
Naked-Image Scanners to Be Removed From U.S. Airports - ssclafani
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-18/naked-image-scanners-to-be-removed-from-u-s-airports.html
======
oinksoft
As long as they've got guys randomly swabbing old folks' palms to test for
bomb-making materials, and all of the other ridiculous trespasses on personal
dignity that comprise their much maligned "security theatre," I won't be
flying. Amtrak may have a few threatening "see it, say it" signs at the
station, but at least they treat me like a customer and not a maniac.

~~~
wting
Some of us who travel between continents don't have that luxury.

TSA already monitors Amtrack:

[http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/06/opinion/don-phillips-tsa-
vipr-...](http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/06/opinion/don-phillips-tsa-vipr-
teams/index.html)

Due to the broad description of the organization's purpose, it gives them
overreaching powers allowing them to secure any mode of transportation. This
has led to the TSA expanding its presence and showing up at NFL games:

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-elliott/the-tsa-
wa...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-elliott/the-tsa-wants-to-be-
every_b_2393332.html)

Edit: For those commenting about NFL game presence without reading the linked
article...

    
    
      > Few people know that $105 million of their taxpayer dollars are going to fund
      > 37 VIPR teams in 2012, whose purpose is to "augment" the security of any mode
      > of transportation. They don't realize that these VIPR teams can show up
      > virtually anytime, anywhere and without warning, subjecting you to a search
      > of your vehicle or person.

~~~
danilocampos
I love it. I encourage their presence at NFL games. I hope they give football
fans a full body cavity search. Let Joe Sixpack endure their absurdity and
maybe we'll actually see progress toward ending the TSA.

~~~
detst
I've been more violated entering NFL games than going through airport
security, on average.

The problem is that the American people want to do _anything_ about
terrorists, crime or "for the children" at the expense of our civil liberties.
It's entirely irrational. TSA at NFL games will not even remotely begin to
change that.

There was a bit of an uproar about the increased security measures at NFL
stadiums some years ago but it died down and things went on as usual.

~~~
flyinRyan
I haven't been in the US for just over a decade. What is keeping Americans so
concerned about terrorists all this time later?

~~~
coldpie
Fox News, largely. You know how you see all sorts of ridiculous inaccuracies
and jokes at Fox News's expense on the Internet? That's the most-watched news
source in the United States.

~~~
noarchy
It can't be blamed on Fox News any longer. They're still cheerleaders for the
"War on Terror", but these wars now belong to the current president. Do you
see other news outlets questioning the current president's military
occupations, drone attacks, etc?

------
Steuard
Or rather, after reading the article, _some_ naked-image scanners to be
removed, and then promptly replaced with others from a different company. No
big news here, as far as I can tell.

~~~
jws
The replacement scanners are not backscatter radiation units and they display
an icon of a person with a little dot that lights up to highlight where the
little icon man has an anomaly.

~~~
JshWright
And for all I know, a highly accurate 3D representation of my body is being
stored in a database for future identification.

I realize that's bordering on tin-foil hat land, but it's why I opt out every
time, and will continue to do so...

~~~
Torgo
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html>

They told us they wouldn't store the images on the previous scanners, but it
turns out they were.

~~~
pyre
The generic government response to criticism of these scanners has been that
they aren't stored, but (as far as I know) the only agency that has out-and-
out said they aren't storing them is the TSA. In this case (the article), the
U.S. Marshals Service was storing the images at a courthouse security
checkpoint.

1\. Did the U.S. Marshals Service claim that they weren't storing the images
prior to this discovery?

2\. Do you know of any examples of the TSA storing the images (in opposition
to what they have claimed they do)?

~~~
Strshps1MoreTim
Why exactly do you feel you have to make lame excuses for the government? We
live in the information age and information now is the ultimate power. The
high level politicians and bureaucrats are clearly maniacs when it comes to
power. IMHO there is no doubt that all information that can potentially be
used in a power struggle, such as Rapiscan scans, is not destroyed, but stored
by some government agency. Those scans can be used to reliably identify tents
of millions of people.

~~~
pyre
I'm not making lame excuses for the government. At no point did I say that it
was ok for them to store the images. My point was that this statement:

    
    
      They told us they wouldn't store the images on the
      previous scanners, but it turns out they were.
    

was disingenuous. Saying that 'they lied about storing the images' has no
basis in truth here (at least without presenting other evidence that I'm
unaware of).

I don't know about you, but I don't think that there's any reason to make
misleading statements in order to present the case that these images shouldn't
be stored.

~~~
Strshps1MoreTim
Right, CIA and NSA never said they are not going to store the images, so it's
perfectly fine with you ...

