TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
from the comforting dept
This probably won't come as a surprise after hearing about the massively botched TSA screening that resulted in a guy covered in urine, but a new report out by Homeland Security investigators found that training of TSA agents is rushed, poorly supervised, and not up to the necessary level for the new security screening procedures.For example, given all the talk about just how important these new naked scanners are, you would think that the TSA agents operating them would be properly trained to use them to see the stuff those machines are supposed to spot. Not so, apparently. According to the report, due to a "software problem," TSA agents were trained on images from an older generation of machines which did not adequately prepare them to use the new machines:
TSOs must complete both new hire and recurrent training on screening technologies; however, airport training equipment is sometimes different from the devices used at screening checkpoints. According to an OTT official, when TSA deployed a new generation of x-ray machines to 81 airports, the updated recurrent training for TSOs with these machines had not been implemented because of software problems. TSOs were still training with x-ray images from older generation equipment, which limits their ability to identify prohibited items using the current checkpoint equipment.So, we're using these naked scanners even though the people operating them haven't been properly trained on them, and they're not really able to spot the prohibited items that we're told can only be spotted using these machines or a grope. Once again, I'm trying to figure out how this makes us any safer. You can see the full Homeland Security report, which is pretty damning, after the jump. It highlights how the agents are often rushed through all aspects of training, and how ill prepared airports are to handle such training. It does not suggest an organization on top of any security threat. It suggests security theater in the extreme. I would think that making sure security is properly trained is somewhat more important than insisting that we must see everyone naked.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: naked scanners, privacy, security, training, tsa
Companies: tsa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Adam Savage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Adam Savage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Adam Savage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Adam Savage
Prepare to take medkit-one for thoughtspeak fix.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Here's a great article on how Israel handles security at their airports. Note the emphasis on properly training PEOPLE as opposed to buying and trusting multi-million dollar machines to do the job.
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-both er
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Epic-acquired TSA Requirements Document (FOIA)
Warning: PDF
http://epic.org/open_gov/foia/TSA_Procurement_Specs.pdf
See section 3.1.3.6
"Shall (53) support full/half duplex data rates of 10/100 mega-bits per second to support future requirements"
Section 3.1.1.5.1
"The WBI system shall provide capabilities for data transfers via USB devices. These devices shall provide connectivity to download FDRS data as described in 3.1.1.5 and to upload/download."
This requirement includes all raw data.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Epic-acquired TSA Requirements Document (FOIA)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Epic-acquired TSA Requirements Document (FOIA)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40072597#40072597
If you dig into it the document, it looks like this only the first part of an over-reaching strategy to create a common information sharing platform called "Security Technology Integrated Program" or STIP.
STIP program cost:
http://itdashboard.gov/?q=content/cost-summary&buscid=171
2012 Contract Awards:
https://myit.usaspending.gov/?q=content/contracts&buscid=171
TSA narrative of the program:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/mgmt/e300-tsa-stip2010.pdf
General Dynamics release:
http://www.gd-ais.com/news/detail.cfm?prid=448&page=1
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Epic-acquired TSA Requirements Document (FOIA)
http://usaspending.gov/explore?&carryfilters=on&fromfiscal=yes&tab=By%20Prime%20Awar dee&typeofview=transactions&maj_funding_agency=70&mod_agency=7013&tab=By+Prime+Award ee&fromfiscal=yes&trendreport=top_cont
Looks like it's time to do some digging into http://www.OpenSecrets.org and hold Senators and Representatives accountable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amazing the TSA uses the same tools (guns, pat downs, interrogations, etc) as a police officer but it only takes a couple of days training. Versus years of training every other police officer military or Coast Guard personal must go through. If they were serious about security they would have deputized career individuals who took security as the daily job not as something better than a fast food job.
Why not have the Coast guard/Border guards take over the task of TSA?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because it's illegal to use military forces for civilian needs unless a declaration of Emergency/Disaster has been made....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
- copied off of abovetopsecret.com
Resident "theorist" at your disposal :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And I was just talking about how much I love Jim Marrs on that other thread and you headshot me with a factoid from HIS site?
Ugh. I'll take my beating, I guess....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Love ya DH
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Joshy@8
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would think that making sure security is properly trained is somewhat more important than insisting that we must see everyone naked
http://epic.org/open_gov/foia/TSA_Procurement_Specs.pdf
10/100 and USB - Just make it easier to make sure my friends can see you nekkid as well.
