8 ms·

100 Naked Citizens: 100 Leaked Body Scans

162 points by ojbyrne 16y ago

slashcom 16y ago
These weren't nearly as high resolution as I expected. I'm surprised they're even useful. I guess that's encouraging in one aspect.
- yafujifide 16y ago
  According to the article, "this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique."
- Xuzz 16y ago
  It might (partially) be due to the "identifying features" being removed from the images.
- pak 16y ago
  This is an older machine, the newer backscatter X-ray type make pictures that look like this: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20022861-10391704.html http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20022861-10391704.htm... Yep, your "junk" is fully visible. Paparazzi's wet dream... I mean, if the LAPD can't keep pictures of a battered Rihanna from TMZ[1], wait until Paris Hilton decides to fly commercial through LAX. (Celebrities can't always afford charter, can they?) [1] http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,498157,00.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,498157,00.html
  - chunkbot 16y ago
    I can't imagine Paris Hilton's backscatter images being all that sensational. You can find much more detailed images with a cursory search online. I get your point, though.
- matwood 16y ago
  The conspiracy side of me says these lower resolution images were purposely released to try and calm the public backlash. I remember seeing much higher resolutions images when these machines first came out.
twymer 16y ago
Originally posted Gizmodo article with some discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1910533 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1910533
bmelton 16y ago
The scariest thing about this, to me, was seeing how people not even in the scanner were picked up. I suppose it's to be expected, since it isn't exactly shielded in the way you'd expect it to be, but if this thing is just spewing radiation all over the place, I can't imagine what's going to become of the people that actually work near it all day long. My privacy is one thing, and I do a good deal to avoid the Backscatters, but this is potentially an actual life and death situation that people may not have even considered, or worse, that is drowned out by all the discussion about our freedoms.
- detst 16y ago
  In another post, I made the comment that anyone that opts out of going through these machines should use this fact to plant fear in the minds of TSA agents. Every one of them should at least be a little concerned about this and it would be great to see them oppose these machines for their own safety, if nothing else.
  - johnglasgow 16y ago
    You act like TSA agents came up with the idea to grope and body scan everyone in the airport. This is a huge pain the in ass for them, and they know that it poses a health risk for themselves. However, this is their job, and they are carrying out orders from their superiors. So there's no reason to make snide remarks to the agents.
    - dwwoelfel 16y ago
      They can quit.
    - detst 16y ago
      > This is a huge pain the in ass for them I'm sure it is. > However, this is their job, and they are carrying out orders from their superiors. I fundamentally oppose this reasoning as justification for doing something you think is wrong. > So there's no reason to make snide remarks to the agents. Saying this as you out opt isn't snide: "I'm a little concerned about the radiation myself but I can't imagine what it's like for you to stand near this machine all day. It must be worrying". I would argue that many of these people are told that the machines are perfectly safe and don't even consider that they are being exposed while standing outside.
Ahmes 16y ago
Free startup idea: wordpress blog giving a $10 bounty per back scatter image submitted, post adwords, simultaneously profit and raise an uproar.
- dfranke 16y ago
  In what sense is that anything other than bribing government officials?
  - sigstoat 16y ago
    what's your point? bribery isn't a one-sided thing. if there are government officials that'll sell out for $10, we all very much need to find that out before someone offers them more than $10 for something more valuable than a nudie pic.
    - dfranke 16y ago
      My point is that this business plan is a quick ticket to somewhere where you'll get a considerably more invasive search than you'd get from the TSA.
  - makmanalp 16y ago
    It's not really a bribe per se if you offer a bounty to the public and an official responds. It probably violates privacy laws and such though.
    - dfranke 16y ago
      As soon as you pay out to said official, it's a bribe. Besides, who would you expect to respond?
- mofey 16y ago
  Do it! Wordpress is ez to use.
waratuman 16y ago
What! The spec are always right! Always.
mv 16y ago
heh, this 'leak' probably was on purpose and from a machine that is so old/blocky/pixilated to make the public see this as a non-issue. The images leaked look NOTHING like the ones at http://dontscan.us/ http://dontscan.us/ .... If the general public see this as what is being fought against, they'll probably think it isn't even worth a fight. Nevermind that this is proof that the government broke a promise to never store/transit the information from these machines. That won't raise enough of a fuss because people are used to being lied to. That and we have a bunch of spineless politicians backed by spineless scared populace who would trade every liberty for just a little more 'security'. Nothing makes me more angry than people who don't want to be responsible for their own actions.
- AndrewMoffat 16y ago
  The conspiracy theorist in me agrees with you. The quality of these images are shit, and the first thing that came to my mind was "well these aren't so bad."
macrael 16y ago
