Slashdot Mirror


TSA Accepting Public Comments On Whole Body Airport Screening

New submitter trims writes "The TSA is now in the public comment stage of its project to roll out Advanced Imaging Technology (i.e. full-body X-ray) scanners. The TSA wants your feedback as to whether or not this project should be continued or cancelled. Now is your chance to tell the TSA that this is a huge porkbarrel project and nothing more than Security Theater. You can comment at http:///www.regulations.gov and reference the docket ID TSA-2013-0004." Note: the backscatter X-ray machines are being phased out, in favor of millimeter-wave systems; the linked documents give the government's side of the story when it comes to efficacy, safety, privacy, and worth. The comment period runs until June 24.

47 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Yes but... by flyingfsck · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will it detect a pressure cooker?

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:Yes but... by c0lo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Will it detect a pressure cooker?

      If you swallow it, no.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      backscatter, or millimeter?

      "Unnecessary" is the word you're looking for.

    3. Re:Yes but... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ALWAYS opt-out.

      If they ask you why - which has happened to me in a very challenging fashion - say: "Because I want to."

      Plan an extra 20-30 minutes on your arrival. It never takes that long. Have everything empty from your pockets and take off a belt, if any.

      It's not as intrusive as the panicky say. Make sure you are clear that you want the screening in place, not in a private area.

      "And friends, somewhere in Washington, enshrined in some little folder, is a study in black and white of my fingerprints. And the only reason I'm singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a situation like that there's only one thing you can do and that's walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in say 'Shrink, You can get anything you want, at Alice's restaurant.' And walk out. You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin' a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may thinks it's a movement.

      And that's what it is, the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacree Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the guitar."

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:Yes but... by SniperJoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I take a bit of the opposite tact, as I prefer to be treated like a criminal in private rather than in full display of the public. That and it forces them to use additional resources, as now two people have to be monitoring the pat-down.

      Frankly, my largest problem (aside from the constitutionality of said pat-down) is the fact that the TSA agents seem to ask a lot of questions that they haven't thought about and don't really seem to want honest answers to. For instance, after opting out, I was once asked if I was I understood what would happen to me and if I was "comfortable with this process". When I answered "No, I think it's a waste of time and a violation of my Constitutional rights," that started a bit of a scene.

      Another favorite is when they ask if I have any medical devices or implants on my body and I answer "Yes" and then they stand there looking at me in silence. Oh, you want me to describe them, well in that case, you shouldn't asked it as a yes/no question then!

      Then we get to "Do you have any areas on your body that are sensitive to the touch?" "Yeah, mate, my whole body."

      I realize I'm being difficult and something of a jerk, but I have no reason why I have to make it EASY to take my rights away. Sigh, now I'm probably on some list.

    5. Re:Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Someone should tell the Republicans that a millimeter is something French. That will thwart the TSA!

    6. Re:Yes but... by iamgnat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I take a bit of the opposite tact, as I prefer to be treated like a criminal in private rather than in full display of the public. That and it forces them to use additional resources, as now two people have to be monitoring the pat-down.

      There are two reasons I choose to do it in public. The first is that in private it's your word against a bunch of TSA screeners. There are no other possible witnesses and I don't trust them not to side with each other given that you've already irritated them by singling yourself out. I'm not saying they are going to be out to do anything wrong, but if there is an issue then you are on the wrong side.

      The second is that it is shocking how many people still don't understand they have an option (or have believed the FUD that it is some horribly demeaning and invasive process). By staying in the public space you help educate those that don't know.

    7. Re:Yes but... by mellon · · Score: 2

      The only time I've ever had a TSA person give me a hard time about opting out was in the International terminal in San Francisco, and the hard time he gave me was "oh come on, it's perfectly safe"—once he got that I wasn't going to give in, he stopped hassling me. Just be polite, act like you're sympathetic rather than annoyed, and it's very unlikely that you will have a bad time of it.

      I don't think that it actually makes us any safer to have these searches, but that's an argument to have at a policy level, not with the folks at the TSA checkpoint.

