Jump to content



Photo

TSA Body Scanner


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Alfeo Dixon SOC

Alfeo Dixon SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 756 posts
  • Atlanta

Posted 15 November 2010 - 05:33 PM

Full-body scanners under attack by consumer group, pilots

As the Transportation Security Administration continues to deploy hundreds
of additional full-body scanners to airports nationwide, the devices are
coming under increasing attack. A consumer group called the Electronic
Privacy Information Center has filed a lawsuit against the government,
challenging its use of the scanners, which can essentially see through the
clothing of air travelers. The suit questions TSA's guarantees that the
machines' images of travelers will never be saved or sent elsewhere, and
will only be seen by an agent who views them at a remote location. In fact,
the suit alleges, the government "has required that these devices have the
ability to store, record and transmit the images that are captured," so they
are equipped with Ethernet connectivity, USB access and hard disk storage
capability. The suit claims that TSA apparently has no way to prevent its
employees who view the images of "naked" travelers from using their own
cameras or cell phones to capture photos of those images. And it notes that
the full-body scanning systems run on Windows XP, which is "prone to
security vulnerabilities" - i.e., can easily be hacked. The suit also
questions whether federal officials have done enough to verify the safety of
the scanners, which rely on backscatter radiation to produce images; and
whether TSA agents fully inform travelers that they have the option of
submitting to a pat-down search instead of going through the scanners. The
group is asking the court to suspend the program.

Meanwhile, the president of the union representing American Airlines pilots
has sent a letter to its 11,000 members suggesting that they refuse to go
through the full-body scanners at airports and require pat-downs instead.
The letter from Capt. David Bates said the TSA's security screening
procedure for pilots "has spun out of control and does nothing to improve
national security." He said the full-body scanners "produce ionizing
radiation, which could be harmful to your health," especially since pilots
already get heavier than normal doses just from flying frequently. Although
the letter urges pilots to opt for pat-downs instead of scans, "There is
absolutely no denying that the enhanced pat-down is a demeaning experience,"
Bates wrote, saying that pilots should request pat-downs conducted out of
public view. "Maintain composure and professionalism at all times and
recognize that you are probably being videotaped," the letter said.

TSA issues rules on toner cartridges, new MacBook

Travelers were advised by the Transportation Security Administration last
week that it will no longer allow passengers to transport toner and ink
cartridges of 16 ounces or more on U.S.-bound flights, in either checked
bags or carry-on luggage. The new security advisory came in the wake of a
failed terrorist attempt to set off bombs aboard international flights. The
bombs, sent via commercial shippers from Yemen, used an explosive powder
hidden in the toner cartridges of printers. Meanwhile, TSA said that
travelers who are carrying Apple's new 11-inch MacBook Air laptops do not
have to remove the computers form their carry-on bags when they go through
airport screening - although they do have to remove the larger 13-inch
versions. Earlier this year, TSA said that electronic devices that are
smaller than standard laptops - things like netbook computers, e-readers,
and tablet computers like the iPad - do not have to be removed from carry-on
luggage during airport screening.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


  • 0

#2 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 15 November 2010 - 06:35 PM

Yeah I usually go with the pat down when I run into those stupid things. Im not a big fan of someone sitting in a dark room looking at naked pictures of me without atleast getting dinner and a movie out of the deal.
  • 0

#3 Janice Arthur

Janice Arthur

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts

Posted 15 November 2010 - 08:33 PM

Hi guys;

I think the checks and balances of who sees the images/keeps them, etc. will be sorted out.

I've heard that the radiation is minimal which is what I worry about not that someone may be seeing a "naked body". Don't flatter yourself, very few of us are in the top 10% there. Maybe you're on the other side and they're grossed out and want to get rid of your image as soon as they can!

Enough lawsuits etc will come out of it that are above my world, good luck with those. As you can tell I don't mind.

JA
  • 0

#4 Alfeo Dixon SOC

Alfeo Dixon SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 756 posts
  • Atlanta

Posted 15 November 2010 - 10:01 PM

Don't flatter yourself, very few of us are in the top 10%


Damn Janice, way to make us boys feel good about ourselves...

I guess I'll order myself a "feel good" vest with a front plate molded with six packs and pecks to cover my sagging gut

you and your 10% Posted Image
  • 0

#5 Janice Arthur

Janice Arthur

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts

Posted 16 November 2010 - 09:04 AM

Don't flatter yourself, very few of us are in the top 10%


Damn Janice, way to make us boys feel good about ourselves...

I guess I'll order myself a "feel good" vest with a front plate molded with six packs and pecks to cover my sagging gut

you and your 10% Posted Image



Alfeo;

The screeners will see those abs and pecks and it'll be the talk of the station.

Joan, "Come over here, my God that guy's a GQ model."

Harriet, "He's got to go first class, I'm calling his gate to get him upgraded."

Joan, "Do you think he'd autograph his picture? I'm keeping this one. Hit print!"

Just a fantasy senario.

JA
  • 0

#6 Henry Gelhart

Henry Gelhart

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 102 posts
  • Florida and Germany

Posted 16 November 2010 - 09:53 AM

Joan, "Come over here, my God that guy's a GQ model."


Just to clarify: Steadicam Operator = GQ Model
  • 0

#7 Sydney Seeber

Sydney Seeber

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 376 posts
  • Hermosa Beach

Posted 16 November 2010 - 11:59 AM

Hi guys;

I think the checks and balances of who sees the images/keeps them, etc. will be sorted out.

leaked body scans
  • 0

#8 Kevin Andrews SOC

Kevin Andrews SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 348 posts
  • Denver CO

Posted 16 November 2010 - 01:43 PM

As long as the radiation is very minimal, even for pregnant women, then I say scan me up baby.

