Tag Archives: TSA

TSA under fire for security flaws

TSAlogo

WASHINGTON – Facing scathing criticism, Transportation Security Administration officials were a no-show at a House hearing on Wednesday.

During a three-hour hearing by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Homeland Security Inspector General John Roth took the TSA to task over systemic shortcomings in providing American aviation security throughout the agency’s almost 14-year history.

Despite government funding of more than $7 billion a year, “we remain deeply concerned about [TSA’s] ability to execute its important mission,” Roth said in a report prepared for the hearing.

The IG identified a series of deficiencies in TSA programs and operations through more than 114 audits and investigations since 2005, according to the report.

Among the findings:

  • Covert tests which smuggled simulated explosives and weapons found significant security vulnerabilities.
  • Billions of dollars spent on technology acquisitions “revealed no resulting improvement” in security.
  • Personnel repeatedly failed to follow security protocols.
  • Weaknesses in TSA equipment “have a real and negative impact on transportation security.”

“This report is an indictment of the failure of the TSA,” said chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation Rep. John Mica, R-Fla. “Not just in one area, but in almost every one of their functions.”

The hearing also provided further critique of America’s aviation security.

Jennifer Grover, acting director of the Government Accountability Office’s Homeland Security and Justice section, noted TSA shortcomings in addressing screening errors, imaging technology, passenger risk assessment and expedited screening processes.

Although a lot of attention has been paid to passenger screening and security, “little progress has been made securing the far larger portion of the airport where passengers do not have access,” said Rafi Ron, president of transportation security consulting firm New Age Security Solutions.

Absent from the hearing was rebuttal from the TSA itself.

“We’ve had an exceptionally difficult time getting information from the TSA on some very basic matters,” said House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

According to Chaffetz, TSA Acting Administrator Melvin Carraway was invited to speak at the hearing, but Homeland Security “felt it was demeaning to have the acting administrator sit on the same panel as a non-governmental witness.”

“That’s absurd,” Chaffetz said. “That’s offensive.”

According to DHS spokesman S.Y. Lee, however, TSA Acting Deputy Administrator Mark Hatfield, Jr. was prepared to testify, but “Chairman Chaffetz declined to allow him to do so.”

“The Department of Homeland Security is respectful of Congress’ oversight responsibilities and is committed to transparency and accountability,” Lee said.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Blogger challenges TSA body scanners, renews constitutionality issue

[field name=”vid1″]

WASHINGTON – On March 3, Jonathan Corbett sewed a pocket on the side of his shirt, placed a metal carrying case inside and stepped in line to walk through a body scanner at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Florida – betting that the metal case would not be detected.

Corbett, an engineer and “TSA Out of Our Pants!” blogger, was running an experiment. He theorized that because the Transportation Security Administration’s imaging technology shows the human body as white and all metallic objects as black against a black background, concealing objects on the side of the body would make them “invisible.” He wanted to see if his metal carrying case on the side of his shirt would pass undetected by the body scanners.

“I was totally nervous,” he said. “I didn’t have a machine in advance to test it on at home or anything.”

He made it through, and  ran the same test the next day at Cleveland-Hopkins International Airport through a millimeter wave scanner, one of the TSA’s latest models of imaging machines.

Corbett posted a video on March 6 titled “How To Get Anything Through TSA Nude Body Scanners,” detailing how he seemed to have outsmarted the TSA’s machines. The video quickly picked up steam on the Internet, drawing more than 1 million viewers on YouTube within a week and propelling Corbett into the media spotlight.

Corbett sued the TSA in November 2010 after the administration adopted the scanners, but the court case over the constitutionality of body scanners has proceeded slowly since then. To speed up the process and eliminate body scanners’ use for airport security, he had the idea that “if these body scanners were proven completely ineffective, the TSA would have to stop using them.”

But the TSA is skeptical of his claims.

“The video is a crude attempt to allegedly show how to circumvent TSA screening procedures,” the TSA said in an official statement released March 8. “TSA conducts extensive testing of all screening technologies in the laboratory and at airports prior to rolling them out the field…It is completely safe and the vast majority use a generic image that completely addresses privacy concerns.”

Questionable Effectiveness

At its surface, Corbett’s findings tackle questions over the machine’s technology, which are consistent with previous studies done by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and other agencies that have also looked into the efficiency of body scanners, according to Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union.

