Quicksearch
Disclaimer
The individual owning this blog works for Oracle in Germany. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.
Nude scanners revisited - again
Monday, January 4. 2010
There is a lot of discussion about the backscatter scanners (or as the media calls them: "nude scanners") in Germany at the moment. Technically it's in discussion for a long time. I wrote about it in 2005 after Bruce Schneier wrote about it. My thought at this moment was "Okay, they will need an aircraft blown out of the sky to force this into the public".
Personally i think the this is lobby at work at the moment. It's a big business to implement backscatter at all airports in germany alone. Just think about the central security area in Hamburg.10 entries ... ka-ching .... and Hamburg is a relatively small airport.
At first: I have no problem with backscatter scanning. Technically the current metal detectors look through my clothing as well. So if a backscatter scanner makes no images and instead just make "boink" (as we all know, scientific progress goes "boink"
) and then get a TSA massage, i'm fine with that.
I'm not fine with high resolution nude photos of every one just want to fly, i'm not fine with spending millions for back scatter scanners, while the people at security can decide to flip burgers or searching people at almost the same wage, i'm not fine with dumbed down version of this scanners with software to protect the privacy as the bad-guys will find ways to use this dumbing-down to fool this device (i want just simple logic .. there is something else than your leather underpants or your latex bra under your clothing .... "boink" -> TSA massage). I'm not fine with with maximal invasive security counter measures, that just helps against past attacks, but not against future attacks.
The same politicians that force us into this back scatter scannings will be the first ones that will cry when the "Bild Zeitung" will publish the length of their private parts. Who prevents someone who can flip burgers for the same wage to get bribed for not seeing a bomb in his or her shift or for writing down interesting information about prominent people. In former times we used well-paid public servant for this task to reduce this risk ... but today.
And at the end those back scatter scanning is somehow futile anyways: Drug dealers found out that it's quite simple to hide drugs inside a person. Backscatter can't detect it, as it stops at the first layer of the skin. So what's the problem to substitute the cocaine with Semtex to create a not-so-intelligent bomb?
Personally i think the this is lobby at work at the moment. It's a big business to implement backscatter at all airports in germany alone. Just think about the central security area in Hamburg.10 entries ... ka-ching .... and Hamburg is a relatively small airport.
At first: I have no problem with backscatter scanning. Technically the current metal detectors look through my clothing as well. So if a backscatter scanner makes no images and instead just make "boink" (as we all know, scientific progress goes "boink"
) and then get a TSA massage, i'm fine with that. I'm not fine with high resolution nude photos of every one just want to fly, i'm not fine with spending millions for back scatter scanners, while the people at security can decide to flip burgers or searching people at almost the same wage, i'm not fine with dumbed down version of this scanners with software to protect the privacy as the bad-guys will find ways to use this dumbing-down to fool this device (i want just simple logic .. there is something else than your leather underpants or your latex bra under your clothing .... "boink" -> TSA massage). I'm not fine with with maximal invasive security counter measures, that just helps against past attacks, but not against future attacks.
The same politicians that force us into this back scatter scannings will be the first ones that will cry when the "Bild Zeitung" will publish the length of their private parts. Who prevents someone who can flip burgers for the same wage to get bribed for not seeing a bomb in his or her shift or for writing down interesting information about prominent people. In former times we used well-paid public servant for this task to reduce this risk ... but today.
And at the end those back scatter scanning is somehow futile anyways: Drug dealers found out that it's quite simple to hide drugs inside a person. Backscatter can't detect it, as it stops at the first layer of the skin. So what's the problem to substitute the cocaine with Semtex to create a not-so-intelligent bomb?
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
It was tried last year. The bomber got close enough to his target to set the bomb off, but his body acted as a shield (remember those films of the hero jumping on the grenade?) and the target only suffered slight injuries.
Alan.
Alan.
Yes, but as long as the bad guy is allowed to use a toilet he can remove the explosives from his body, put them under his shirt, and return to the seat.
Maybe it would help to put the toilets under surveilance. Or maybe it wouldn't...
Maybe it would help to put the toilets under surveilance. Or maybe it wouldn't...
Well paid public servants will not solve the problem.
The problem is "monotony".
The human condition is not designed to be observant of every possible little detail for millions of cases consistently.
No matter how much someone is being paid or how good people are, some will be missed.
This does not mean that we don't try - not when the live of hundreds or thousands of people are at risk.
This means, we have to watch for the specific cases and build test cases, just like we have to do with software.
I would not like you to get blown up on a plane because we simply don't try!
If you have a better idea than the body scanners to check millions of people without putting grubby hands over someone like your wife or daughter, what is it?
The problem is "monotony".
The human condition is not designed to be observant of every possible little detail for millions of cases consistently.
No matter how much someone is being paid or how good people are, some will be missed.
This does not mean that we don't try - not when the live of hundreds or thousands of people are at risk.
This means, we have to watch for the specific cases and build test cases, just like we have to do with software.
I would not like you to get blown up on a plane because we simply don't try!
If you have a better idea than the body scanners to check millions of people without putting grubby hands over someone like your wife or daughter, what is it?
Maybe we could employ autistic people for those monotonous tasks.
Some of those people are thrilled by such tasks.
Some of those people are thrilled by such tasks.
If they can identify bombers and stay on-task, I am all for it!
Sometimes, people with certain mental disabilities are very capable of staying on-task with monotonous tasks - fulfilling critical needs in modern day society.
Sometimes, people with certain mental disabilities are very capable of staying on-task with monotonous tasks - fulfilling critical needs in modern day society.
Has someone seen a test, where this devices were tried by some skilled people from the police or private investigators ?
I haven't seen any and therefore i see this as happily spending public money on untested technology to get a picture in the news.
The scanner performes its task only, if workers with low skills have i high detection rate, even after 7 hours of their shift. This have to be proven, not pictures of private parts and test scans perfected by photoshop.
I haven't seen any and therefore i see this as happily spending public money on untested technology to get a picture in the news.
The scanner performes its task only, if workers with low skills have i high detection rate, even after 7 hours of their shift. This have to be proven, not pictures of private parts and test scans perfected by photoshop.
+1
The LKSF book
The book with the consolidated Less known Solaris Tutorials is available for download here
Web 2.0
Contact
Networking
xing.com
LinkedIn
Facebook
My photos
- mail: joerg@c0t0d0s0.org
- icq: 144000169
- Me, myself and I
- openBC
- My del.icio.us
- c0t0d0s0@twitter
- c0t0d0s0@last.fm
- wiki@c0t0d0s0
- Amazon Wishlist
Networking
xing.com
My photos
Comments
about Nanosecond
Fri, 25.05.2012 00:26
She was great.
I was fortu
nate enough to sit next to her
for a cross country plane rid
e in the 1980s. I had al [...]
about Nanosecond
Wed, 23.05.2012 00:11
I remember this being drummed
into us during Digital Design
at Uni. It's important to cons
ider it when laying out [...]
Mon, 21.05.2012 18:04
Hello Kevin, Im not surprised
with what you are seeing or ha
ve seen when attaching a SSD t
o a USB2.0. USB3.0 helps [...]
Mon, 21.05.2012 04:44
Hi Greg,
With regards to IO
PS I have seen terrible result
s using a 60GB SATA2 SSD with
USB2.0 - USB2 really cho [...]
Buttons
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Germany License