~~~
pyre
The point is that making misleading comments (or outright lying) is only going
to hurt your cause. People will ignore the message (no matter how right it may
be) and attack your methods.

------
js2
Article doesn't say it, but the Rapiscan scanners are x-ray backscatter based,
about which there are significant health concerns. The L-3 (ProVision)
scanners are millimeter wave based.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner>

I wonder if the privacy issue is a cover story.

~~~
blahedo
Actually, the article does say it---just above the heading for "Privacy
concerns".

It also says, near the end, that of the new contracts, two are with companies
that use millimeter-wave, and one is with a company that uses backscatter.

So the privacy thing probably isn't just a cover story, or at least not for
the X-ray issue.

~~~
cpeterso
It's sad (but unsurprising) that the machines are being removed for reasons
other than safety or effectiveness.

~~~
zaroth
I'm not sure if you're trolling? The machines are being removed precisely due
to concerns over safety and effectiveness.

Efficiency is the number one reason they are being removed, as stated by the
TSA. The backscatter machines produce an R-rated image of the person being
scanned. This requires secondary personnel to view the image in a separate
area and then communicate back to the primary personnel at the checkpoint. TSA
asked Rapidscan to write software which could render a non-R-rated image which
could be displayed and interpreted at the checkpoint, but Rapidscan could not
or would not.

If you have studied HCI, the simplicity and efficiency of the interface is
highly correlated with the ability of the user to complete a designated task.
Making the checkpoint more efficient increases TSA personnel's ability to
accomplish their objectives.

The UI of the ProVision is specifically designed for 'non-experts' -- it shows
a simple stick figure and a bright colored box for any area of the body that
triggers an alert. What could be easier to interpret? You can even look at
your own results as you walk through.

Whether or not you're a fan of TSA, whether you believe the increased
efficiency is simply a face-saving excuse to get the "naked body scanners" out
of there, the TSA's rightfully concluded the ProVision (RF, non-ionizing)
scanners are a superior product, and everyone should be happier to get to walk
through them rather than the X-ray based machines.

Personally I'd be happier not having to queue and walk through any fixed
scanner... and they are working on airport designs which will make that a
reality.

------
wvenable
The machines served their purpose: they were purchased. Doesn't matter if they
get used. It's now time to move onto the next security item that can be
purchased for millions of dollars.

~~~
dsl
From the third paragraph:

"It will now get rid of the remaining 174 Rapiscan machines, _with the company
absorbing the cost_ "

~~~
rasengan0
uh, did I read that right?

CEO Deepak Chopra?!

The quantum potential of infinite possibilities...

"OSI Systems is “pleased to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement with the
TSA” that will involve moving the machines to other government agencies, Chief
Executive Officer Deepak Chopra said in a statement. "

~~~
Twisol
Quoting greenyoda from below:

> Note that Deepak Chopra, the CEO of OSI Systems (the scanner manufacturer in
> the article), is not the same person as Deepak Chopra, the alternative
> medicine doctor.

> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra_(disambiguation)>

~~~
rvkennedy
And yet, they're both selling dubious solutions to problems they've invented.
What are the odds?

------
ck2
Super incomplete headline by bloomberg.

ONE kind of naked scanner is being replaced with ANOTHER.

And then the existing naked scanner is being kept in service just at different
locations like courthouses.

Absolutely nothing has changed, extraordinary amounts of taxpayer money still
changing hands.

------
greenyoda
Note that Deepak Chopra, the CEO of OSI Systems (the scanner manufacturer in
the article), is not the same person as Deepak Chopra, the alternative
medicine doctor.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra_(disambiguation)>

~~~
phpnode
please don't help perpetuate the phrase "alternative medicine", if it was
effective, it would just be called "medicine". A better description would be
"Deepak Chopra, the charlatan"

~~~
Strshps1MoreTim
I have no idea who this guy is, but often "alternative medicine" is very
effective. In poorer countries it's often performed by smart professionals,
who are using experience accumulated over centuries or even millennia - what
plants help what conditions, etc.

