Focusing public attention on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues

Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners ("Backscatter" X-Ray and Millimeter Wave Screening)

Top News

  • EPIC to Testify in Congress on Airport Security: EPIC has been asked to testify before the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection on Wednesday, March 17, 2010. The hearing will examine "An Assessment of Checkpoint Security: Are Our Airports Keeping Passengers Safe?" EPIC is expected to discuss the documents it has recently obtained in an open government lawsuit against the DHS. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging. (Mar. 15, 2010)
  • EPIC v. DHS: EPIC Obtains Complaints About Airport Body Scanners: In response to an EPIC Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) released more documents about body scanners in US airports. The documents include many complaints from travelers who went through the devices. Travelers reported that they were not told about the pat down alternative or that they were going to be subject to a body scan by TSA officials. Travelers also expressed concern about radiation risks to pregnant women and the image capture of young children without clothes. EPIC has previously obtained whole body imaging vendor contracts, operational requirements, and procurement specifications from TSA. EPIC and Ralph Nader have urged President Obama to suspend the program until an independent review is completed. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.  (Mar. 8, 2010)
  • The GAO Calls for Further Analysis Before Deploying Whole Body Imaging Machines: The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently released a report regarding the deployment of body scanners. The GAO cited its 2009 recommendations to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA): that the TSA conduct operational tests to ensure that the whole body imaging machines are reliable, and the that TSA conduct an assessment of the whole body imaging machines' vulnerabilities. In its latest report, the GAO warned TSA of the importance of full operational tests, citing the puffer machine debacle as an example of the government waste that results from insufficient operational testing. The GAO also expressed concern over TSA's lack of complete risk assessments and inability to "provide documentation to show how they have addressed the concerns raised in the 2009 GAO report regarding the susceptibility of the technology to terrorist tactics."  Because of this, the GAO concluded that it is unclear whether the body scanners or other technologies would have detected the weapon used in the December 25 attempted attack. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners. (Mar. 1, 2010)
  • Ralph Nader and EPIC's Marc Rotenberg Urge President Obama to Suspend Whole Body Scanning Program: In a letter to the White House, consumer advocate Ralph Nader and EPIC President Marc Rotenberg have asked President Obama to suspend the deployment of body imaging devices until "a comprehensive evaluation of the devices' effectiveness, health impacts, and privacy safeguards is completed by an independent board of review." Mr. Nader and Mr. Rotenberg point to a recent workshop at which experts noted that the devices are ineffective, that health risks have not been assessed, and that the TSA has misrepresented the privacy safeguards. They also said that air travelers subject to secondary screening who are actually familiar with the capabilities of body scanners would prefer a pat-down search to a body scan for both privacy and religious reasons. European governments are currently undertaking a three-month review of the body scanner proposal. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging. (Feb. 24, 2010)
  • EPIC and Ralph Nader Host Event on Body Scanners: Today the Center for the Study of Responsive Law (CSRL) and EPIC hosted an event: “Airport Body Scanners Under the Microscope: Not Such a Pretty Picture.” The event featured keynote speeches by Ralph Nader and Marc Rotenberg, president of EPIC. The event also included two panels, the first of which focused on the problems with body scanners, and the second of which dealt with the political opportunities that exist to combat the widespread utilization of the scanners. The event included talks by experts on radiation, airport security, religious and constitutional ramifications of whole body imaging, and the international response to whole body imaging machines. EPIC Staff Counsel, Ginger McCall, discussed documents that EPIC recently received that reveal that the machines can store and transmit images. Katitiza Rodriguez, director of EPIC’s International Privacy Project, discussed the EU’s decision to postpone the use of these machines until a full privacy and health risk assessment can be completed. For more information see: EPIC: Whole Body Imaging. (Feb. 19, 2010)
  • Federal Budget Announced for Fiscal Year 2011, Surveillance Projects Scrutinized: The Office of Management and Budget has released the federal budget for fiscal year 2011. The budget proposes funding for several new surveillance initiatives, including over $700 million to the Department of Homeland Security for "Passenger Aviation Security". The Department would like to purchase 500 body scanner machines for U.S. airports, bringing the projected total number of machines to 1,000 at a cost of over $200 million by the end of 2011. The new budget also includes several hundred million dollars for the Department of Justice's national security programs, which were recently the subject of a critical Inspector-General's report for improper use of authority. For more information, see EPIC DHS and Privacy, EPIC Domestic Surveillance, EPIC Air Travel Privacy, and EPIC Whole Body Imaging. (Feb. 3, 2010)
