Slashdot Mirror


House Subcommittee Holds Hearing On TSA's "Scanner Shuffle"

OverTheGeicoE writes "The Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation Security held a hearing on TSA's recent decision to move X-ray body scanners from major airports to smaller ones, which the subcommittee refers to as a 'Scanner Shuffle.' John Sanders, TSA's assistant administrator for security capabilities, testified that 91 scanners recently removed from major airports were now in storage due to 'privacy concerns.' Although TSA originally planned to relocate the scanners to smaller airports, those plans have been shelved because smaller airports don't have room for them. The subcommitteee is also investigating allegations that the machines' manufacturer, Rapiscan, 'may have falsified tests of software intended to stop the machines from recording graphic images of travelers' (VIDEO). Coincidentally, shares of Rapiscan's parent company, OSI Systems Inc., dropped in value almost 25% today, its biggest intraday decline in about 12 years. If wrongdoing is proven, Rapiscan could face fines, prison terms and a ban on government contracting, according to a former head of federal procurement."

49 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. RAPEscan by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 5, Funny

    I never noticed how poorly the scanner machine's company was named...

    --
    The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
    1. Re:RAPEscan by gringer · · Score: 2

      The chinese are about 2 years ahead of you:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBL3ux1o0tM

      --
      Ask me about repetitive DNA
    2. Re:RAPEscan by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Like everyone else, they work on stuff that looks good, but requires little actual effort or brain power.

      They only get serious when their contract comes up for renewal.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    3. Re:RAPEscan by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      But - is it legitimate rape, or illegitimate rape?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:RAPEscan by somersault · · Score: 2

      No no no, it's not "rape scan". That's horrible and serious sounding. It's clearly intended to be pronounced "rapey scan".

      --
      which is totally what she said
  2. boing, boing, boing... by slick7 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can hear the rubber stamp bouncing now.

    --
    The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
  3. should be CFA not TSA by swschrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the cluster fuck agency. seems they are consistently boorish, idiotic in rulemaking, inconsistent, and being called out as leaders in group comedy, instead of as an effective security force.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:should be CFA not TSA by geekoid · · Score: 2

      Too reasons:
      1) They are a new agency that was thrown together overnight, the TSA will be fine.
      2) They are under Homeland security. A group that can't run jack shit properly. Everything under them falls a part, and they don't improve or learn.

      Make TSA there one Bureaus, get rid of Homeland security, move the money into CIA and FBI.
      Maintain the agency separation policy.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:should be CFA not TSA by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Interesting

      seems they are consistently boorish, idiotic in rulemaking, inconsistent, and being called out as leaders in group comedy, instead of as an effective security force.

      You are missing the most important part

      There are NO demonstrable results that anyone in TSA could show for the last 11 years. The 2-3 half-assed terrorist attempts (shoe bomber, etc.) have been stopped by other passengers. TSA accomplishments are rivaled only by the anti-terrorist rock (though TSA is significantly more expensive)

      I asked this before and I will ask again -- how does an agency exist/expand/get funding without demonstrating any results whatsoever? One could dislike CIA/FBI/IRS, but one could at least point to something beneficial that they actually do.

    3. Re:should be CFA not TSA by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's a comedy pinata.

      Not to mention that the original AQ leadership is mostly dead (and in some cases, All Dead, only thing you can do is sort through their pockets for loose change). Israel is doing just fine with scanner-free profiling (I suppose that requires some form of proper Cop Radar to work though, or a minimum IQ standard). So really, TSA has left the fair shores of bureaucratic annoyance to explore the fresh new horizons of totalitarian repression, for no net value to anyone but themselves.

      My solution is pretty straightforward -- I won't fly.

      And if some clever person wants to do horrible things to people in bulk, as before, do you think they'll go through the already-hardened option, or find some other piece of critical civil infrastructure to infect?

      I'd feel much more secure if water treatment plants had updated security, that there was a solid path for SCADA security, than that the SCF that the TSA has now become re-arranges yet another set of radioactive deck chairs on their bureaucratic Titanic.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    4. Re:should be CFA not TSA by Jesrad · · Score: 2

      how does an agency exist/expand/get funding without demonstrating any results whatsoever?

      That's because you fail to understand what the real objectives of this agency are, and what results are actually evaluated.

      If an agency has its funding consistently increased, if its antics and public failures are conveniently dismissed or stamped out, and if many ambitious, politically-influent people fight and rush to get a high-responsibility mandate in this agency, then it means it is very successful in providing the results that whoever is funding it, was hoping it'd produce.

