Privacy advocates are faulting the invasive nature of the U.S. government’s plans to use full body scanning technology to screen airport passengers. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) intends to deploy 150 scanners to U.S. airports with funding through the Obama administration’s $787 billion federal economic stimulus package.
The purpose of the machines, which show grainy images of the human anatomy, is to detect nonmetallic weapons and potential explosives concealed under a passenger’s clothing. But some skeptics maintain the X-rays that the advanced imaging technology uses may not necessarily find items hidden in body cavities.
Separating Airport Personnel From Passenger Scanning
The personnel who examine the scans are in a separate room away from the passengers being scanned. Neither can see the other.
“Officers evaluating images are not permitted to take cameras, cell phones, or photo-enabled devices into the resolution room,” the Government Accountability Office noted in a January 27, 2010 report, “Better Use of Terrorist Watchlist Information and Improvements in Deployment of Passenger Screening Checkpoint Technologies Could Further Strengthen Security.” “To further protect passengers’ privacy, ways have been introduced to blur the passengers’ images. The millimeter wave technology blurs all facial features, and the backscatter X-ray technology has an algorithm applied to the entire image to protect privacy.”
“Even if the privacy concerns are addressed, the scanners face skepticism from airport officials with limited space to install them and airline companies that want the focus to be on disrupting plots before people arrive at checkpoints,” Jeff Bliss wrote in “Staffing Will Add $2.4 Bln to Scanner Cost, GAO Says,” March 17, 2010 on Bloomberg.com.
Machines Defended as Necessary to Thwart Potential Attacks
Former U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff favors use of the scanners as a means to thwart the smuggling of explosives aboard airplanes.
“The administration has cited the Christmas Day bombing attempt, with which alleged al-Qaeda terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is charged, in pushing to double its planned deployment of scanners at U.S. airports by 2014, when it hopes to have 1,800 of the machines in place,” Spencer S. Hsu wrote in “GAO says airport body scanners may not have thwarted Christmas Day bombing” in the Washington Post of March 18, 2010. “It also has cited the case to encourage foreign governments to use the same new technologies at airports that send flights to the United States.”
Scanners have been deployed at Chicago O'Hare International Airport and Boston’s Logan International Airport, among other U.S. facilities.
Some privacy groups have challenged claims on disclosure from the TSA. The Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained copies of traveler complaints filed with the TSA under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) about use of the scanners. EPIC along with consumer advocate Ralph Nader asked President Obama to suspend implementation of the scanners until a full effectiveness and safety review can be completed.
Commenting in the March 2010 Costco Connection in “Should air travelers be required to undergo whole-body security scanning,” EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg accused the TSA of being deceptive about the equipment. “They said that they do not store, record or transmit images. But ... we found these devices were equipped with hard disk drives, USB ports and Ethernet connectivity. They also have a ‘super user’ control to disable filters and to export raw images.”
Passengers File Objections to Scanners
In the March 8, 2010 Computerworld in “Travelers file complaints over TSA body scanners,” Jaikumar Vijayan wrote: “The 51 pages of documents show that travelers were often not fully informed about the scans or what the process involved. Some complained about a lack of instructions or signage regarding the scanning machines, while others said they were not informed about the pat-down alternative available to those who don’t want to be scanned.”
“Using technology for every threat may cost more and reduce risk less than measures such as increasing visa reviews in "high-risk" countries, said David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security at Duke University and the University of North Carolina,” Angela Greiling Keane wrote for Bloomberg December 29, 2009 in “Calls for Full-Body Screening Grow.”
Additional objections have come from Islamic organizations, Orthodox Jews, and evangelical Christians. The technology poses less a problem under Jewish law if passengers are screened by someone of the same gender.
“The Fiqh Council of North America, which is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America, recently issued a fatwa, or religious edict, stating that scanners violate Islamic law and suggesting instead that Muslims request a pat-down,” Helen T. Gray wrote March 17, 2010 for McClatchy Newspapers in “Full-body scans at airports might violate teaching of some faiths.” “The edict states that the scanners are a violation of Islamic law that men and women not be seen naked by other men and women and that modesty is considered part of the faith.”
The GAO is trying to evaluate the TSA’s assurance that it has fully assessed how would-be terrorists might find ways around the technology to evade detection.
John Seidenberg - John Seidenberg has worked on newspapers, newsletters, radio news, and produced specialized news publications as well as freelance ...