  • Homeland Security Releases Annual FOIA Report: The Department of Homeland Security has released the 2009 Freedom of Information Act Report. The report shows that the Department processed over 160,000 requests in the past year, with 27,182 requests remaining pending. Of the requests processed, 11% were granted in full, 60% were classified as "partial grants/partial denials," and the remaining 29% were denied in full. The overwhelming majority of backlogged requests and appeals are pending at the Customs and Immigration Service. For denied requests with processed appeals, nearly 30% were fully reversed on appeal, and another 32% were reversed in part. EPIC currently has two FOIA cases pending against the Department relating to its use of Body Scanner machines. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS, EPIC FOIA Litigation Docket. (Feb. 1, 2010)
  • EPIC Urges Increased Privacy for “Global Entry” Registered Traveler Program: On January 19, EPIC filed comments with the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), urging the agency to “to revise its establishment of the Global Entry program and to reconsider the privacy and security implications of the program.” CBP proposed to make permanent the Global Entry program, under which pre-registered international travelers can bypass conventional security lines by scanning their passports and fingerprints at a kiosk, answering customs declaration questions, and then presenting a receipt to Customs officials. EPIC urged CBP to ensure that Global Entry complied with the Privacy Act and to conduct a separate Privacy Impact Assessment. Those measures are particularly pressing in light of recent problems, including data breaches and bankruptcy, experienced by “Clear,” a similar registered traveler program. In 2005, EPIC testified before Congress that the absence of Privacy Act safeguards for registered traveler programs would jeopardize air traveler privacy and security. For more information, see EPIC Global Entry, EPIC Air Travel Privacy, EPIC Biometric Identifiers, EPIC Automated Targeting System, and EPIC Whole Body Imaging. (Jan. 28, 2010)
  • Experts to Speak at National Press Club about Body Scanners: Leading privacy law scholars Anita Allen and Jeffrey Rosen, acclaimed author and surveillance authority James Bamford, world renowned security technologist Bruce Schneier, and EPIC President Marc Rotenberg will be at the National Press Club,  on Monday, January 25 at 8:30 a.m. for a panel discussion on "Body Scanners and Privacy." The event takes place as Congress is in the middle of hearings to determine whether to deploy full body imaging devices in US airports. (Jan. 24, 2010)
  • European Union Rejects US Demands on Body Scanners: EU President Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba announced today that European countries would not rush to install body scanners as the United States has urged. He said that there will first be studies to determine whether the devices "are effective, do not harm health, and do not violate privacy." The European countries have agreed that they will adopt a unified position on the body scanner proposal. European Minister Viviane Reding stated that "Europe's need for security cannot justify an invasion of privacy. Our citizens are not objects: they are human beings." Previous post-9/11 disputes between the US and the EU have involved the transfer of Passenger Name Records and financial information. The European position in the current dispute is strengthened by the recent adoption of the Lisbon Treaty and the entry into force of the Charter of Fundmental Rights. EPIC has scheduled a press conference at the National Press Club on January 25 on "Body Scanners and Privacy.” For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology. (Jan. 21, 2010)
  • TSA Broadens Use of 'Backscatter X-Ray' Machines That Conduct 'Virtual Strip Searches': The Transportation Security Administration is expanding the use of "backscatter X-ray" systems for passenger screening. The $100,000 refrigerator-size machines use "backscatter" technology, which bounces low-radiation X-rays off of a passenger to produce photo-quality images of travelers as if they were undressed. Computer processing partially obscures the image that is available to operators. TSA states that the agency will delete the raw images, but there is no law or regulation that prevents the agency from saving the original, detailed images. Until there is such a prohibition, EPIC believes funding for the program should be suspended. See EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance and page on Backscatter X-ray. (October 11, 2007)
  • Field Tests Begin in Arizona on Backscatter X-Ray Machines: An X-ray machine aimed at detecting weapons and explosives hidden on passengers is scheduled to make its debut Friday at Phoenix's Sky Harbor International Airport. The "backscatter" will be in operation at Security Checkpoint B in Terminal 4. While any Terminal 4 ticketed passenger can pass through any checkpoint, the B concourse is primarily used by travelers on Tempe-based US Airways. (February 21, 2007)
  • Phoenix Airport to Use 'Backscatter' X-Ray on Travelers: Sky Harbor International Airport here will test a new federal screening system that takes X-rays of passenger's bodies to detect concealed explosives and other weapons. The technology, called backscatter, has been around for several years but has not been widely used in the U.S. as an anti-terrorism tool because of privacy concerns. (December 1, 2006)