      Consider that the very act of spending taxpayers' money could in itself very well be the intended result sought after. Providing high-paying, low-effort job opportunities for politicaly-introduced young party cadre members, is another obvious one.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
  4. The TSA is still a thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I don't understand is why the TSA still exists. Everybody hates it and it costs us a ridiculous amount of money. Every time I've uttered the phrase "security theater" around normals, they've heard it before and agree with it. Why haven't any politicians jumped at the chance to cut it like the cancer it is and score major points with their electorate?

    Is corruption really the answer, or am I missing something, here?

    1. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Everybody hates it and it costs us a ridiculous amount of money.

      That ridiculous cost to us is ridiculous profits to somebody else. That somebody can in turn give to any politician who wishes to eliminate the TSA up to 2500 reasons per election cycle to change their mind.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's all in how you ask the question. On the one hand, you can ask "Do you support airport security or should we quit discriminating against terrorists?". On the other you can ask "Should pre-schoolers be groped by strangers in the airport?". You can also pre-load with a bunch of obvious yes or obvious no questions to get the answers you want. For that matter, you can tilt the stats by asking (or not asking) people who don't fly.

      As a whole though, I'll bet few, if any Americans actually support the TSA's current methods, especially groping children and irradiating pregnant women.

    3. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's all in how you ask the question.

      I absolutely agree with you. On the other hand, I've encountered lots of crazy people (including here in Slashdot) who seem to terrified that an unseen hoard of terrorists are eager to jump on planes and blow them up if we all don't take off our shoes and belts, take the special baggie out of our luggage with our mini-shampoo in it, and do "the special pose" for the new scanners. I've even had serious people here -- not trolls -- tell me that we need to be worried about terrorists shooting lasers at planes from the ground at airports. (I wish I were kidding.)

      The government and media has done a great job of convincing people that this invisible hoard exists. And with all that disinformation, any poll is going to be biased in weird ways away from a rational response. In that light, it would not surprise me that the GP's assertion was true and that a large number of Americans are afraid enough to be in favor of the TSA overall.

    4. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reading the Drudge Report, there was a story a week ago that 30% of Americans think it would be ok for the TSA to do body cavity searches before allowing people onto the planes. He has also posted numerous poll about the majority of Americans think the TSA does a good job (like 52% majority). Of course Drudge is not biased for the TSA, he also posts every possible story of the TSA messing up as well.

      Reading polls like that shows that the majority think it is fine and the TSA could go even further. The government run public education has succeeded in making enough of the country dumb enough so they can do what they want and have the people call anyone who opposes government suppression bigots.

    5. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2

      So... idiocy is still a thing?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    6. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by strength_of_10_men · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because no one wants to be "that guy" that killed the TSA in case another terrorist takes down an airplane. Simple CYA thinking. Until we, as a nation, make it clear that the TSA is unacceptable, things will just carry on. And from my last visit to the airport, the people seem to be accepting it just fine.

    7. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by sjames · · Score: 2

      There are paranoids out there, but even many of them would give a pre-schooler a pass on the security or at least acknowledge that they shouldn't be on the no-fly list.

    8. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      He has also posted numerous poll about the majority of Americans think the TSA does a good job (like 52% majority).

      They should run a poll that asks Name one useful security measure perpetrated by TSA.

      Or Name one incident where TSA had stopped a terrorist attack

      See if they can get 52% majority on that... I don't even know what a "good job" means. A good job of what??

    9. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Ron Paul and Representative John Mica have tried to lead a charge to get rid of the TSA.

      But for all the wrong reasons, i.e. that it costs taxpayers money, not that it is an attack on the rights of the little guy to be protected from the big guy.
      In the case of the radical right wing populists, the enemy of my enemy is definitely not my friend.

    10. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by smpoole7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > A majority think it's doing a good job.

      The vast majority of Americans never fly. All they know is that there haven't been any more airplanes crashing into buildings. Ergo, they conclude that the TSA must be working.

      If they did fly regularly, and ever watched some little kid screaming because the TSA agent was groping and touching them "where mom and dad told me never to let anyone touch me," they'd change their opinions in an instant.

      Sad, but true.

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    11. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by dbIII · · Score: 2

      Corruption is the answer, but it is sometimes called "pork" just as utter lies are called "spin". Another barrier to abolishing the TSA is that is an enormous welfare system that pays a lot of people to do little of use, but that's seen as better than suddenly putting them all out of work.

    12. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by dbIII · · Score: 2

      tell me that we need to be worried about terrorists shooting lasers at planes from the ground at airports

      That's a frequent hassle near several airports, although the perpetrators are dangerous idiots instead of terrorists.