Cant wait until Megan Fox goes through one of these.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
Mike when are you going to tell the truth ? really you know that is total spin, why do you're readers constantly let you get away with it..
The heading for a start, how misleading !!
TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
You make that claim, as a statement of fact due to what?
You make the claim, falsely, or at least the implication from that heading that they are using the older "limited" equipment.
That is not true is it Mike, what this is about is they had to use the older scanners in their training, the ones that do not show up as much..
But it does show up differences, less clear than the modern machines, so if you are capable of finding something illegal with the older scanning technology.
YOU most certainly will be able to spot the differences in contract with the new and more sensitive scanners.
But you dont care at all about any of that do you Mike.
This is a change for another flame headline, misleading, and false..
But it gives you great fodder for your cows to chew on for awile. before they get bored and wonder off..
But please one day mike, would you be able to write something that is not false, or misleading, biased and factually wrong.. Please.. just for a change..
The more I read your rubbish the more respect I have for the TSA who are trying to do a very difficult job in trying conditions, with people like you constantly trying to degrade them..
Do you think most of those TSA people would be doing what they do, if it was not for them wanting to pay cheque, and to be able to support their families.
And if you Mike, hate them so much, they must be doing something right..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
Reading comprehension fail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
It's the Homeland Security investigation that states it.
Reading comprehension fail x2.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
That is not true is it Mike, what this is about is they had to use the older scanners in their training, the ones that do not show up as much..
But it does show up differences, less clear than the modern machines, so if you are capable of finding something illegal with the older scanning technology.
YOU most certainly will be able to spot the differences in contract with the new and more sensitive scanners.
I will, once again, quote directly from the Homeland Security report, as I did in the post:
That statement says that you are wrong. Will you admit it? So far, in the last week, I have taken the time to point out direct factual errors in your claims every single day, and not once have you returned to admit you were in error. It's getting to be quite amusing.
Shall we try again tomorrow?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some will say you simulate the images, well where do you get the images to emulate from? recollections?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd rather prostitute myself than try to find your balls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Wear underwear
2. No excessively baggy cloths
3. If you are wearing a skirt or long dress to have proper materials underneath.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Subject
The funny this is terrorists will simply change their tactics to avoid detection anyways. I've read at CNN where experts are explaining that rubber explosives that are designed to shape the human body can not be detected by these scanners. The rubber explosives would not be detected either if they are stored inside bodily orifices.
Bomb sniffing dogs and puffers would be far more effective. Let the dogs sniff your crotch and ass as that's what they do naturally anyways.
Why the hell is the TSA so paranoid about being recorded? I'll tell you why. They are worried about terrorists studying their techniques to find weaknesses, and they also don't want to be caught and held liable for things such as forcing female cancer survivors to take out their prosthetic breasts and exploding urine bag ending up on YouTube. They don't want to get caught for blatantly ignorant acts. I would suspect that the latter is the primary concern.
Also, it sounds like the TSA has a lot of things to hide and they do not want to be held accountable for anything that can and will go wrong. What a bunch of idiots, and these guys are supposed to protect us?
Bomb sniffing dogs, puffers, metal detectors and regular non-sexual pat downs are far better security. That is all that's needed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Subject
If the lovely terrorists decide to hide explosives in their rectums after evading the radiation scanner, metal detectors, sexual-pat downs and they end up blowing up a plane--what will you do next? Give every single man, woman and child passenger full anal cavity searches?
The TSA needs to figure out something because if this happens, NO ONE will ever fly again and this will result in a catastrophic collapse of the entire world economy...which of course is precisely what the terrorists want and we're playing right in to their hands through the loss of privacy, rights and freedoms.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Subject
Fixed that for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
two observations
2. Know not thy enemy, but know thyself, and the battle is lost. Know thy enemy but not thyself, and the battle is lost. Know thy enemy and know thyself and the battle is over before it's begun.
TSA needs a history lesson or three.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Airport Security Redux
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cd0BHqauEa4
Maybe we should take our cues from Australia on security--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3grHjibNdA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not really a surpise
I also knew a couple of guys who designed software to help highlight dangerous items in airport x-ray machines. They said that the operators in the U.S. were among the most poorly trained and least proficient they'd dealt with. Now that was a few years ago so it may have improved.... but you won't see me laying any large wagers on that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bomb sniffing dogs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HOMESEC?
That's like having your outfit being laughed at by the naked cowboy in Times Square.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]