    8. Re:Yes but... by Scorch_Mechanic · · Score: 2

      The second is that it is shocking how many people still don't understand they have an option (or have believed the FUD that it is some horribly demeaning and invasive process). By staying in the public space you help educate those that don't know.

      You don't get it, do you? It is a horribly demeaning and invasive process. I've had the patdown before (only once so far, I've been able to avoid it and the scanners since). Even though the agent who did the patdown was extremely courteous and detailed exactly what each step was before he did it, I still felt invaded and demeaned. I have nothing against the man, he was very professional about it. I felt weird and violated for the rest of the day. As Sonic says, "That's no good!"

      If you're gonna opt for the patdown, wear shorts if you can. They don't have to pat down your legs if they're bare.

      --
      You should turn signatures off.
    9. Re:Yes but... by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2

      Someone should tell the Republicans that a millimeter is something French. That will thwart the TSA!

      In case you haven't noticed, the Democrats are currently in power. If you have complaints, you should take them to the governing party, no?

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    10. Re:Yes but... by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2

      Well, that's certainly their right. Nobody's forcing TSA screeners to be TSA screeners.

      Personally, if my job involved touching other men's scrota all day long, I'd find another line of work, ASAP.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    11. Re:Yes but... by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      In case you haven't noticed, the Democrats are currently in power. If you have complaints, you should take them to the governing party, no?

      If that's the case, then how come everything is stalled in Congress, the sequester is now in it's second month, and Obama's attempts to regulate guns have all failed? Having the majority in this country in only the executive branch and one of the houses of Congress doesn't make them "in power".

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    12. Re:Yes but... by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 2

      The sequester was President Obama's idea, and he had no trouble ramming an extremely unpopular Affordable Care Act through Congress. If he cared about gun control he'd ram that through, too.

      Gun control is a bit of a special case, however, because what the President really wants would require a Constitutional amendment.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  2. Ah, now the delays make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Years of delays, violating a court other many wondered what the heck was up with the TSA delaying this public comment.

    Now it's clear: They were waiting for a terrorist attack.

    1. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by jhoegl · · Score: 5, Informative

      Homegrown Terrorist attack.
      But I will still not give up my liberty for my security. I will die for my Freedom and rights, including being a victim of an attack.
      Unfortunately, I am not the only one in this country... so I must yield to societies decision.

    2. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Letting your children grow up with their liberties pre-sacrificed for the appearance of security is just downright irresponsible. If you think terrorism is a major threat to them please take statistics classes or start crusades against the long list of more dangerous things first.

    3. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Years of delays, violating a court other many wondered what the heck was up with the TSA delaying this public comment.

      Now it's clear: They were waiting for a terrorist attack.

      Give them some credit.
      They may also be looking for reasons to phase out millimeter-wave systems for super-duper-wave systems. These machines cost $250K/pop and don't do shit to detect anything. The contractors who made the first batch and then the replacement batch must be salivating already.

      Where do I sign up to deliver machines without any quality control? I can do it much cheaper.

    4. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But I will still not give up my liberty for my security. I will die for my Freedom and rights, including being a victim of an attack.

      So, you don't have a wife and children who depend on you?

      Does that mean people that went to fight Hitler didn't have children and wives? They did. They went to fight the Nazis to preserve security in the US and the western world for their kids and wives.

      Just like the GP, he's ready to die to liberty maybe so his/her children can enjoy some of it too. It is not just whether you survive, but whether the bits of the laws that survive you are worth it.

      PS. If you are so worried about getting blown up, perhaps you should be worried about getting killed by some moron texting on their phone while driving, or drunk/drugged driver, or some moron speeding and T-boning your car. Or if you have a gun, perhaps you should be worried that you will die because of that gun (98%+ of all domestic deaths are caused by a gun in the house, not by external gun).

      But perhaps you think you are special and statistics do not apply to you. That's what most people think too.

    5. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Now it's clear: They were waiting for a terrorist attack.

      And yet I couldn't find a single comment in support, even right after a terrorist attack, on the webpage, until about 10 pages in. And you know what? It'd still be a bad idea even if there was a boston bomber situation every month from now until doomsday. But you know what they say about our most inept public agency... "You can't cure stupid."

