Researchers Easily Slipped Weapons Past TSA’s X-Ray Body Scanners

http://www.wired.com/2014/08/study-shows-how-easily-weapons-can-be-smuggled-past-tsas-x-ray-body-scanners

by ejr • 12 years ago

76 41 12 years ago

Jemaclus3• 12 years ago

I wanna know how this kind of experiment actually works.

Bill: "Hey Joe, we're gonna do an experiment, and we need you to smuggle a chainsaw through airport security."
Joe: "All right. Hold my sign, I don't wanna lose it."
TSA: "Is this a chainsaw?"
Joe: "I'm a researcher, I swear."
TSA: "Likely story. FULL CAVITY SEARCH, FELLAS."
Bill: "Hmm, that didn't work. Next up, flamethrowers. Hey Frank..."

ejr2• 12 years ago

They would have used their own machine in a controlled setting to ensure it's the machine they're testing, not the temperament of the TSA agents

  ...the University of Michigan, and Johns Hopkins plans to reveal their own results 
  from months of testing that same model of scanner

kmowery7• 12 years ago

That's correct. We have our own machine and tested it in a lab setting; we never attempted to smuggle contraband in the field.

Jemaclus3• 12 years ago

Ah, that makes sense.

dmix• 12 years ago

The scanners are available outside of airports. The university could easily purchase one for study.

xanderstrike• 12 years ago

You could read the article, it's all there.

Jemaclus3• 12 years ago

I could, but then my joke wouldn't work.. ah well. :)

rwmj• 12 years ago

I wonder how much of a dose of radiation they exposed themselves (or their grad students) to while researching this?

kmowery7• 12 years ago

Hi! Lead author here.

We only had a person in front of the X-ray scanner a few times, to minimize exposure. Most of the time we scanned a radiological "phantom", which is designed to look exactly like a human under the X-ray spectrum.

pmorici3• 12 years ago

Are you going to test the millimeter wave style machines as well?

herbig2• 12 years ago

The article title is false. Within the article it admits the TSA no longer uses this type of body scanner.

pmorici3• 12 years ago

"the X-ray scanners are still installed in courthouses, jails, and other government security checkpoints around the country."

herbig2• 12 years ago

Thus the falseness of the article title. The title suggests that terrorists can take over planes using these methods, which is not the case.

dang• 12 years ago

Can you (or anyone) suggest an accurate, neutral title?

Ethan_Mick• 12 years ago

"The only useful airport security measures since 9/11, were locking and reinforcing the cockpit doors, so terrorists can’t break in, positive baggage matching and teaching the passengers to fight back. The rest is security theater.”[0] --Bruce Schneier

[0] http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/12/tsa-insan...

kmowery7• 12 years ago

Hi! Lead author here.

We'll be giving a talk on this work tomorrow at the USENIX Security conference, but I'd be happy to answer questions here before then!

dhimes• 12 years ago

Good luck catching your flight :-)

ejr2• 12 years ago

What were some of the challenges of carrying out these tests? And I imagine procuring the machine may have been an issue if the manufacturers knew you were exposing their shortfalls.

kmowery7• 12 years ago

You'd be surprised how difficult it was to bring it on campus and actually turn it on! Over the course of the project, we worked with our IRB, radiological safety experts, regulatory compliance, and campus public safety before we put someone in front of the device. We set the machine up in a lab with a concrete wall to backstop the radiation, and had a 2 meter safety zone around it while it was actually emitting X-rays.

As for procurement, we purchased our machine on eBay from a private seller who purchased it from a U.S. government surplus auction.

batbomb2• 12 years ago

Hi,

Have you tried concealing things under a couple of inches of a biological material and wrapping that to the body (beer gut, pregnant lady)?

Specifically, I'm thinking a a few large chunks of ham, coupled with some transglutaminase to aid in the forming of a "meat shield".

kmowery7• 12 years ago

Yes we did! Any organic material shows up pretty well under backscatter X-ray, and so can be used to cover darker contraband. You can see this done with Teflon in our gallery: https://www.radsec.org/gallery.html under "Concealing a Knife by Masking".

We didn't try meat due to the mess, but it would almost certainly work as well!

(Technically, in this X-ray energy spectrum, the amount of backscatter is related to the "effective Z" of the material, where Z is the atomic number of the elements involved. Materials made from lighter elements like carbon and oxygen? Backscatters well. Heavy elements like iron? Absorbs x-rays.)

tsaoutourpants• 12 years ago

Jon Corbett here. Thanks for conducting this study. For some, watching a video of me beating the scanners isn't enough to prove it, but it becomes harder to ignore when a scientific study confirms it. It's also nice to see confirmation of the "pancake exploit" which those critical of the machines have suspected for years.

josho• 12 years ago

The article notes the $1 billion spent to deploy the machines, and later states that these machines are no longer in use. What is left unsaid is the cost to deploy the machines that replaced this model–suggesting another billion spent on more security theatre.

kmowery7• 12 years ago

The $1 billion number covers procurement, deployment and usage of both the Rapiscan Secure 1000 backscatter X-ray and L3 ProVision millimeter wave AIT systems.

The Secure 1000s have been removed; the L3 ProVisions are still deployed in airports.

DanBC3• 12 years ago

It is disappointing just how compliant people are with the stupid procedures.

But then you see the stories about people who are in the right, and are complying with the TSA procedures (going as far as having letters from TSA) who get terrible treatment.

http://rt.com/usa/154672-tsa-breast-milk-settlement/

bane2• 12 years ago

It sucks, but you really have very few alternatives, only 1 of which will actually get you onto the plane so you can get to where you're going and most of which will ensure you'll never get on a plane again.

The procedures may be stupid, but people do weight the options and can be surprisingly rational given that set of choices.

Given a choice of "get scanned and get on the plane" or "instigate an armed overthrow of the TSA checkpoint" I'm probably going to go with getting on the plane myself.

DanBC3• 12 years ago

There is the third option of "comply so that I can get onthe plane, but vigorously campaign (or at least write a single letter to my elected representative) to change the policy".

coldpie• 12 years ago

I opt out of the nude scanners every time I fly. I've never had an exceptionally unpleasant experience with the nut-gropers, but I'm a young, white, male so your experience may vary.

I have a dream of everyone opting out, overloading the system and requiring a fundamental change. But I'm always the only person doing it.

legomylibrum• 12 years ago

You can always opt out. You'll get a pat-down instead and they'll make you wait 5-10 minutes, but I always do that unless I'm running very late. If enough people do, they usually get fed up and open the metal detectors.

Researchers Easily Slipped Weapons Past TSA’s X-Ray Body Scanners

Related Stories