“The effectiveness of the body scanners is highly questionable,” Stanley said. “What we’ve been saying since the beginning is that the costs and benefits of this technology don’t match up.”

The GAO reviewed the machines after a bombing attempt on Christmas Day 2009 by the “underwear bomber,” saying, “While officials said [the scanners] performed as well as physical pat downs in operational tests, it remains unclear whether the advanced imaging technology would have detected the weapon used in the December 2009 incident.”

(Shirley Li/Medill)

Reacting to Corbett’s video and defending the ability of the body scanners to detect explosives, TSA blogger Bob Burns explained on the administration’s official blog that the machines are just “one layer of our 20 layers of security…and is not a machine that has all the tools we need in one handy device. We’ve never claimed it’s the end all be all.” The post also pointed out that travelers can opt out of going through the body scanner and receive a pat-down instead.

The TSA uses two types of body scanners: backscatter X-ray machines by companies like Rapiscan Systems, and L-3 Communications’ newer millimeter wave device, both of which produce the white-on-black image Corbett tested. The former uses X-rays, while the latter bounces wave energy off the traveler’s body to detect anomalies.

Rapiscan released a statement on the video, assuring travelers the machines are effective.

“The threat detection capabilities of the Rapiscan Secure 1000 system have been extensively tested by the TSA, the UK Home Office, and other government security agencies,” the Rapiscan statement read. “These tests have demonstrated that the Secure 1000 is able to detect a wide range of metallic and non-metallic items regardless of where they are concealed on a person’s body.”

Privacy Questions and Government                                                                      

Still, privacy advocates and others have criticized the technology as invading people’s privacy because they show a person’s nude body in determining whether the travelers have concealed items that could be security threats.

Corbett’s ultimate goal is not just to disprove the technology’s effectiveness, but to raise the issue of privacy with body scanners and the TSA security system.

“The initial thought was definitely the privacy concerns,” he said. “Essentially the TSA is saying, ‘If you want to fly, we’re either going to give you a virtual strip search or pat down your genitals or both.’ Those don’t seem like acceptable options.”

“They’re extremely intrusive technology,” Stanley said. “The basic concern is that they are highlyviolative of privacy and at the same time appear to be of questionable effectiveness, which leads us to wonder if they’re worth the tradeoff.”

Though the TSA dismissed the video in its blog post and statement, the scale of the response to the post shows Americans more aware of the discrepancies in aviation security, said Corbett.

“I think more and more Americans are saying, ‘Why are we doing this? Why are we letting our families be photographed naked, or our children be touched inappropriately in ways that no one is allowed to touch them, but because they have a TSA badge this is somehow acceptable for our safety?’” Corbett said. “More and more Americans are starting to stand up and say no as the horror stories continue to come out.”

According to Stanley, the body scanners will likely stay in use, despite Corbett’s efforts. However, he said the government should pay more attention to the flaws in the technology.

“The government is a big battleship, and it changes course only gradually,” Stanley said. “I think that one thing is clear is that they need to get rid of all scanners that don’t provide the body outline…We certainly hope that the TSA goes in that direction, and the government needs to invest more money into getting the basics of security rights.”

As for Corbett, the blogger said the TSA’s reaction shows the administration’s “arrogance,” and pointed out that the administration did not deny his attempt exposed a flaw in their system. In a blog post on Saturday, Corbett said he will file a Freedom of Information Act this week for a copy of the security video of him walking through the scanners as further proof, and encouraged his readers to talk about the issue with their senators and congressmen.

“Right now, the ball is still in the TSA’s court,” Corbett said. “It’s been incredible to see that Americans are now wise to what the TSA is doing and doesn’t like it.”

Tagged , , , , ,

How much privacy are you willing to sacrifice for airline safety?

CHICAGO — Privacy or civil liberties? That is the question airline travelers will soon have to answer for themselves.  At least that is how the ACLU paints the picture.

Security at airports is at an all-time high following the failed Christmas Day airline bombing and body scanners are leading the charge to beef up airport security.  With plans to buy 1,000 scanners over the next two years, the TSA hopes to prevent future Christmas Day bombing incidents and sees these scanners as the best course to prevent such incidents.

While the reasoning that scanners will detect explosives and save lives seems straightforward, the ACLU says there are more shades of gray to that picture.  