    13. Re:The TSA is still a thing? by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      What I don't understand is why the TSA still exists. Everybody hates it and it costs us a ridiculous amount of money. Every time I've uttered the phrase "security theater" around normals, they've heard it before and agree with it. Why haven't any politicians jumped at the chance to cut it like the cancer it is and score major points with their electorate?

      Is corruption really the answer, or am I missing something, here?

      Not everybody hates it. Head to a red state and talk to the "real america" and they'll be proud to tell you they have the latest scanners and that the government is keeping us safe. What they really complain about is that they see no reason why they have to go through the scanners as they don't have brown skin.

  5. Ooh! by tool462 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I want to go through one of the scanners right now. Just to show the TSA how happy I am :)

    1. Re:Ooh! by ibennetch · · Score: 2

      The one that gets me is on the last trip - when opting out - the lady was trying to convince me to go through the scanner "Why not go through? There's no radiation from these machines" she says. I was so floored I couldn't even reply.

      A TSA agent a few weeks ago told me they're sound waves. I have to question the science portion of their training program...

      And yeah, I've had a few agents try to argue with me or try to convince me it's safe as well. I'm not really interested in explaining myself or arguing with them.

    2. Re:Ooh! by dbIII · · Score: 2

      A TSA agent a few weeks ago told me they're sound waves

      Maybe they were. The way to tell is if they applied some sort of gel or lubricant to the sensor and rubbed it all over you.

    3. Re:Ooh! by dtmancom · · Score: 2

      Just do what I do: say, "I used to work at the company that made these, and we used to cook Hot Pockets in them for lunch."

      Not true, but I do enjoy making them wonder.

  6. Translation please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can someone please translate the comment above to english?

    1. Re:Translation please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think the translation is something like this:

      Two reasons:
      A) They are a new agency that was thrown together overnight, and might have been fine if "B" hadn't occurred:
      B) They were put under Homeland security which apparently can't do anything right.

      Dissolve Homeland security, move the money into CIA and FBI and move the TSA out on it's own so we are left with three Bureaus.
      Also maintain the agency separation policy.

      Or something like that.

    2. Re:Translation please? by dbIII · · Score: 2

      In other words pointless insanity. The TSA is probably the most pointless and useless portion of Homeland Security and is not worth saving.

  7. I've got a question by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    How the fuck do you fail to NOT program a piece of custom hardware to encode JPG and MPG4 files? One would think you would merely have to...not code it to do that! The prosecution rests.

    1. Re:I've got a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Feel free to be worried about cancer. That doesn't justify you in disparaging those who don't like forced humiliation.

    2. Re:I've got a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      As someone who does like forced humiliation, the TSA is not on my Goddess's safe list of loaner dommes, either. Hell, they haven't even asked me for my safeword. If I'm going to be abused, violated, and driven through some sort of humiliating sexual theatre act using spurious medical equipment, I at least want it to be by a competent Domme, and not some crackpot psychopaths who are doing it because of their own subconsious demons.

  8. Naked pics... and CANCER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If only privacy was the biggest concern..
    These things are skin cancer machines, just do a quick Google search.
    That's why they are not found in Europe..

  9. Re:What law allow them in the first place? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Certain constitutional protections are suspended at airports and borders. This is for your personal safety and to ensure that bootleg mp3s don't endanger the economic safety of the nation.

    Please consider our agents and screeners. While pay is good for the level of qualifications being asked (similar hiring process to a burger joint), it's not a very high salary. Searching just one 10 year old girl can be enough to get a TSA agent through the entire day. Is it really too much to ask, and what else can we do? You want these people out working in schools? Here at airports we can watch them to ensure that they look, touch but don't penetrate.

  10. To avoid the backscatter Xray by jnmontario · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I flew out of Minneapolis a few weeks ago and while on the way down I didn't have to go through the scanner (in Canada we use millimeter wave and always have), they had the backscatter in the airport. I simply, and politely, asked to have my kids go through the metal detector along-side the backscatter instead since I didn't want them to get a blast of xrays. "No problem" said the TSA person (who BTW was incredibly nice and reasonable about the whole thing). In fact, the whole fam. got processed through the metal detector instead. They DID confiscate the ~3 oz. of my kids' toothpaste however. Security theater.

  11. Fines & Prison? Yeah, Right by BlueStrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Rapiscan could face fines, prison terms and a ban on government contracting, according to a former head of federal procurement."

    Yeah, right. That'll happen.

    Good luck getting Eric Holder to prosecute.

