Body scanners wouldn’t have caught Northwest bomber

by Sean McLachlan on

Here’s another hit for airline security. Not only have we discovered pat-downs aren’t effective, now it turns out that full-body scanners wouldn’t have detected the Christmas bomber on Northwest Flight 253.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was overpowered by passengers and flight crew after trying to detonate nearly 3oz of the chemical powder PETN (pentaerythritol tetranitrate) hidden in his underwear with a syringe containing a liquid accelerant to set it off. Neither of these items would have been detected by the scanners because they use a millimeter-wave technology that´s only good for detecting dense objects such as metal, plastic explosives such as C4, and thick plastic. Powders and small amounts of liquids can’t be detected.

Conservative Minister of Parliament Ben Wallace, former adviser at the defense firm Qinetiq, which developed the scanners for airport use, said that in test trails the millimeter waves passed through not only clothing, rendering it invisible, but also liquids, powders, and thin plastics. The very things Abdulmutallab hid in his nether regions to avoid detection in case he got patted down, which he didn’t.

Wallace said that x-ray scanners probably wouldn’t have worked either.

The machines’ limitations were confirmed by Kevin Murphy, product manager for physical security at Qinetiq. The company is developing an improved version.

Last week the Transportation Security Administration ordered $165 million worth of millimeter-wave and x-ray scanners at about $150,000 a pop.

Airport pat-downs: exercise in futility

by Tom Johansmeyer on

Is this really a shock? Pat-downs don’t work well. Aviation experts say that government rules limit where the security folks can check, which means that would-be bombers only need to stash their illicit goods in the uncomfortable places that can’t be touched. Any frequent traveler has been subject to this ritual at least once – and has probably wondered what good it does. Arms, armpits and legs are felt … but is this where anybody would stash something illegal or dangerous?

Making the ritual more troublesome is that the pat-down only occurs when there is a triggering event, specifically the chirp of the metal detector. Clear the technology, and the effectiveness of a pat-down is irrelevant.

The current pat-down technique was shaped by a 2004 TSA list, which was based on complaints by female passengers … and even the revised approach, which protects sensitive body parts and hasn’t been released to the public, hasn’t been enough to prevent the occasional irritation over underwire.

A Government Accountability Office report last year led to some changes, because federal investigators were able to sneak liquid explosives and detonators through airport security checkpoints. The changes that followed opened up the areas open to search – including breasts and groins – but only in certain situations.According to a statement by the TSA, “This new procedure will affect a very small percentage of travelers, but it is a critical element in ensuring the safety of the flying public.”

Of course, the Christmas bombing attempt has prompted a renewed interest in airport pat-downs. They may not be effective, but action is better than nothing, right? Yet, passengers again pushed back, with Gerry Berry, a Florida-based airport security expert, telling The Associated Press, “People just wouldn’t stand for it. You wouldn’t. I wouldn’t.”

And, there’s always the fear of litigation when normally covered and protected body parts are involved. The TSA says that security balanced with privacy concerns is its top priority.

Meanwhile, the comforting touch of a TSA staffer could become more common. As full-body scanners are deployed more widely, passengers will be able to choose personal contact over a total scan.

[Photo by The Consumerist via Flickr]

The Netherlands to start full body scans of all US bound passengers

by Scott Carmichael on

The Dutch government held a press conference this morning announcing their plans to beef up security at Amsterdam Schiphol airport.

Within three weeks, fifteen bodyscan machines will be in place (sources say the machines are the Rapiscan Secure 1000 scanners), and a 100% screening of all US bound passengers may help prevent a repeat of the Northwest Airlines incident.

See – THIS is how you tackle security. Something happens, and within 3 weeks, you implement the technology required to prevent it from happening again. I’m not a big fan of the bodyscanners, but given how the terrorists are operating, I don’t see any other solution, short of asking people to fly naked.

Government officials made it clear that only one person will be able to view the scanner screen at a time, and that images can not be stored. The initial implementation requires border protection police staff to view the screens, but the next version will be fully automated, and a computer will determine whether any items are on your body that require closer scrutiny.

Of course, the Dutch privacy groups are very much against the scanners. My biggest concern is that images of naked children leak out, and make their way into the hands of pedophile groups. If governments are indeed going to start an accelerated roll out of these scanners, they’d better be 100% sure they protect our privacy – if they screw this up (and chances are, they will), the backlash will be fierce.