a fortress that sports a fearsome looking portcullis but has open windows on the ground floor.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Does this same condition exist for the Millimeter Wave RF scanners too, or do they have better resolution or discrimination abilities?
I haven't traveled much since these scanners went into effect, but so far I've only seen the RF scanners.
Last time I encountered one I asked the TSA rep if it was RF or X-ray, and she said "It's millimeter wave, and it's the same as an ultrasound". I told her that that can't be true since an ultrasound doesn't use RF energy, and she said "It *is* the same, now move along". I reported her misinformation to a supervisor, but I'm not sure he even understood the difference between ultrasound and an RF scanner.
I'm fine with the RF scanners (I don't think they are all that effective since a determined terrorist will use one of the many holes in airport security to bring in his weapon -- plus my "junk" isn't all that interesting), but I don't like being lied too (or worse someone directing me into a device that she doesn't even have a basic understanding of -- surely the difference between sound and RF energy is not too hard for a TSA agent to understand)
Maybe these devices and this system isn't perfect, but it's better than the alternative, which is doing nothing.
Callous as it may sound, we balance convenience and cost against people's lives every day. Reducing the national speed limit to 10MPH would undoubtedly save lives, but people's need to travel is deemed to outweigh that benefit.
Having accepted that we as a society do allow some increased risk in exchange for our day-to-day rights, profits and convenience, the question becomes: "How does the potential for an attack balance against the cost and restriction presented by the security measures?"
A measure such as this is very expensive, only moderately effective, potentially risky (I haven't had a chance to read up properly on the radiation issues) and felt by many to be an unacceptable invasion of privacy. The risk presented by terrorists is minuscule (look at all the juicy unsecured targets in the US that simply aren't being attacked, then compare that to Northern Ireland - the latter is what you see if there are actually a reasonably sized core of determined attackers). To me, this seems like an unacceptable trade-off.
>not very effective (PDF) even in their intended role
You're implicitly buying in to the claim that their intended role has something to do with safety.
The purpose of a system is what it does. The ~$200,000 scanner purchases funnel tax money to a company which made payments to the former director of Homeland Security. They condition people to being treated like prisoners. The first was deliberate.
They're working perfectly.
Most people don't realize that backscatter is an imaging tool and not a bomb detector. It requires a human operator to interpret the image. If the bomb is well blended into body contours, there is a high probability that the operator would miss it. If you look at the backscatter sales literature (it's on their web sites) it shows images of people with concealed knives or guns. Stuff that would also set off a metal detector.
In my opinion, it is a little disingenuous that the TSA is using the bomb threat as the justification to switch from metal detectors to backscatter. One of the reasons that the shoe and underwear bombers failed is they weren't able to conceal a proper detonator (which contains metal), and resorted to trying jerry rig a lighted fuze detonator. So in that sense, the metal detectors did do their job. But if concealed explosives were the primary threat, then x-ray in tandem with bomb sniffing dogs or some type of actual bomb detector would be more effective. The other downside to imaging is the human operator spends hours looking at thousands of passengers. There is a good chance that the operator won't be alert enough to spot a bomb or weapon, even when it is not perfectly concealed.
As I have said, the only way to be absolutely sure is to perform a premortem autopsy on every passenger. The downside is that somewhere along the way, it becomes a postmortem autopsy. The good news is that airlines could then stack passengers into cargo planes at twenty time the density as current passenger planes. The bad news, no more round trip tickets.
So what? Lots of people have had operations. Are you going to open up all of them on the spot, just to see what's inside?
Linux user since early January 1992.
Adam Savage of Mythbusters walked through a backscatter with two 12" razor blades and they never noticed.
Shouldn't You expect more from your DJ?
Stop Helping The Terrorists!
These guys Leon and Joseph working at their fancy 'university' are clearly on an ego trip, revealing such secret information through their 'research', and publishing it through their rogue 'scientific journal'. They should put a warrant out for these guys, or better yet, an assassination drone.
The real cost of this 'free information'! Will nobody think of the innocent TSA agents this will embarrass? How can the security industry survive if you keep downing their products with such facts. Security and survaillance systems, voting machines - all information on such vital systems to our democracy and freedom must remain a secret to protect our innocent pretty little heads.
And Soulskill! how dare you post 'a story' here with and actual link to the original document in PDF format! you are not helping anybody. How will the link farm owners buy new shoes for their kids now? Will nobody think of the kids! They could've at least included some x-rays of kids on their paper - to demonstrate how effective the machine are at showing every part and crevice of their bodies.
www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
That depends on if the passenger had Taco Hell the previous night.
This space unintentionally left blank.
NOW you're thinking like a TSA administrator!
A security measure that is not perfect can still be good. Okay it can be circumvented by a limited set of actions.
A terrorist attack also doesn't have to be perfect to be good. Neither the shoe, underwear, nor toner-cartridge bombs went off and they still cost $billions. Unfortunately, the long-term economics of this don't favor us.
There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
has happened, with terrible results. Different machines of course, but nevertheless a demonstration that shit happens. There's no reason to believe that airport backscatter systems' software is any more reliable than that deployed on systems that have failed disastrously in the past.
See http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/lib/Therac_25/Therac_1.html
for one example.
At the risk of my own karma, I do declare, "MOD PARENT UP!!!"
The TrisexualPuppy
I know you may think you were joking (or perhaps you read the article last year), but someone has actually managed to attempt an assassination (ass-ination?) using--wait for it--one pound of explosives in their colon. The target was Saudi Prince Mohammed Bin Nayef, and the assassin managed to fit a pound of PETN inside his posterior.
He who has no