    The only thing Holder is "busting" these days are the very laws and constitution he's supposed to uphold and defend. Heck, all Rapiscan needs to do is put a NBPP member in as the new CEO. They'll be "teflon" and it won't matter if the body scanners disintegrate passengers like one of the "Mars Attacks!" rayguns.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    1. Re:Fines & Prison? Yeah, Right by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...since the Republicans bent over backwards to let Bush do whatever the fuck he wanted, they didn't have a leg to stand on to stop him.

      Oh, no you don't.

      You don't get to dump this one off.

      Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR...all Progressives...were the ones that started the US government down the path of, and set precedent for future administrations and congresses, for the government to grant itself new and expanded powers far beyond the limits set by the constitution.

      You can thank 100 years of the Progressive movement in the US for government treating the constitution like "just a goddamned piece of paper". That's what "Progressive" refers to, and is the Progressive movements' key point; That government power should "progress past" the limits on it's powers set forth in the constitution. It's not like it's something I pulled from my ass...go read up on the history of the Progressive movement in the 20th century.

      Now people who voted-in Progressives...in both parties (Bush is a Progressive, as is McCain, btw)...are surprised and upset when the government grabs powers and uses them in a way they don't like or didn't think about? Sorry. You wanted it, you got it Toyota. Enjoy the police state you helped build.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  12. LOL by sootman · · Score: 2

    If wrongdoing is proven, Rapiscan could face fines, prison terms and a ban on government contracting, according to a former head of federal procurement.

    Yeah, right. Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day.

    Now, time for a good cry.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  13. 180,000 more pax a day? by sam1am · · Score: 3, Interesting
    TFA:

    The backscatter machines were pulled three weeks ago from New York's LaGuardia and JFK, Chicago O'Hare, Los Angeles, Boston, Charlotte and Orlando airports. The move was designed to speed up security lines at checkpoints there.

    Sanders said it's worked and that lines at those airports are now moving 180,000 more passengers each day.

    I find this confusing. Were the TSA lines the gating factor in keeping 180,000 passengers from flying each day? According to A4A, 2.4 Million Passengers will fly on 11/25/2012. 180,000 passengers is 7.5% of that figure. An average travel day in the US looks to be roughly 1.8 million passengers. 180,000 is 10% of that figure.

    What did those 180,000 people do? Wait in line until it closed/they missed their flight, then try again another day? Decide not to fly?

    1. Re:180,000 more pax a day? by chrismcb · · Score: 2
      I am guessing that was a misinterpretation. But I did like:

      The move was designed to speed up security lines at checkpoints there.

      Well DUH. The old metal scanners took like 10 seconds. The new scanners take a couple of minutes (or appear too)
      But you know what is even FASTER???? NO security at all! AMAZING

  14. The TSA needs to be abolished by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The TSA needs to be abolished. Period.

    1. Re:The TSA needs to be abolished by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      Not abolished. Just rolled back to pre-911 levels. Keep the cockpit doors bolted shut. Keep metal detectors and the X-Ray machines for carry-ons. Ditch the "3oz of liquid" rule, the Rapiscan systems, etc. The TSA has to stop pretending that every new rule they dream up to inconvenience passengers dramatically increases security.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  15. Re:What law allow them in the first place? by arth1 · · Score: 2

    Here at airports we can watch them to ensure that they look, touch but don't penetrate.

    You obviously haven't been subjected to the customs guys with their plastic gloves.

    Anyhow, the main problem is neither modesty nor cancer, but that you're treated as a suspect and lose your right not to go through search and seizure without even being suspected of any wrongdoing,

    If you have nothing to hide, you get angry when treated like you do.

  16. Petition TSA on "Priority" Airport Screening Lines by woztheproblem · · Score: 2

    This is a little off-topic, but concerns getting TSA to change it's ways. There is a petition on change.org asking TSA to get rid of "priority" screening lines. As the petition says, the speed of a government service should NOT depend on how much we pay to an airline, and TSA should not allow airlines to profit by offering better access to a government service as a perk for a high priced ticket (or participation in their reward programs).

    The petition doesn't have a lot of signatures yet, but to me it's a no brainer, so I hope it catches on.

  17. Re:Petition TSA on "Priority" Airport Screening Li by hde226868 · · Score: 2

    The problem with the petition is that the lines are run by the different airport authorities and not by TSA. So the petition is addressing the wrong institution.

  18. Re:Prison Terms by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Rapiscan could face fines, prison terms and...

    Yeah let's put a Corporation in prison, that would be a good first.

    Reminds me of the saying, "I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."