We don't realize in our sheltered lives in the U.S. how dangerous the world is or how many groups want to do us harm. If this is what needs to happen to get to the next level of security, then everyone needs to go along with it. It sure beats the alternative.

I say scan me up, print it out, send it to your mama if you want. But please do your best to find that one guy that could cause the next big tragedy.


Safety over Convenience every time B)
  • 0

#9 Janice Arthur

Janice Arthur

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 811 posts

Posted 16 November 2010 - 02:50 PM

Sydney;

I think there will be leaks, and I think someone lost there job over that, because clearly it was illegal to do so. Any CSI show shows how they trace IP addresses.

I was refering to the legal aspect of logging, keeping, security of the data bases, etc.; that is an issue that will be refined and further defined.

I do think that a Vitruvian man picture in Gray and white of me or anyone else in a completely asexual pose is not much. Our over-sex-themed society is up-in- arms about this intrusion when any magazine you open shows just about that much skin. (They also look better than us naked!) Ask anyone on the street and they laud about the beauty of the human form, now some are apalled at this asexual picture was taken to keep them safe. They act like the human body is something new to us, guess what its not.

In reality 10s of millions of scans have been taken and only a few have leaked; those are good odds.

I'm with Kevin; keep us safe; keep the bad guys at bay. Its a reality in the name of security and technology progression. Think of the scanners in the Arnold movie, Total Recall, those we all thought were just cool. Those, better scanners, are coming but we need to start somewhere. As others have said just because you make the internal combustion engine does not mean you instantly invent the Ferrari. It takes the model T first.

Good debate.

JA
  • 0

#10 Alfeo Dixon SOC

Alfeo Dixon SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 756 posts
  • Atlanta

Posted 16 November 2010 - 05:25 PM

I'm with Kevin; keep us safe; keep the bad guys at bay. Its a reality in the name of security and technology progression.

And if I can get an upgrade or date from them... I'm all in too!!!

Think of the scanners in the Arnold movie, Total Recall, those we all thought were just cool. Those, better scanners, are coming but we need to start somewhere.

Posted Image

Now that scares me... to see the bones is a lot of radiation... but by then, we may have already burned off the ozone and living in a Riddick world


-Alfeo
  • 0

#11 Tom Daigon

Tom Daigon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts
  • Las Vegas

Posted 16 November 2010 - 05:46 PM

Now that scares me... to see the bones is a lot of radiation... but by then, we may have already burned off the ozone and living in a Riddick world


-Alfeo
[/quote]

And by then you will probably look a lot more like Arnold Schwarzenegger...
  • 0

#12 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2922 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 16 November 2010 - 06:17 PM

I'm with Kevin; keep us safe; keep the bad guys at bay. Its a reality in the name of security and technology progression. Think of the scanners in the Arnold movie, Total Recall, those we all thought were just cool. Those, better scanners, are coming but we need to start somewhere. As others have said just because you make the internal combustion engine does not mean you instantly invent the Ferrari. It takes the model T first.



No it doesn't keep us safe, it's called security theater for a reason.

The danger is'nt in what you can carry on board, it's what you can ship....

cargo isn't scanned

Think about that for a while

TSA is a smoke and mirrors dog and pony show that is designed to make you feel safe, but it's far from making flying safer.
  • 0

#13 Sydney Seeber

Sydney Seeber

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 376 posts
  • Hermosa Beach

Posted 16 November 2010 - 07:30 PM

Sydney;
keep us safe; keep the bad guys at bay. Its a reality in the name of security and technology progression. Think of the scanners in the Arnold movie, Total Recall, those we all thought were just cool. Those, better scanners, are coming but we need to start somewhere. As others have said just because you make the internal combustion engine does not mean you instantly invent the Ferrari. It takes the model T first.

Good debate.

JA

My issue is twofold. One, they don't keep us any safer than the methods already in place a couple of years ago. It's highly likely the scanners can't see any number of low budget techniques designed to kill people in closed spaces. It's only a matter of time before the boobie bombers make their way over here or somewhere politically useful to them, lord knows AQ has been threatening westerners for over a year with that one. You simply cannot guard against every threat. If a few douchers out there want to kill people badly enough, chances are extremely likely some of them will find a way on a plane no matter what safety measures anyone (lobbyists) put in place. There's a limit to what safeguards we need, which brings me to point two...

These scanners and safety checks are simply over the top and an invasion of privacy. It's not a body image thing for me personally... 20 years' worth of parading my ass in front of a crowd while playing organized sports will eliminate that kinda thing. It's simply what's decent and necessary. While I do not believe as some have said recently in the media that the TSA is full of a bunch of pedos, I do believe the scanners will undoubtedly influence who passes through from time to time. Here comes the Hooter's Airline staff, (Are they still in business?) how about I hook up my broheim back in the booth stuck staring at a tiny screen all day. That sort of thing. I believe this new step has crossed a line and many of the recent complaints are valid.
  • 0

#14 William Demeritt

William Demeritt

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1057 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 16 November 2010 - 11:46 PM

REALLY interesting article on the whole topic.

http://www.thestar.c...y-little-bother
  • 0

#15 Sydney Seeber

Sydney Seeber

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 376 posts
  • Hermosa Beach

Posted 17 November 2010 - 12:35 AM

Yeah, but they'll shoot yer laptop
  • 0




Boland Communications

PLC Electronics Solutions

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Varizoom Follow Focus

rebotnix Technologies

Engineered Cinema Solutions

Ritter Battery

SkyDreams

BOXX

PLC - Bartech

Betz Tools for Stabilizers

Wireless Video Systems

IDX

Teradek

GPI Pro Systems

Omnishot Systems