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    6. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by elashish14 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having a family is not an excuse for being a coward. If anything, it's a reason not to be a coward, so you can set an example for others and the future.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    7. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Would you like your kids to grow up in a world without freedom?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      FYI, the public comment period began nearly a month ago (26 March)

    9. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      + + + + + wisdom

      Telling your children that they should be brave, while acting like a wimpy douche is nothing short of hypocricy.

      --
      "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
    10. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can deliver witching sticks for less than ten dollars each. THEN, I can train agents to use those sticks for less than a hundred dollars each!

      Or, if you prefer, I can supply magic wands, with or without pixie dust, for less than fifty dollars each. I don't offer training for magic wands though - it will be the government's responsibility to locate and/or train qualified wizards.

      --
      "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
    11. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where do I sign up to deliver machines without any quality control? I can do it much cheaper.

      US Department of Homeland Security
      ATTN: Office of Security Technology System Planning and Evaluation Group
      Transportation Security Administration
      601 South 12th Street
      Arlington, VA 22202-4220

      Make sure you ask for their blanket immunity from prosecution plan, which also has options to avoid house oversight committees and contractual exemptions that all other federal agencies must comply with, like, for example, a requirement to choose the lowest-cost contract that meets requirements.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    12. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by mianne · · Score: 2

      Not necessarily. However the standard security apparatus from the 1970's, known as the "Walk-Through Metal Detector", would have easily detected these devices.

      --
      Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
    13. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by narcc · · Score: 4, Funny

      98%+ of all domestic deaths are caused by a gun in the house

      Citation Needed

    14. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by khallow · · Score: 3, Interesting

      98%+ of all domestic deaths are caused by a gun in the house, not by external gun

      To give some context for how dumb this remark is, in 2000 in the US, accidental firearms discharge killed 776 people. Falls killed over 13k people. Drowning in a bathtub killed 341.

      It's also worth noting that the presence of so many guns in homes discourages the kind of activities that would result in external gun deaths. After all, the usual goal for breaking into homes isn't to get shot. I guess an analogy would be accidental deaths in the military. It's not a good thing for your military to be suffering more deaths from enemy action than from accidents and friendly fire because it means you're in a serious fight.

    15. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by GrumpySteen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or if you have a gun, perhaps you should be worried that you will die because of that gun (98%+ of all domestic deaths are caused by a gun in the house, not by external gun).

      I'm in favor of gun control laws, but Jesus Christ that's a stupid claim to make.

      Here are the real statistics for cause of death and suicide is the most common cause of firearm related death., but suicide is only the tenth most common cause of death and makes up only 2% of the most common deaths and firearm related sucides are only about half of that, so that would put them around 1%

      Perhaps you meant that 98% of firearm related deaths are due to the homeowner's firearm? Once again, no. Out of the 11,078 homicides in 2010, you're claiming that 10,855 were committed with the homeowner's gun and only 223 involved a gun owned by someone else.

      That is an insane claim to make and there is absolutely no evidence to back it up.

    16. Re:Ah, now the delays make sense by gutnor · · Score: 2

      You are a lousy business man, you are destroying the market for the good, honest to God, snake oil vendors.

  3. Timing? by mosb1000 · · Score: 2

    Isn't it a little late for a public comment period?

    1. Re:Timing? by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Isn't it a little late for a public comment period?

      Welcome to America. We shoot first then ask question later.
      If you're far enough north we'll do it half in French, then apologize.

  4. A+++++ Loss of rights! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Body scan was of the most high-standard quality! Great holding pen. Quality of the internment was superior. TSA is exceptional.

  5. What are comments going to do? by White+Flame · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are the TSA just going to say "We have listened to your comments, and are continuing to pursue security theater^W practices as they best "serve" our country", or is there some sort of accountability set up for what the comments are saying?

    It's nice to see that even right after the Boston bombing, the comments appear to still be 100% against AIT scanners.