Background

Post-September 11, airline travel security has invoked the increased use of technology and better training of security personnel as a means of improving travel security. Some of these proposals, such as improved training for airport screeners, checking all bags for bombs, strengthening cockpit doors, and placing air marshals on flights, do not implicate privacy interests and are sound security measures. Others, however, present privacy and security risks to air travelers because they might create data files directly linked to the identity of air travelers. These files if retained could provide the basis for a database of air traveler profiles. The Transportation Security Administration utilizes two technologies to capture naked images of air travelers - backscatter x-ray technology and millimeter wave technology.

In 1895 x-rays1 were discovered by Wilhelm Röntgen.2 This discovery of how to look through an object to observe details beneath has advanced to include new techniques. One such technique called "backscatter" X-Ray is based on "the emergence of radiation from that surface of a material through which it entered. Also used to denote the actual backscattered radiation.3"

backscatter imageThe application of this new x-ray technology to airport screening uses high energy x-rays that are more likely to scatter than penetrate materials as compared to lower-energy x-rays used in medical applications. Although this type of x-ray is said to be harmless it can move through other materials, such as clothing.

A passenger is scanned by rastering or moving a single high energy x-ray beam rapidly over their form. The signal strength of detected backscattered x-rays from a known position then allows a highly realistic image to be reconstructed. Since only Compton scattered x-rays4 are used, the registered image is mainly that of the surface of the object/person being imaged. In the case of airline passenger screening it is her nude form. The image resolution of the technology is high, so details of the human form of airline passengers present privacy challenges.

Airport security has undergone significant changes since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Recently, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced a proposal to purchase and deploy "Whole Body Imaging" X-ray machines to search air travelers at all airports. TSA said it believes that use of the machines is less invasive than pat-down searches. However, these machines, which show detailed images of a person's naked body, are equivalent to a "virtual strip search" for all air travelers. This proposal, along with the agency's controversial plan to profile air travelers, shows extraordinary disregard for the privacy rights of air travelers. The Department of Homeland Security is requesting $72 million to invest in detection systems, which includes funding for the backscatter machines, which cost between $100,000 and $200,000 each.

The backscatter machines use high-energy X-rays that are more likely to scatter than penetrate materials as compared to lower-energy X-rays used in medical applications. Although this type of X-ray is said to be harmless, it can move through other materials, such as clothing. When being screened, a passenger is scanned by high-energy X-ray beam moving rapidly over her body. The signal strength of detected backscattered X-rays from a known position then allows a highly realistic image to be reconstructed. In the case of airline-passenger screening, the image is of the traveler's nude form. The image resolution of the technology is high, so the picture of the body presented to screeners is detailed enough to show genitalia. These images are not necessarily temporary - screeners can save the body images to the system's hard disk or floppy disk for subsequent viewing on either "the system monitor or on any IBM compatible personal computer with color graphics."

Backscatter X-Rays and Transportation Screening

The Transportation Security Administration claims that is not storing detailed images of passengers screened by the system. The agency also states that it is providing a screening option for passengers who object to screening by the technology. However, the technology is designed to accomplish what has been described on this page, and until the process of assuring that the claims of the agency are enforced--questions will remain about the use of the technology. EPIC will make available on this page aviation security and privacy -related documents it obtains from the government under the Freedom of Information Act law about the adoption of "backscatter" x-ray technology intended for use in screening air travelers.

