Comments on: Surprise! Feds stored thousands of checkpoint body scan images after all http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:29:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: arikol http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852235 arikol Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852235 Why, I do believe so. At least in the UK this has been discussed and that was the first result. If that has been changed then I've missed it. I think this needs to be tested in court. Abusing the child protection laws to actually HELP freedom, privacy and security would be a nice change of pace. As well as showing a pineapple up the TSA's collective arse. Why, I do believe so.
At least in the UK this has been discussed and that was the first result. If that has been changed then I’ve missed it.

I think this needs to be tested in court. Abusing the child protection laws to actually HELP freedom, privacy and security would be a nice change of pace. As well as showing a pineapple up the TSA’s collective arse.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-936459 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-936459 A body scan. A smile. A wink. Still I got nowhere. A body scan. A smile. A wink. Still I got nowhere.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852238 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852238 Scanning any child with these devices is the creation of child pornography, and storing any such image is the possession of such. Scanning any child with these devices is the creation of child pornography, and storing any such image is the possession of such.

]]> By: holtt http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852494 holtt Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852494 Hmm as much as I don't like those scanners, there's a lot of jumping to conclusions here. First of all this was at a courthouse and was not done by the TSA. Second of all, just because the people at the courthouse were feds and so are the TSA doesn't mean the TSA also is doing this. Hmm as much as I don’t like those scanners, there’s a lot of jumping to conclusions here. First of all this was at a courthouse and was not done by the TSA. Second of all, just because the people at the courthouse were feds and so are the TSA doesn’t mean the TSA also is doing this.

]]> By: brianary http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-933666 brianary Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-933666 Isn't everyone with explicit material required to keep records to establish the age of the subject? Just <em>not having those records</em> should be enough to get these guys in trouble. Isn’t everyone with explicit material required to keep records to establish the age of the subject? Just not having those records should be enough to get these guys in trouble.

]]> By: deckard68 http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852517 deckard68 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852517 I guess that explains why the US Marshall's service bought up all those "hawtlawyers.com" and "perp-pervs.com" urls! I guess that explains why the US Marshall’s service bought up all those “hawtlawyers.com” and “perp-pervs.com” urls!

]]> By: brianary http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-933670 brianary Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-933670 "It would not be possible for an operator to determine the gender of the person being imaged from the millimeter wave images, much less identify their anatomy." Then what good are they? Seriously, how can weapons of various description be discerned with something so blurry? Sorry, I just don't buy it. “It would not be possible for an operator to determine the gender of the person being imaged from the millimeter wave images, much less identify their anatomy.”

Then what good are they?

Seriously, how can weapons of various description be discerned with something so blurry?

Sorry, I just don’t buy it.

]]> By: gravytop http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852521 gravytop Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852521 Well, this certainly isn't a statement of the law. An image of a naked child is not child pornography per se -- it has to have a lewd focus on certain bodily parts, or someone has to possess it for inappropriate purposes, etc. Otherwise, any number of medical textbooks and documents would be pornography and illegal. Well, this certainly isn’t a statement of the law. An image of a naked child is not child pornography per se — it has to have a lewd focus on certain bodily parts, or someone has to possess it for inappropriate purposes, etc. Otherwise, any number of medical textbooks and documents would be pornography and illegal.

]]> By: gravytop http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852523 gravytop Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852523 how is it that you've been subjected to so many involuntary examinations? just curious what this means... how is it that you’ve been subjected to so many involuntary examinations? just curious what this means…

]]> By: Brainspore http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-933681 Brainspore Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-933681 Especially if the weapon in question is cleverly disguised as a penis. Especially if the weapon in question is cleverly disguised as a penis.

]]> By: J. B. Crawford http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-933428 J. B. Crawford Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-933428 The lackluster coverage of this issue frustrates me. It's very important to note that the U. S. Marshals Service (in no way related to the TSA) was using the Brijot Gen2 scanner, which is completely different from the models used in airports. The procurement order requiring the ability to retain and transfer images is a procurement order entered by the Marshals service, NOT by the TSA. The Brijot Gen2 systems do not meet TSA requirements and as such cannot be used in airports. The Brijot Gen2 scanners produce images that are far less detailed than the images produced by the ProVision systems in use by the TSA. It would not be possible for an operator to determine the gender of the person being imaged from the millimeter wave images, much less identify their anatomy. The Troy Record has images and video of a Brijot system in use: http://www.troyrecord.com/articles/2010/04/21/news/doc4bce7ac3414f2457734546.txt You can see that the millimeter wave images are very blurred, and in no way could be called 'x-ray' or 'naked' images. Only the silhouette of a person is visible. I am disappointed to see BoingBoing repeating this news item without actually looking in to it at all. These systems are in no way comparable to the TSA systems, and the outrage over this news item is virtually entirely because of confusion over what exactly the Marshals Service machines did. This confusion is fed in to by the illustration featured in the quote on this page, which is completely and utterly unlike the images captured by the machines in question. The lackluster coverage of this issue frustrates me.