  6. More Security Theatre by litehacksaur111 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am afraid that Michael Chertoff only made hundreds of millions with the old backscatter machines and needed even more government money, so his company decided to come out with some new units which the TSA will spend over a billion dollars to acquire. The military industrial complex will bankrupt us as Eisenhower predicted.

  7. Prediction... by flimflammer · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wow, I jokingly made comments a long while back that it wouldn't surprise me if the TSA opened up these comments the moment a bomb went off somewhere, considering how long they've just been sitting on it.

    But now that it's happened, I am surprised. If there really is a connection to the timing, that's downright shameful. However that's not entirely anything new for the TSA.

  8. Re:like it or not... by Arker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "That all said, I find it mildly absurd that any security we don't like we just classify as security theater.. How on earth can we on one hand argue that Bush et al had ample warning and did nothing and then on the other bitch when they do something? "

    Here's the thing. They had all the information they needed to stop it - the problem was not too little information, it was too much. They had far more information than they had the capacity to analyze.

    So the response? Not to upgrade ability to analyze the information already collectable, no. Instead, let's collect a few thousand times MORE information. Let's throw a dragnet over anyone and everyone and store every email on the net forever, in case we need to search back through it later.

    This is security theatre. We all get used to being less free, to being herded around more like cattle, on the assurance it will make us more safe. It will not. The same agencies that HAD the information to stop the crime, but not the analytical facilities to recognise the fact in time, now have EVEN MORE info to sift through. The vast majority of it completely irrelevant to stopping terrorists - but a wonderful treasure trove for anyone looking for something to use against their political enemies.

    In the meantime the terrorists are even less likely to be detected, since we are throwing roughly the same analytic capabilities at a ridiculously expanded data set.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  9. Israel airport security by cervo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In any case I found this fascinating article http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2012/06/19/what-israeli-airport-security-teaches-the-world/ that Israel does not have x-ray machines, or taking off your shoes to go in the airport. They have behavioral based interviews. And in the end everyone wants to blow up Israel, and yet I cannot remember hearing of planes crashing into buildings, or even being hijacked. It's really quite amazing. I would cut the security theatre and go do what Israel is doing.... Which seems to be behavioral based interviews and paying attention to how people act.

    Also they do a ton of screening on cars. In some US airports, the parking lot is right near the terminal. Drive in a car full of explosive material and you could do a lot of damage. Or even pull right up to the terminal unchecked for dropping bags. In some terminals you could even crash the car right through the glass doors and then go do something..... That's not security.

    1. Re:Israel airport security by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      The "behavioral based interviews" are thinly veiled racial profiling. Illegal in America, so we can't use that method.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Israel airport security by Rich0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is definitely an issue. Israel only has two international airports, and spends quite a bit of money on security in general, with every citizen serving in the military.

      That makes the entire society far more security conscious, and military training means that people know how to follow procedures and generally stay alert. The fact that everybody serves in the military also means that the guards are diverse and not just those who couldn't find a job or get a scholarship.

      The result is that a security program that works in Israel will not necessarily work in the US, and certainly not with bottom-dollar security guards.

      Also, Israel has a lot of defense in depth. Maybe the airport security isn't as tight, but they have far more border security at drive-in points, and even checkpoints at places like malls. All of this makes it a lot harder to get weapons to the airport in the first place. There is also a much higher state of vigilance - when bombs have been planted on buses in the past they've generally been noticed resulting in immediate evacuation before they go off.

      Oh, and the last I heard El Al depressurizes every bag before putting it on a plane to set off altimeter-triggered bombs. So, some of the security is behind the scenes.

    3. Re:Israel airport security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're completely forgetting the fact that in Israel's eyes, the airport is the LAST and LEAST EFFECTIVE point to stop an attack at. That's why security is so layered there. And no, the TSA might implement a minor subset of Israel's tactics, but they do NOT employ the same tactics as Israel (notwithstanding those that cannot simply be implemented outside of Israel or Israeli-controlled areas).

      El Al, to the last of my knowledge (and very close friends of mine were actual security personnel for El Al), packs bags into a secondary container that is installed into the cargo bay. This provides extra protection in case of a bomb in a bag scenario at the expense of some cargo hold room.