~~~
mattstreet
Professions who help people just by listening. It has been shown that most of
the positive benefit people experience from many of these therapies is just
the fact of having someone that cares (or at least appears to) listen to your
problems for an hour and provide support.

~~~
mkr-hn
Palliative care is a part of mainstream medicine:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palliative_care>

Another example of real alternative medicine becoming mainstream.

------
logn
What I don't get is the 1973 court decision allowing these searches: "In 1973
the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key
pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way
they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes “noting that airport
screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are
conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential
administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives
aboard aircraft [...] [an administrative search is allowed if] no more
intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to
detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and
passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.” " (source:
[http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-...](http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-
the-tsa-legally-circumvents-the-fourth-amendment/))

So our forefathers obviously intended "reasonable searches" to include strip-
searching the entire population of travelers to ensure they are not bearing
arms. Riiight. According to Wikipedia (
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Colonial_America)
), in colonial America the government regularly searched houses and seized
property without warrants (general searches) to enforce taxes. There was a
legal battle over this, AND \--->>> John Adams viewed it as the spark in which
originated the American Revolution.

Seriously, how in the world can we be so ignorant as to ignore our history and
try to enforce constitutional amendments without sensible historical context.

~~~
jstalin
Lawyer here. The administrative search exception to the fourth amendment means
that an administrative agency can search to enforce an administrative
regulation without a warrant. The most common example of this that everyone
would understand is a county health department inspecting a restaurant
licensed to sell food to the public.

In other words, because a restaurant has submitted to the licensing scheme of
a county, it impliedly gives the county the right to search it without a
warrant. Consider how a county health department could do its inspections if
it had to get a warrant to do so each time it needed to.

So, in essence, in the case above, the Supreme Court is saying that since
you're submitting to the government's regulations by choosing to fly, they
don't need a warrant to search you.

------
epoxyhockey
This is recycled content from last October. Past discussion:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4674309>

I will mention that IAD airport in TSA's backyard still have a complete array
of Rapiscan scanners, with no sign of being replaced. Each scanner is slightly
rotated away from the next. One might postulate that the xray leakage off to
the sides of the scanners would have a compounding effect on TSA workers if
the scanners were arranged perfectly in line.

------
welder
Many times I've flown with knives in my carry-on without realizing it until
after the flight. Why go through all this security when it doesn't even work?
Makes me suspicious it's all for show and to fill some company's pockets.

~~~
betterunix
You could walk through the security check without an knives, and sneak a bit
of glass out of an airport bar on the other side. Why bother with knives, when
you can make a prison shiv using things you can buy just before boarding a
plane?

The real answers to hijacking are (1) locking the cabin door from the inside
and (2) passengers understanding that they are not just going to be flown to
Cuba. The security checkpoints are almost entirely useless.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Why would I bother sneaking a bit of airport glass when I can just go to a
Applechili's, order a steak, and keep the silverware?

~~~
betterunix
I suppose it depends on your airport; my local one is a tiny regional airport
with a bar but not many opportunities to score some silverware. In the end, if
your evil plot requires silverware, I suppose you would just go to a larger
airport; the nearest international airport is only 2 hours away from here.

------
jayferd
Am I the only one who reads "Rapiscan" as "Rapey-scan"...?

~~~
ratherbefuddled
No, that did seem rather a poor choice of names to me too.

------
jstalin
Simple solution: Opt out of the naked scanners, every time. I've gotten used
to the pat downs and they don't bother me at all. I just give myself an extra
10-15 minutes lead time when arriving at the airport.

~~~
stanleydrew
I do this every time, but it always ends up feeling futile. I'm just waiting
for the day when "opting-out" is no longer permitted.

------
brandonsavage
They're still not removing the body scanners entirely though, just the ones
that can't display a generic outline. The privacy violations and radiation
exposure will continue.

~~~
jws
_…radiation exposure will continue…_

The L-3 Communications scanners are millimeter wave. They do not share the
possible dangers of the backscatter machines.

~~~
hkmurakami
I don't doubt that health harms are minimal if any, but every time I go
through these I get a very weird sensation in my torso which I'm just not fond
of, so I've started opting out since December.

I personally don't mind the patdown at all, and the TSA personnel have all
been professional each time I've requested to opt out. I do wonder what would
happen if a significant minority started opting out, since that would most
likely clog the system pretty badly.

~~~
cheald
I've opted out every time I've ever ended up in a scanner line, but the
millimeter wave stuff is absolutely significantly more safe than the
backscatter, specifically because it doesn't use ionizing radiation.

Of course, it's also easily defeated[1][2] by anyone that knows what they're
doing, so it's not like it's keeping us particularly safe.

[1] [http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/03/06/1b-of-
nude-...](http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/03/06/1b-of-nude-body-
scanners-made-worthless-by-blog-how-anyone-can-get-anything-past-the-tsas-
nude-body-scanners/)

[2] [http://americablog.com/2010/01/german-tv-highlights-
failings...](http://americablog.com/2010/01/german-tv-highlights-failings-of-
body-scanners.html)

~~~
tsaoutourpants
That TSA Out of our Pants guy seems pretty smart!

