In German Trials, Airport Body Scanners Easily Confused

OverTheGeicoE writes "The German government just finished a 10-month test of millimeter-wave body scanners made by L3 Communications. It appears they are not happy with the results. The devices raise false alarms 7 times out of 10, and are confused by layered clothing, boots, zippers, pleats, and even incorrect posture. Australia recently started a trial, and the second person in at the Sydney airport set off the alarm repeatedly due to sweaty armpits."

Comments

Ballmer

[Alex Belits]

sweaty armpits

Now you will never be able to deport Ballmer. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Re:Ballmer

[ChunderDownunder]

Microsoft just bought Finland.

Re:Ballmer

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

BUT HOW WILL MICHAEL CHERTOFF PROFIT?

We need 100 percent coverage of airports by US mandated scanners, like... yesterday!

Screw your trials. Deploy our expensive scanning equipment, or we'll send more Oslo-style, Manchurian-candidates to your little chocolate and brioche countries.

Re:Ballmer

[X0563511]

You can always just exile him. Then finding a home is on -his- shoulders!

Raise the stakes

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing to do when faced with one of these is to strip naked on the spot. Fuck 'em.

Re:Raise the stakes

[ColdWetDog]

Hmmm... No replies? A verifiable Real Girl (TM) turns up and posts a flirty comment and you guys all run and hide! It must be true what they say about this place...

Sorry. But when I see "webmistressracheal" the first thing that pops into mind is an bumper sticker that I saw in a traffic jam that said "Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones But Whips and Chains Excite Me". The license plate read 'N2LTHR'.

That was a number of years ago but it is still fresh in my mind.

I'm not sure anyone else has had this sort of an experience, but when you have an evocative nic like yours, well, you just have to take the consequences.

Re:Raise the stakes

[webmistressrachel]

LOL some good points in there.

1) Fair enough. I start my browser and go to "slashdot.org/login.pl" directly, then click submit.

2) The bait is in my posting history, I'm real, I'm verifiable, I'm female AND there's pics. Some peeps here have already found that out; I was kinda trolling them for compliments etc... sorry...

3) Wow. Never thought of it like that. Does this apply to all women now? Even if they "ask for it" like I did? Poor men. That can't be good for our collective mental health, and that is the only really serious thing I've posted today. I'm sorry.

Thanks for the reply, anyhow.

Re:Raise the stakes

[plover]

I set off a false alarm the last time I flew, and got all the patting and stroking. But I couldn't figure out how much to tip for the service.

Actually I was so pissed off I was practically yelling at them. It was after the 3rd leg of an international flight, I'd been going for 24 hours straight, I was stinky and sweaty and the useless idiots at O'Hare delayed me so long I missed the connection for the 4th leg. I want the TSA budget cut in half, and I want this cowardly bullshit to end.

The backscatter scanners have actually lowered my personal safety. First, what was our ratio of hijacked flights to non-hijacked flights after 9/11? Zero. The system worked. By adding backscatter scanners, they decreased zero by how much? That's right, ZERO. Backscatter scanners are by definition 100% ineffective. They wasted $370 million dollars of my tax money on lining some corrupt politicians and manufacturer's pockets, instead of spending that money on real transportation safety features, like erecting stoplights at the 370 most dangerous uncontrolled intersections in America. I'm at much more risk of a car accident than I am of any kind of hijacking or bombing. They need to fix my real problems, not the imaginary ones they use to get votes from fucking cowards...mumble...god-damn politicians...grumble...

Not a happy ending. No tips were given.

Re:Raise the stakes

[X0563511]

Here's a tip: don't check the "public computer" option and the site will keep you logged in via a cookie. I haven't had to log in for... months?

4) Perhaps we just don't care for someone trolling for attention, whatever gear they happen to have between their legs?

Re:Raise the stakes

[Tenebrousedge]

It is true what they say about slashdot...but it's unverifiable. Hit me up on gmail/gchat/g+

Re:Raise the stakes

[Wyatt Earp]

I've flow quite a bit in the last year, between ANC to SEA, ANC to PDX and ANC to LVS, and never have gotten the physical search. Not even when the new radar scanners found the biomedical device and wires in my body.

Re:Raise the stakes

[RockDoctor]

I set off a false alarm the last time I flew, and got all the patting and stroking. But I couldn't figure out how much to tip for the service.

Well, since the sub-text of all the complaints that I see - and since it's an American problem I anticipate not seeing it first-hand - is that some people feel as if they're being treated as "two bit whores". So surely the appropriate price for their services is ... two bits.