womanThe stated goal of these new proposals is to rely on technology to reduce the "hassle factor" in airports and to reduce security threats. The core idea is to focus security resources on suspicious travelers, while ensuring that most people are not inconvenienced by heightened security. Terrorists, however, have been known to go to great lengths to look like most people. Will a technology that will capture detailed images of potentially all airline travel passengers lead to greater safety? Current technology can successfully detect dangerous substances, firearms and other weapons without backscatter x-ray imaging of passengers. Can the goal of safe air travel be reached without reproducing a digital image of a passenger's body? It has long been recognized by security experts that it is impossible to eliminate all threats to airline travel. Is the application of "backscatter" x-ray technology a deterrent and not a solution to perfect airline travel safety? If this is true, then is the trade off in passenger privacy worth the effort to deter terrorists? The application of security technology and increased passenger screening has also resulted in an increased detection of non-violent criminal offenses. Is the application of "backscatter" x-ray technology to screen airline passengers more than just a means of detecting terrorists?

In 2009, the TSA announced that Whole Body Imaging would replace metal detectors at airport security check points. This is a marked departure from the earlier promises by the agency that the technology would only be used for secondary screening of air travel passengers.

Airports Currently Using Whole Body Imagaing Technology

  • Albuquerque International Sunport Airport
  • Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport
  • Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport
  • Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport
  • Denver International Airport
  • Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport
  • Detroit Metro Airport
  • Indianapolis International Airport
  • Jacksonville International Airport
  • McCarran International Airport
  • Los Angeles International Airport
  • Miami International Airport
  • Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport
  • Raleigh-Durham International Airport
  • Richmond International Airport
  • San Francisco International Airport
  • Salt Lake City International Airport
  • Tampa International Airport
  • Tulsa International Airport

Jan. 2010 NPC Event Materials

Latest News

Resources

Identification Schemes

Profiling

Other Documents

Analysis

  • Paper on the limitations of profiling, Roger Clark, Australia National University.
  • ACLU testimony before White House Commission on "Civil Liberties Implications of Airport Security Measures" (September 5, 1996).
  • Letter to Privacy Journal editor Robert Ellis Smith from the FAA denying Smith's request for a copy of the FAA Security Directive on identification of airline passengers.
  • HotWired article "Fear of Flying" on proposals. (September 11, 1996).

Other Airline Passenger Screening Resources

  • FAA Proposes Profiling Regulations. The Federal Aviation Administration published proposed regulations on April 19, 1999, governing "Security of Checked Baggage on Flights Within the United States." The draft rules detail the use of computer profiling techniques to identify suspicious passengers.
  • Airline Passenger Profiling Goes Into Effect. The Computer Assisted Passenger Screening System was scheduled to be phased in nationwide beginning on January 1. Under the system, passengers who "fit the profile" will be selected for heightened security measures, which can include a thorough search of their luggage, intrusive personal questioning, tagging of luggage with orange tape, and a physical escort from the check-in counter to the airport gate by security personnel. The ACLU is providing an online complaint form for passengers targeted by the profiling system.
  • Microsoft Chief Architect Charles Simonyi tells what happens when you "fit the profile" (from Slate).
  • Proposed FAA rule for collecting personal information including name, address, Social Security Number, Date of birth and next of kin for every domestic passenger.
  • General Account Office report, Aviation Safety and Security: Challenges to Implementing the Recommendations of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security (Testimony, 03/05/97, GAO/T-RCED-97-90).
  • The Gore Commission has released its final report recommending passenger profiling. A coalition of 17 groups has sent a letter to Gore opposing ID checks, profiling, new x-ray technologies and excessive secrecy by the FAA in making decisions.

Legislative History

HR 1271. FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Authorization Act of 1997. Funds FAA projects for new surveillance technologies such as advanced x-ray systems for individuals. Introduced on 4/10/97 by Morella (R-Md). Referred to the House Committee on Science. Approved by Committee 4/16/97. Reported to the House H. Rept. 105-61 (CR H1714) on 4/21/97. Measure adopted on 4/29/97, RC #95 (414-7), (CR H1995). Referred to Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation (CR S3843) on 4/30/97.

Bill Passed the Senate: 11/13/1997
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments: 2/3/1998
Bill Passed the House by a voice vote: 2/3/1998 3:07pm:
Bill Signed into Law by President Clinton: 2/11/1998
Became Public Law No: 105-155.

References

1http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ems3.html#c4
2http://geology.b.dictonarypage.co.uk/backscatter/
3http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/X/X/X-Ray_machine.htm
4http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/comptint.html