------
Rickasaurus
Naked doesn't bother me, it's the radiation from x-ray based scanners.

~~~
nostrademons
I thought I'd heard that the radiation dose was on the order of what you'd get
from 2 minutes of your airline flight. [1] I was far more worried about the
nude photos, and always opted out before the backscatter machines were
replaced with millimeter-wave. "Being groped is uncomfortable for 5 minutes;
having nude photos floating around some TSA agent's computer is uncomfortable
for a lifetime."

[1] [http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-
EmittingProducts/RadiationEmitt...](http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-
EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/SecuritySystems/ucm227201.htm#2)

~~~
X-Istence
Until there is independent 3rd-party verification that indeed the radiation
dose is that what I get from flying for 2 minutes, I won't trust the TSA
telling me so, or the company that is making billions of the machines.

Skin cancer, as well as various other cancers run in my family, I don't want
to risk it.

Although, coming back from Europe to the US nothing says "Welcome to flying
back to the US" than a grope from some security guy at Amsterdam airport that
is paid to be there because the US initiated new rules requiring all flights
to the US to have RapiScan machines for full-body imaging, or the grope at the
first arriving airport with my connecting flight back to the city I live in.

------
3amOpsGuy
As a non-american, i'm curious (& supportive). When are you going to get
together and drop your TSA?

Could you band together this year and get rid of it?

~~~
crikli
If only we the people had that kind of power. Unfortunately we've submitted
ourselves to staggering invasions of our rights to safeguard our illusion of
security. The train has left the station and it ain't coming back.

------
JeremyKolb
Dang it! I was hoping that those machines were actually going away.

------
jelled
As someone who used to travel extensively for work, I've been through these
things dozens of times. I consider myself a modest person and wouldn't walk
around a locker room without a towel, but I don't see what the big deal is
with these scanners. Who cares if someone you don't know who doesn't know your
identity can see a blurry outline of your junk? Its like two ships passing in
the night.

Edit: I will admit trying to avoid them. Not for privacy reasons but because
they are sloooow. The line going through the regular x-ray always moves much
faster.

~~~
leoedin
I completely agree. The pictures these things produce aren't recognisable as
more than a vague outline. I think sometimes people forget that they aren't
actually that unique. We're all naked under our clothes. Most people aren't
special enough that anyone cares about seeing a pixelated naked image of them.

The guy in the TSA booth sees thousands of naked people a day. He's not
laughing at you, he's just trying to get through his day. It's similar to how
going to the doctor with something embarrassing seems like a huge deal for
most people, but to the doctor you're just the nth person that week pulling
down their trousers.

~~~
darkarmani
> It's similar to how going to the doctor with something embarrassing seems
> like a huge deal for most people

Except the doctor serves a purpose and the TSA is just a jobs program and
waste of money. Remind me how many of these caught terrorists per million
dollars spent.

~~~
leoedin
Airport screening was introduced in the US in 1973. In the 5 years prior to
this there was 12 major aircraft hijackings originating from the US. In the 5
years after this, there were 2.

Airport screening effectively ended the very rapidly increasing number of
aircraft hijackings which occurred in the early '70s. There were of course
other factors in play, but the sharp drop (1972 saw 6 major hijackings) after
the introduction of airport screening is certainly a good indicator of the
effectiveness of airport screening.

Airport screening isn't completely effective, but it's fairly demonstrable
that having a layer of security when boarding an aircraft does act as a
deterrent to aircraft hijackings. It doesn't completely stop them, but it does
make a difference.

I'm not going to defend the TSA as an organisation, but to say that airport
screening as a whole serves no purpose is not really based in fact. It's
almost certainly possible to bring banned items onto aircraft, and it's fairly
reasonable to assume that if someone is dedicated enough they will find a way
to cause death, but what airport screening does do is act as enough of a
deterrent that aircraft hijacking isn't seen as an easy crime. The rapid drop
in numbers post-screening shows that.

------
ddrmaxgt37
I see that Bloomberg is keeping with their habit of misleading titles and
linkbait.

------
egb
Does anybody have a link to the site that tracks user-submitted reviews of
security lines sorted by airport/terminal/airline and tells you which lines
are forced through which types of scanners?

My google fu has failed me...

~~~
egb
Found it, for those who are interested - <http://tsastatus.net>

------
logorrhea
A step in the right direction, but they are going to replace them with yet
another scanner. I wouldn't mind them not shooting any waves at me at all just
so that I can board a plane.

------
lucian1900
It's called Rapiscan? Really!?

------
jostmey
About time!

------
Vivtek
Great! Money well spent, then!