So, get your jollies, give them two "bits" and walk away, shaking your leg as if your rich aunt's small perverted dog has just been coming on your shoe. If they ask you what it's about, give them your best "cheeky bellhop" look, then a third "bit".

One of the 'bits' should be foreign, for maximum effect. Canadian or Mexican or whatever coins require a second look to distinguish them form native ones.

Re:Raise the stakes

[plover]

If you hear that I get arrested for trying this next time, please know I bear you no ill will. The laughs will have been worth it.

Re:Raise the stakes

[RockDoctor]

But I've got no intention of wasting my time and energy travelling to America, so I can laugh at America's problems with undisguised contempt.

Have fun! And get out of Gilead while the getting is good.

Darn. Somebody fixed the post.

[Jane Q. Public]

I was going to point out the repeated paragraph as an example of unintended "backscatter".

MIssion Accomplished

[am 2k]

As far as I understand, the primary (and probably only) purpose of those scanners is to make their manufacturers a buttload of money. I think they're doing that perfectly fine, so it's definitely a success!

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[hitmark]

Well the installation of them at airports allow said places to give the impression that they are doing something regarding those "scary terrorists". But yes, most of it is snake oil salesmen making it big on a assumed epidemic.

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[am 2k]

Well, it seems to work pretty effectively for that, too.

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[Haedrian]

I think I should start a company which sells metal doorways with the words "Scanner" written on them. They won't do anything, but I'll make a packet.

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[DragonWriter]

Well the installation of them at airports allow said places to give the impression that they are doing something regarding those "scary terrorists".

Yes, but that's not the purpose, that's just the mechanism to get the public to accept their tax money being used to provide handouts to the manufacturers.

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[Anonymous Coward]

It's certainly a good testing environment to see what people will tolerate, and the current research suggests that we're pretty keen about handing over our civil liberties in exchange for false security. These people are effectively strip searching innocent people, and have stated that if a child is old enough to stand then they'll get scanned. Naked fucking pictures of your children on the screen and this is just for run of the mill travel in the United States. Visible security tends to follow the trends set by some nut job Muslim with a hankering for explosions. For example, the requirement to remove shoes for passing through security became more common after the shoe bomber's exploits. The full body scanners are an attempt to deal with the obvious problem of it being rather easy to smuggle dangerous substances on to planes. To the next bomber I'd suggest they hide bombs in either their anus or their vagina - in fact make a habit of doing this. I'm curious to see whether or not the TSA would adopt mandatory cavity searches for all passengers?

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[sgt scrub]

uh huh huh you said buttload.

Re:MIssion Accomplished

[objectdisoriented]

Bush's original apointee to head the Department of Homeland Security is on the board of the company that produces the scanners. He says this has nothing to do with them going into airports.

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[maxwell demon]

I guess the TSA uses scanners which show the actual scan. In Germany, the scanner's software identifies potential objects and marks them on a schematic picture, so you're not seen naked on the screen. Humans are better at interpreting patterns, and more importantly they learn. After the first few times they've seen sweaty armpits on the scan, they'll probably recognize them. If the software misinterprets sweaty armpits as hidden objects the first time, it will do so for every person until eventually the software gets an explicit update to not misidentify sweaty armpits.

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[Joce640k]

... but the US can.

Citation needed.

Sweaty armpits? Seriously?

[jcr]

Brings a whole new meaning to the term "sweating bullets", I guess.

-jcr

are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[sl4shd0rk]

if so, i would find it interesting to see how the united states addressed the false positive issue.

Re:are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[FatLittleMonkey]

The Euro/Aus scanners don't show the direct image. It is processed to separate the "normal" (clothes and body) from "abnormal" (weapons), and then displays the "abnormal" against a generic silhouette. The idea is that the scanners will be easier to introduce into countries with stronger privacy laws/culture than the US. However, it seems to be fooled by variations in bodies and clothing.

TSA systems have human operators interpret the images directly. They quickly get used to ghosting and artifacts and stop issuing false positives. However, tests (official and otherwise) show that they also fail to detect actual weapons.

Re:are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[blackraven14250]

I could have sworn you're correct. I think the article was on here recently.

Re:are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[Rich0]

I wonder if this is a technology or a human issue.

Humans simply aren't good at staring at a sea of harmless stuff and then spotting something dangerous.

I remember reading about a company that came up with an x-ray machine that had a game of sorts built into it. The scanner would periodically put a picture of a gun or a knife or whatever in the actual images of baggage, and the operator had to push a button to remove it. If the operator missed something then it would alert the supervisor to change out the operator. This gives the operator something to do so that they don't zone out. Obviously if you push the button and the gun doesn't go away then you have a problem to deal with.