Immediately following the attempted Christmas Day bombing, the ACLU released multiple press releases saying the spread of body scanners is not the appropriate response; that the technology is an invasion of privacy; and the effectiveness of this technology isn’t strong enough to warrant such an invasion.

Gary Daniels, the associate director of the Ohio ACLU, echoes those sentiments.

“There are less invasive was to keep people safe,” Daniels said.  “This is a virtual strip test.  People don’t realize the level of invasiveness [of the body scanners].”

Daniels continued saying, “There is no right to fly.  But the question is should we be making as difficult as possible to fly.  That seems to the TSA’s and government’s default setting right now.”

However, a recent March 31 Unisys Security Index survey reported that 93 percent of Americans are willing to sacrifice some level of privacy and 65 percent of Americans said they are willing to cooperate with airport body scans.

Mark Cohn, the vice president of Enterprise Security at Unisys Cooperation, said that these results were not a shock to them.

“This is not surprising,” Cohn said.  “People are pretty concerned with safety.  There must be a balance between risk and reward.  People realize they have to give up some privacy for security.”

Cohn also stressed the fact that there seems to be a level of trust among consumers and the TSA and thus there is a higher acceptance rate of security protocols such as the body scanner.

But Cohn said that the body scanner is just one piece to the puzzle.

“It is not the answer to all threats,” Cohn said.  “[The body scanner] complements the other layers of technology.  There can’t be a fixed protocol with airport security.  A mix of technologies creates the greatest, most effective defense.”

Tagged , , , ,

Repeal of TSA policy raises question of unfair profiling

CHICAGO — The Transportation Security Administration on April 2 reversed an airport security measure targeting international passengers from 14 countries, prompting speculation about the underlying cause of the policy change.

Following the attempted bombing of Northwest flight 253 on Christmas Day by 23-year-old Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the TSA implemented enhanced screening for passengers arriving from Iran, Sudan, Syria, Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and Cuba.

The new security protocols, which now apply to all inbound passengers traveling to the U.S., “supersede the emergency measures put in place immediately following the attempted terrorist attack on Dec. 25, 2009,” according to the TSA press release.

But was country-specific screening eliminated because it is ineffective, or did implications of racial and religious profiling prompt the administration to abandon the policy?

Some U.S.-based Islamic organizations pressured the Obama administration to repeal the policy, claiming the additional screenings unfairly singled out travelers from predominantly Muslim countries. These advocacy groups lend equal weight to national origin, ethnicity and religion, and consider any form of selective treatment based on those criteria a breach of civil liberties.

Dr. William Reno, a specialist in African politics at Northwestern University, believes that TSA policy directives like this engender negative sentiment toward the U.S. in the countries they single out.

“In places like Sudan and Somalia…people there are very sensitive to any U.S. policy that affects their country,” Reno said. “Actions like the TSA screening become very big news overseas. It fits a narrative that extremists prefer, and it may be that…Washington weighed the benefits with the real costs and decided that it was best to repeal.”

Beyond the promise of equal screening for all, the TSA’s press release can be construed as intentionally vague. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano bats around phrases like “real-time, threat-based intelligence” and “layers of security, both seen and unseen”, but never approaches any kind of concrete new direction for the TSA.

Opponents of the Christmas Day policy might regard this dearth of newness as a political maneuver, a bid to scuttle an unpopular, knee-jerk decision in the guise of a fresh direction. But the possibility also exists that country-specific screening simply does not work.

According to Dr. John Williams, co-author of “Soldiers, Society, and National Security and U.S. National Security: Policymakers, Processes, and Politics”, a concern for political correctness was not the primary driver behind the policy change.

“If it was profiling based on ethnicity per se, that would be a problem,” Williams said. “But regarding people from highly problematic countries and giving them special attention, I don’t think that is a problem politically – it’s inefficient, that’s the problem. You have to find something more effective…than screening everyone from those countries.”

Williams references Israel’s method of behavioral profiling as a potentially effective substitute, but cautions that screening under almost any circumstance is a form of profiling, including the “new, enhanced…and random screening measures” outlined by the TSA.

Abdulmutallab was charged Jan. 6 in a six-count criminal indictment in the Eastern District of Michigan for his alleged role in the Christmas Day bombing, and faces life in prison if convicted, according to a Justice Department announcement.



Tagged , ,