Schmurrr

Wait. So TSA is canning Rapiscan because they couldn't deliver on an agreement, but exactly which agreement has TSA ever delivered on? Public comment before nude-o-scope installation? (No.) All FOIA requests? (No.) Upholding the Constitution? (No.) Effective airport security? (No. FWIW, I got something through a checkpoint last year that should not have gone through, thanks to a gaping hole in the process.) I submit that TSA has violated agreements with me (a citizen and taxpayer), and I would like to can the whole agency.

Schmurrr

I am going to say that raw image data will be saved and will be convertible to humanly viewable images because that is how you monitor the accuracy of the ATR. The raw image data will also be saved because it must be available for review should a terrorism incident occur. I think it will be saved long term because some government agency will be looking for a way to mine the raw image data for other purposes so as to provide more validation of the government's investment in the technology. (You could call the last item "research" if you like.)

mre5765

But now there will be a different brand of back scatter coming, so that can't be it.

Himeno

Was there not a court ruling that the scanners didn't breach the 4th amendment because there was an option available to not go through them?

WillCAD

I'm not paranoid enough to say that this will happen or that it is happening, but there is no denying that it could happen. The machines are more than capable of data storage and transfer, of both raw scan return data and compiled images. The Orlando courthouse incident a few years ago proves that, as does the mere existence of sample images from the machines on both the manufacturer's and TSA's web sites - if the images can't be transmitted, how do they get on the web sites? Obviously, they CAN be.

I am paranoid enough, however, to look at TSA's continuous assertion that "the images are not saved" and read it with a government NewSpeak filter.

In other words, they said the images wouldn't be saved, and they might actually be serious about that, but they never said anything about the raw scan data from which the images are created in the first place. THAT little chunk of binary bits could easily be saved on every machine from every scan going back to initial deployment, and TSA would not have even lied about it, except by omission - that data, if it is saved, can easily be used to recreate the full-res images of any scan ever performed by the machines, without privacy filters or intentional de-resing.

It could happen, in theory. And that's always been a privacy concern to me.

I don't think there have been any court rulings specifically on whole body imaging, or on the "enhanced pat down" sexual assault. However, previous court decisions established the administrative search exception to the 4th Amendment being completely contingent on the ability of a person to totally avoid the search by simply not flying.

I don't recall hearing of any court rulings on the Constitutionality of any specific search methodology, at least not during the TSA era. But I may have missed or forgotten something.

chollie

?? But why now?

TSA has thoroughly 'debunked' all concerns about radiation (routine or via mis-calibration or malfunction) and has been successful if refusing to allow independent testing or even machine-posted dosimeters at the checkpoints.

What changed? And so suddenly?

chollie

From the WaPo piece:

'Until those new machines are in place, one terrorism security expert said, the capacity of checkpoints will be diminished. The TSA said it had not determined how long it would take to have the replacement machines up and running.

“You can assume until then that you will have a reduction in security,” said Rafi Ron, a former Israeli security operative who works as a consultant in McLean. “That will require a manual pat-down, which is not well accepted by the public, for good reason.”'

Global_Hi_Flyer

Why should they? There is no personal responsibility or liability for their decisions in these matters. The only time there would be personal responsibility is if an attack happened and some congresscritter excoriated them for "not doing enough". "Out of an abundance of caution" really means "We'll never get punished for doing too much".

susiesan

delete

susiesan

Once they are bought and installed someone please let us know how to identify these machines. I will go back to opting out wherever they are used.

halls120

You already identified it as a perfect confluence of events, to which I'd add a second Obama term, which gives them time to quietly hide Rapiscan's failures, and quell AFGE's pressure - I have to believe someone inside finally figured out that the stonewalling would eventually crumble. This way, the details of Rapiscan's failures and the real story on radiation leakage never see the light of day.

Boggie Dog

http://as-e.com/products-solutions/p.../smartcheck-ht

http://as-e.com/products-solutions/p...uct/smartcheck

chollie

(bolding mine)

This is the real missing puzzle piece for me. Who finally sat up and decided that bailing on Rapiscan was preferable to continued stone-walling (something that TSA excels at, with Congressional and Executive impunity)?

Boggie Dog

Probably someone who finds doing time in a federal prison not to their liking.

RadioGirl

The exact wording of the statement from Bloomberg is fascinating. TSA have some sort of contractual arrangement with three companies, not necessarily the same arrangement for all three, and it's for new machines which "must have" (implied future tense) privacy software.

What it does NOT say is that TSA have agreed to purchase/deploy scanners from all three companies. Nor does it say that all three companies have scanners now which meet TSA's requirements.

From the links to AS&E provided by Boggie Dog a few posts up from here, it appears that AS&E currently has the so-called "chalk outline" similar to the original Rapiscan machine.
Curious that they specifically exclude facial features. Look at the pictures and decide for yourself, but it's certainly no MMW-ATR type Gumby figure.

It also says:
This is the same so-called "privacy" protections that the Rapiscan units had: "it's just a chalk outline", "the images can't be stored" and the image-viewing screener is in another room, so they can't see you IRL.

What that implies to me is that AS&E has not yet developed the "privacy software" that is available for the MMW, and further, may run into the same technical problems in doing so.

It is possible that TSA are keeping AS&E on the books as a potential supplier, perhaps to create a sense of competition for the MMW suppliers, and perhaps to diffuse the claims that Rapiscan is being dropped because of the x-ray health risk.

(It's also possible that the management of TSA is dumber than a bag of hair, and still believes that the x-ray scanner is harmless and can be made to work with ATR. I'm not discounting this option.)