      Remember about 10 years ago or so when that guy at LAX started shooting up the El Al counter? Despite the fact that at every airport in this country the local police and other law enforcement agencies have demanded that El Al security be unarmed, it was an El Al security officer who shot that limo driver dead even before the LAPD could drop their donuts... And at natba"g (Ben Gurion Airport, code TLV), there are people who are constantly walking the area scanning and scoping (including trash cans). Leave a bag unattended in Israel, and the whole area will be cordoned off faster than you can say "felafel, Humus, chips".

      Every car is stopped before it even enters the airport territory, and the whole security process didn't just start there (if you were the one flying at least).

      I could keep going, and even mention that Richard Reid attempted to blow his shoes up on an El Al flight and was unable to. But hey, you did your masters thesis on this subject, so you know more than I would - one who has lived for extended periods of time in both the USA and Israel...

    4. Re:Israel airport security by sootman · · Score: 2

      And every time someone posts that, someone else has to post a reply saying that just does not scale. I guess it's my turn. Even Bruce Schneier says so. Bruce, quoting someone else with whom he agrees: "...no matter how safe or how wonderful the flying experience on El Al, it is TINY airline by U.S. standards, with only 38 aircraft, 46 destinations, and fewer than two million passengers in 2008. As near as I can tell, Cairo is their only destination in a majority Muslim country. Delta, before the Northwest merger is included, reported 449 aircraft and 375 destinations."

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  10. 4th amendment by White+Flame · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The law disallows certain behaviors, regardless of technology empowering them. These scanners are unreasonable search of my person and effects. Traveling is not suspicious behavior.

  11. Meet you on the No Fly list! by bradorsomething · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My Comment to Them:

    "I travel about twice a month and have been a regular traveler most of my life, and because of this, the deployment of this technology has had a major impact on my life.

    This technology is not wanted by air travelers, and was put in place with less testing than the shampoo I am no longer allowed to carry through security. Experts have found that shadowing can cause items to slip through this screening, and these devices cannot detect anything inside the body. They have also created long, bunched up lines of people at airports, outside of the "secure" cordon, which would allow a terrorist to kill many more people than would be on a single airplane... and these deaths could ironically be attributed directly to the delays caused by these devices, which regularly slow the lines and require pat-downs when they don't read properly (my experience when waiting).

    Security at airports has become a reactive reflex which always fights the last threat. I am confident I am not the only tax payer who feels their money was completely wasted on these devices, whose only value, I feel, was to make some contractor rich, and get some person re-elected by convincing the under-informed that they were "safe."

  12. Re:like it or not... by Skreems · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This particular upgraded equipment is security theater because numerous experiments have shown that it's easy to smuggle very nasty things past it without detection, and with fairly little effort. Knives, molded plastic explosives (simulated, if I recall correctly), handguns, etc. have all been successfully concealed from this technology. There are plenty of articles on-line detailing how it was done.

    The purpose of these machines is to prevent those with malicious intent from getting dangerous materials onto a plane which they could use to hijack it and repeat the 9/11 approach. But since these machines have been shown to be remarkably bad at actually achieving this goal, going forward with the ludicrously expensive purchase and the continued privacy-invading operation of said machines is clearly not ACTUALLY making air travel more secure. However, it looks shiny, and to the average person who doesn't work with security and isn't used to thinking in "black hat" mode it can seem effective. Which is basically the definition of security theater.

    --
    Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
    The Urban Hippie
  13. Filibuster it by spectrokid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everybody here should enter the same comment: "I would like an independent body to calculate the cost vs. saved lives and compare it to other possible investments like traffic safety, cancer research, or promoting healthier lifestyles to school children."

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  14. Back scatter X-ray is NOT being phased out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Only the machines from Rapiscan are being phased out. It's not because of safety, rather it's because Rapiscan can't deliver software to remove human-in-the-loop (eg removing the need for a human to look at you naked).

    They've awarded additional contracts to both Smiths (makers of the garbage "puffer" machines) and AESi (in addition to the current millimeter wave machines from Level3). I believe that AESi's devices are back scatter x-ray.