Privacy Concerns with Millimeter Wave Scanners

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's attempt to blow up Northwest Airlines flight 253 on December 25, 2009, by hiding plastic explosives in his underwear, reveals how terrorist insight has improved after 9/11 attack. Each flight is a potential terrorist target that can create a ton of problems for the innocent citizen. At the same time, it is a huge challenge for security airport authorities to implement new technology and stop terrorists-to-be at the security gate.

In response to Abdulmutallab's terrorist attack to a U.S. civil aircraft, full-body scanners have been deployed in Albuquerque (ABQ), Atlanta (ATL), Baltimore (BWI), Cleveland (CLE), Washington DC (DCA), Denver (DEN), Dallas-Ft. Worth (DFW), Detroit (DTW), Houston (IAH), Indianapolis (IND), Jacksonville (JAX), New York City (JFK), Las Vegas (LAS), Los Angeles (LAX), Miami (MIA), Phoenix (PHX), Lafayette (RDU), Little Rock (ROC), Richmond, Va (RIC), San Francisco (SFO), Salt Lake City (SLC), Tampa (TPA) and Tulsa (TUL) airports across the United States.

The millimeter wave scanner is one of the two types of full-body scanners, along with the backscatter x-ray scanner. Through the use of exceptionally high radio frequencies that are transmitted as two antennas are concurrently rotated around the passenger's body, a 3D full-body image is generated on a monitor. The millimeter wave scanner can penetrate the clothes and, in effect, it strips-off passengers to detect objects or materials such as weapons, guns, knives, liquid explosives or drugs that are possibly strapped on the body.

Although full-body scanning may prevent potential terrorist attack, it has also raised a lot of criticism in regards to privacy issues. The use of advanced imaging technology allows Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials to see passengers naked, including any prosthetics, medical equipment such as pacemakers and, of course, their private parts. The TSA claims that facial features and private areas are covered when passengers are scanned. Moreover, it has been suggested that only passengers who are suspected of carrying smuggled goods should be scanned. Other passengers can choose between the full-body scan and the pat-down inspection.

Privacy advocates claim also that millimeter wave scanners are a major threat to child protection laws. First of all, children should not be scanned at the airport for not being exposed to radiation at all. However, the images of children who are scanned are so explicit they amount to "virtual strip-searching" facilitating child pornography offenders wearing the uniform of Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

The TSA claims that the images of passengers who are scanned are not electronically saved or printed to be stored anywhere. Moreover, the TSA officer who views the passengers does not have any type of contact with them as the viewing room is in a separate place, away from the security checkpoint. Therefore, once the image is captured and the passenger leaves the scanner, the image cannot be retrieved anymore because this option is disabled by the manufactured as requested by the TSA.

Although the TSA claims sound reasonable, privacy advocates are not convinced. Privacy concerns are still on because anyone would be concerned in the idea of being viewed naked, even if the TSA official is in an isolated room or the image will be destroyed.

Sources:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world /list-us-airports-full-body-scanners-2547541.html
http://www.brighthub.com/scien ce/aviation/articles/65805.aspx
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/03/AR2010010301826.html