Finally - this thing talks about mm waves - but I thought that the machines in the US were backscatter x-rays? The wavelength of an X-ray is WAY smaller than a mm. I could see how mm-wavelength radiation is going to be more easily fooled by wet clothes/etc.

Re:are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[FatLittleMonkey]

Humans simply aren't good at staring at a sea of harmless stuff and then spotting something dangerous.

That seems to be it. Lots of false-alarms, few actual threats, is going to be difficult for either humans or machines.

Finally - this thing talks about mm waves - but I thought that the machines in the US were backscatter x-rays?

Doesn't the US use both? (Google says Wikipedia says LAX and SFO both have mm-wave scanners, so does the Trans-Hudson (PATH) train.)

Re:are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[d0nju4n]

That's where the "random" pat-down comes in to play.

Re:are these the same scanner in use in the usa?

[sgt scrub]

detecting weapons is overrated.

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[Stormthirst]

Given that the Americans are insisting that these scanners are used globally[1], at least the Germans are concerned with the health and privacy of their citizens.

[1] and you thought the TSA situation stinks - now Washington is bullying the EU into using them too. Citation? RTFA

Complaints

[qxcv]

As if these scanners needed to be more fun to play with.

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

The manufacturer thought they were for the TSA so they built in lots of false positives. The TSA needs false positives so they can grope more - after all, they are just a bunch of pedophiles, rapists and pervert thieves. Grope your crotch, steal your ipad while you aren't looking.

AM I WRONG? No, it's funny because it's true.

What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[brusk]

I don't have a position on whether these scanners are better or worse than the alternatives, but a 70% false positive rate is not necessarily a bad thing. What people forget is that false positive/false negative rates are dependent on the underlying rate of occurrence of the phenomenon you're looking for. Say you create a test for a disease that has a false positive rate of 0.1% for people who don't have the disease (which is excellent!). If the disease is extremely rare, say 0.1% occurrence rate in the population tested, about half the people who test positive will in fact not have disease. Whereas if 10% of the population has the disease, only about 1% of the positive tests will be false positive. Not because the test is any different, but because the underlying rate is so much higher. So without knowing what the underlying rate of people bringing inappropriate items through security is, the 70% number is hard to interpret.

Re:What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[NixieBunny]

I think the rate of actual terrorists is .000000001%, so essentially all positives are false positives.

Re:What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[mseeger]

According to what i read in the local newspapers here in Germany, the systems raised an alarm at 7 out of 10 people passing through them.

Re:What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's terrorist talk there buddy.
You and your false sense of security will kill us all.

Re:What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[ColdWetDog]

According to what i read in the local newspapers here in Germany, the systems raised an alarm at 7 out of 10 people passing through them.

Sounds about right. They're probably American machines. Most of the people in a German airport would be Germans. Thus foreigners to the machine's inbuilt intelligence and worthy of a beep or two.

GO USA!

Re:What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[sgt scrub]

Oh please. Everybody knows nothing is manufactured in the U.S.

Re:What does "seven out of ten" mean here?

[RockDoctor]

I thought that Micro$oft were one of the US's biggest companies exporting huge-amounts of US-manufactured Fear (TM), Uncertainty(TM) and Doubt(TM).

Cargo pants

[Jim Hall]

I've only taken one trip since the new bodyscanners, but the first time through, I got hit with a false positive. The source of the problem: I was wearing cargo pants, with the pockets on the sides, and the bodyscanner couldn't see past the pocket. So I was taken aside, and given a manual pat-down in addition to the bodyscanner.

Glad I showed up early to the airport that day. These things just contribute to the delay of taking a flight.

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[Idbar]

But hey, 7 out of 10 false alarms? Isn't that the purpose of it? Making people believe someone is doing something for the "safety" of the passengers?

Re:zomg, make everywhere as safe as airports

[splutty]

Thanks,

You made me chuckle :)

Re:Not bragging, but

[LoRdTAW]

You need to see a doctor.

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[snowgirl]

Given that the Americans are insisting that these scanners are used globally[1], at least the Germans are concerned with the health and privacy of their citizens.

[1] and you thought the TSA situation stinks - now Washington is bullying the EU into using them too. Citation? RTFA

Well, civil and human rights are Article 1 of their constitution... but anyways, it seems like this is less about privacy and health, and more about effectiveness. You know, those silly Germans insisting on things actually working well.

don't sweat the terrorism

[mr_walrus]

sweaty armpits in the close confines of an airplane *is* terrorism.
he should not be allowed to board :)

Re:What technology is used by TSA?

[oldhack]

Fear and Loathing (TM).