|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 27882873)
I would hope this study would be enough to convince TSA to abandon the BDO program.
I have always questioned if anyone could be trained in Behavior Detection well enough to put in place the practice in just a couple of weeks, especially on people who the TSA employee has never had any interaction with. Given that the Behavior Detection isn't a proven science I really question is some quickly trained people could even grasp the most basic concepts of the program. And who would start answering questions from a stranger in an airport? If TSA wants to ask me a question they had better be identifying exactly who they are and why the questions. Looks like I had cause for my concern. “The passenger should not suspect that they have undergone any deliberate line of questioning,” a Spot document instructs, contributing to the ACLU’s conclusion that plainclothes Spot officers “conduct surveillance covertly”. |
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 27883531)
From the link:
Yes I read that part. But who is going to start answering questions from a complete stranger in an airport? |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 27883578)
Yes I read that part. But who is going to start answering questions from a complete stranger in an airport?
|
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 27887515)
And if the 'stranger' is in a TSA uniform, who won't "suspect that they have undergone [a] deliberate line of questioning"?
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 27887635)
They are suppose to be in civvies so we don't suspect their questioning to be odd.
|
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 27887696)
The one that interrogated me, followed me into the toilet, and continued trying to ask questions while I was in the stall a few years ago was in a standard TSA uniform. I didn't pay attention at the time to how many stripes.
|
Behavior detection fails yet again:
TSA does not have valid evidence that most of the indicators in its revised list of behavioral indicators can be used to identify individuals who may pose a threat to aviation security. In our review of all 178 sources TSA cited in support of its revised list, we found that 98 percent (175 of 178) of the sources do not provide valid evidence applicable to the specific indicators that TSA identified them as supporting. In total, we found that TSA does not have valid evidence to support 28 of its 36 revised behavioral indicators, has one source of valid evidence to support each of 7 indicators, and has 2 sources of valid evidence to support 1 indicator. |
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 28587870)
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 28588039)
For those who don't want to read the document GAO is again stating that there is little to no valid evidence supporting TSA's BDO program.
GAO: TSA doesn't have scientific justification to detect terrorists through most behavioral tics |
Specifically, the Act required that TSA, not later than 30 days after enactment, utilize BDOs for passenger and baggage security screening, including the verification of traveler documents, particularly at designated TSA Pre✓™ lanes to ensure that such lanes are operational for use and maximum efficiency. FSDs, of course, have the final say, and as I type this, both the Precheck and regular lanes are getting longer. |
Originally Posted by Fredd
(Post 28588213)
USA Today ran a piece...
GAO: TSA doesn't have scientific justification to detect terrorists through most behavioral tics TSA also pointed out that identifying suspicious behavior in airports has resulted in law-enforcement arrests. edit to add: another quote from the article: The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees TSA, responded to the GAO that the behavior-detection program was eliminated before this fiscal year, and officers were integrated into the checkpoint workforce. |
I Wasted My Lunchtime Reading the GAO Report
This report will go nowhere for a couple of reasons:
1. The requesters were two Democrats, so the Republicans will ignore it. 2. There are no politicals to inject any administration views and policies. 3. Once again, the TSA simply blew off the GAO. The response letter is somewhere between laughable and arrogant. It starts on Page 12 of the report. "Highlights" include (Sorry -- Can't cut & paste text from a JPEG): 1. They never said they got rid of the SPOTNik program. They simply made the SPOTNiks ordinary clerks, but with SPOTNik powers. 2. They said they used the money from the SPOTNik to buy more clerks for the long lines last year. 3. They cherry-picked the RAND study (which had very little to do with airport security): The TSA quoted: ...there is current value and unrealized potential for using behavioral indicators as part of a system to detect attacks. Despite exaggerations found in commercial claims and the media, there is current value and unrealized potential for using behavioral indicators as part of a system to detect attacks. Unfortunately, analytic quantification of that potential is poorly developed. Observing physiological state holds promise for detecting deception and other behaviors. Physiological State and Reactions. Observing physiological state holds promise for detecting deception and other behaviors. We touch upon polygraph testing, other measures of peripheral nervous system response, electroencephalograms (EEGs), vocal stress, and facial expression analysis. "hanging wires, especially around the waist, may be signs or a suicide bomber." This is the same lack of accountability we see every day at checkpoints. They just lie and walk away. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 28588318)
If GAO can count the number of screeners that are also doing BDO work was the program really eliminated or is this just a case of government deception?
|
that there is little to no valid evidence supporting TSA's BDO program.
I'm a little behind on this story... Supporting that it is effective or that it even exists? If it's agents following people into bathrooms (like the above post describes) I gotta believe they would try to mask it. |
Originally Posted by yandosan
(Post 28588945)
that there is little to no valid evidence supporting TSA's BDO program.
I'm a little behind on this story... Supporting that it is effective or that it even exists? Pure Bunkum! The other part of this is that DHS announce last year that funding for the TSA BDO program had ended. Seems that's not entirely true either. How is it that honesty and TSA are polar opposites? |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:01 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.