It’s very important to note that the U. S. Marshals Service (in no way related to the TSA) was using the Brijot Gen2 scanner, which is completely different from the models used in airports. The procurement order requiring the ability to retain and transfer images is a procurement order entered by the Marshals service, NOT by the TSA. The Brijot Gen2 systems do not meet TSA requirements and as such cannot be used in airports.

The Brijot Gen2 scanners produce images that are far less detailed than the images produced by the ProVision systems in use by the TSA. It would not be possible for an operator to determine the gender of the person being imaged from the millimeter wave images, much less identify their anatomy. The Troy Record has images and video of a Brijot system in use: http://www.troyrecord.com/articles/2010/04/21/news/doc4bce7ac3414f2457734546.txt

You can see that the millimeter wave images are very blurred, and in no way could be called ‘x-ray’ or ‘naked’ images. Only the silhouette of a person is visible.

I am disappointed to see BoingBoing repeating this news item without actually looking in to it at all. These systems are in no way comparable to the TSA systems, and the outrage over this news item is virtually entirely because of confusion over what exactly the Marshals Service machines did. This confusion is fed in to by the illustration featured in the quote on this page, which is completely and utterly unlike the images captured by the machines in question.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852278 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852278 I wonder if you write "eat me" on your undershorts in metallic ink, would it show? I wonder if you write “eat me” on your undershorts in metallic ink, would it show?

]]> By: AirPillo http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852534 AirPillo Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852534 It should be illegal for administration officials to deliberately make false statements about their agencies' practices to the public. Perjury laws should apply to such statements, as well as the associated jail sentences for committing such perjury. It should be illegal for administration officials to deliberately make false statements about their agencies’ practices to the public.

Perjury laws should apply to such statements, as well as the associated jail sentences for committing such perjury.

]]> By: dainel http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-950595 dainel Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-950595 Next time you go through one of these, just ask the operators. "May I have a copy of my scans please? I want to have them printed out and hung above my bed at home." Oh, flying naked is not as unreasonable as it sound. They could have you change over to disposable paper gowns (think hospital), at the airport. Next time you go through one of these, just ask the operators. “May I have a copy of my scans please? I want to have them printed out and hung above my bed at home.”

Oh, flying naked is not as unreasonable as it sound. They could have you change over to disposable paper gowns (think hospital), at the airport.

]]> By: Xeni Jardin http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-933458 Xeni Jardin Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-933458 Interesting, thanks JB! Noted. The duplicate post Cory published today has been removed (we always remove duplicate posts, when it happens). Interesting, thanks JB! Noted. The duplicate post Cory published today has been removed (we always remove duplicate posts, when it happens).

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-937300 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-937300 When will Wikileaks post the naked TSA pictures that we are being told are not being stored? When will Wikileaks post the naked TSA pictures that we are being told are not being stored?

]]> By: Chris-Mouse http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852054 Chris-Mouse Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852054 So if any of those tens of thousands of images are of children, would that make the court security people guilty of making and distributing child pornography? So if any of those tens of thousands of images are of children, would that make the court security people guilty of making and distributing child pornography?

]]> By: Sagodjur http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852064 Sagodjur Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852064 So where's the surprise again? We knew this was going to happen, even when they said it wouldn't happen. "We're buying machines, computers really, that don't have the ability to store information. So nobody has to worry. We're not going to be saving these pictures..." If you look at the product info page for the Gen 2, you see it looks like a Windows XP interface. http://www.brijot.com/products/gen2/appsoftware.php So why were we supposed to believe they *couldn't* save images? So where’s the surprise again?

We knew this was going to happen, even when they said it wouldn’t happen.

“We’re buying machines, computers really, that don’t have the ability to store information. So nobody has to worry. We’re not going to be saving these pictures…”

If you look at the product info page for the Gen 2, you see it looks like a Windows XP interface.

http://www.brijot.com/products/gen2/appsoftware.php

So why were we supposed to believe they *couldn’t* save images?

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852065 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852065 I'm not a lawyer, but I bet one could make a case for that. I’m not a lawyer, but I bet one could make a case for that.

]]> By: Viper23 http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852070 Viper23 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852070 So, if they're not storing the images and something does get through, how are they going to go back and review what/who went wrong? So, if they’re not storing the images and something does get through, how are they going to go back and review what/who went wrong?

]]> By: franko http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852072 franko Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852072 i'm not surprised or outraged at all. i mean, i didn't believe them in the first place, so... i’m not surprised or outraged at all. i mean, i didn’t believe them in the first place, so…

]]> By: Jackasimov http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852075 Jackasimov Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852075 I'm not entirely sure I can understand why they'd even want to have these images on file, other than sheer perversion. Am I missing something? I'm not saying I like for strangers to look at me naked, I'm just saying I'd be happier if I could provided my own professional "full body scans." I’m not entirely sure I can understand why they’d even want to have these images on file, other than sheer perversion. Am I missing something? I’m not saying I like for strangers to look at me naked, I’m just saying I’d be happier if I could provided my own professional “full body scans.”

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852076 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852076 They said "not normally activated when installed at airports". The image-gate images are from a court house. Technically they have not been proven wrong. We really just need to get over our victorian era body prudishness. We seem to have no problem blowing people up and torturing them during prime time. They said “not normally activated when installed at airports”. The image-gate images are from a court house. Technically they have not been proven wrong.

We really just need to get over our victorian era body prudishness. We seem to have no problem blowing people up and torturing them during prime time.

]]> By: OldRipbeak http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852077 OldRipbeak Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852077 Suggested listening (NSFW): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT-JiKB9ctA Suggested listening (NSFW): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT-JiKB9ctA

]]> By: slgalt http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852087 slgalt Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852087 Someone needs to make a nsfw pr0n type parody of these images, then the conservatives will cry foul and ban these things. Think of the children! Someone needs to make a nsfw pr0n type parody of these images, then the conservatives will cry foul and ban these things. Think of the children!

]]> By: Inventorjack http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852105 Inventorjack Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852105 Is that mouse in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me? (Someone was bound to say it. Might as well be me.) Is that mouse in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?

(Someone was bound to say it. Might as well be me.)

]]> By: Wilks http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852117 Wilks Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852117 Not at all surprising, of course. Makes me think of a recent paper on how hard it is to actually, permanently erase data on a computer. http://www.vmsweb.net/attachments/pdf/Useful_Void.pdf After reading that, the idea that TSA or whoever could competently, securely erase the data was quite far-fetched. One would need a whole erasure-management and accountability system just to ensure citizen privacy and responsible record destruction. I hardly think they're that invested in it. Not at all surprising, of course. Makes me think of a recent paper on how hard it is to actually, permanently erase data on a computer.

http://www.vmsweb.net/attachments/pdf/Useful_Void.pdf

After reading that, the idea that TSA or whoever could competently, securely erase the data was quite far-fetched. One would need a whole erasure-management and accountability system just to ensure citizen privacy and responsible record destruction. I hardly think they’re that invested in it.

]]> By: ultranaut http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852125 ultranaut Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852125 Rule 36 Rule 36

]]> By: UUbuntu http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-934310 UUbuntu Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-934310 Wikileaks releasing those images would generate some real coverage from the cable news networks ("Just ahead, thousands of fuzzy photos of nekkid people released by Wikileaks -- is YOURS among them?"). The stories would go on for weeks. Now, 400,000 pages of possible war-related crimes from Iraq documented, released and made public? Ho hum -- 5 minutes of coverage and nobody visits. Wikileaks releasing those images would generate some real coverage from the cable news networks (“Just ahead, thousands of fuzzy photos of nekkid people released by Wikileaks — is YOURS among them?”). The stories would go on for weeks.

Now, 400,000 pages of possible war-related crimes from Iraq documented, released and made public? Ho hum — 5 minutes of coverage and nobody visits.

]]> By: jungletek http://boingboing.net/2010/08/04/surprise-feds-stored.html#comment-852136 jungletek Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-852136 You mean rule 34? You mean rule 34?

]]>