To be clear: these images came from the US Marshals Service scanning people entering a courthouse in Florida, not from the TSA. The TSA maintains that their machines are unable to store images: http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/08/tsa-response-to-feds-admit-storing.html http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/08/tsa-response-to-feds-admit-stori... These images were not leaked or snuck out by an employee or anything, they were acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request. I think the TSA's scanners are an unjustifiable invasion of privacy, but I think that people should make their arguments with the facts. This article is shamelessly caching in on people's outrage without really adding much to the discussion. The US Marshals' statement on the subject: http://www.usmarshals.gov/news/chron/2010/080510a.htm http://www.usmarshals.gov/news/chron/2010/080510a.htm
- loewenskind 16y ago
  >The TSA maintains that their machines are unable to store images They may maintain that but they've done one lie after another about these machines. An actual TSA screener seems to indicate here [1] that they do indeed store the images, they just choose to delete them if they aren't pertinent. This sounds much more likely, if they find something they will probably need the photos for any court case that comes later. Note that this would also mean that the images can be retrieved from the machines and possibly in a very convenient manner. [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/e49v8/by_request_iama_tsa_supervisor_amaa/c156b75 http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/e49v8/by_request_iama_...
- marze 16y ago
  These images are from a different type of scanner that produces much fuzzier images than the x-ray based scanners being used on air travelers. It would be naive to think the government responded to the freedom of information request and released these images now during the controversy about the TSA pat downs and x-ray scanners by chance, as it will give those not paying attention the impression the images are not very detailed.
- watchandwait 16y ago
  TSA is lying about storage. The machine's specs REQUIRE storage of images in a "Test Mode", and even allow export of the images through a USB thumb-drive. Check out pages 10 and 16. http://epic.org/open_gov/foia/TSA_Procurement_Specs.pdf http://epic.org/open_gov/foia/TSA_Procurement_Specs.pdf
heyrhett 16y ago
I counted 8. And these aren't the scans everyone is talking about.
yatsyk 16y ago
I bet a number of porn movies are filmed already when these scanners are used in story :)
Tarski 16y ago
"While the fidelity of the scans from this machine are of surprisingly low resolution, especially compared to the higher resolution “naked scanners”" The pictures don't quite live up to the title of the article.
stretchwithme 16y ago
Not to worry. The TSA scanners don't store images so there's no way anyone will every see them. I saw it on the news. And they even showed one of the images that are impossible for anyone else to see.
huadie 16y ago
╭⌒╮WELCOME http://www.onseeking.com/ http://www.onseeking.com/ ----- ~ ¤ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╭⌒╮╭⌒╮～╭⌒╮ HANDBAG 35$ ,））））,''）~~ ,''~） ╱◥█◣ ╱◥█◣ SHOES 35$ ｜田｜田｜｜田｜田｜ CLOTH 15$ ╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬ 2010 NEW Your fashion! Your season! Michael bag fashion tidalcurrent.the fashionable element "bag" you - glamour infinite. Mass commodity, low discount, the buy cheaper. { www. onseeking .com } mall price can buy eligible products and services. Select all kinds of women, men's shoes, etc, { onseeking .com } shopping navigation! In addition, the company has a good reputation, quality standard, At a reasonable price. In the past few years, have been deeply overseas My friends for their support. Therefore, please rest assured purchase. ====== Free transport====== !!!!!!!!!!!!!! (http://www.onseeking.com/ http://www.onseeking.com/) !!!!!!!!!!!! input this URL: (http://onseeking.com/ http://onseeking.com/) you can find many cheap and fashion stuff (jor dan s-h-o-e-s) (NBA NFL NHL MLB j-e-r-s-e-y) ( lv h-a-n-d-b-a-g) (cha nel w-a-l-l-e-t) (D&G s-u-n-g-l-a-s-s-e-s) (ed har dy j-a-c-k-e-t) (UG G b-o-o-t) WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!! ----------------------
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

162 points by ojbyrne 16y ago

These weren't nearly as high resolution as I expected. I'm surprised they're even useful. I guess that's encouraging in one aspect.

yafujifide 16y ago
According to the article, "this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique."
Xuzz 16y ago
It might (partially) be due to the "identifying features" being removed from the images.
pak 16y ago
This is an older machine, the newer backscatter X-ray type make pictures that look like this: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20022861-10391704.html http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20022861-10391704.htm... Yep, your "junk" is fully visible. Paparazzi's wet dream... I mean, if the LAPD can't keep pictures of a battered Rihanna from TMZ[1], wait until Paris Hilton decides to fly commercial through LAX. (Celebrities can't always afford charter, can they?) [1] http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,498157,00.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,498157,00.html
- chunkbot 16y ago
  I can't imagine Paris Hilton's backscatter images being all that sensational. You can find much more detailed images with a cursory search online. I get your point, though.
matwood 16y ago
The conspiracy side of me says these lower resolution images were purposely released to try and calm the public backlash. I remember seeing much higher resolutions images when these machines first came out.

twymer 16y ago

Originally posted Gizmodo article with some discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1910533 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1910533

bmelton 16y ago

The scariest thing about this, to me, was seeing how people not even in the scanner were picked up. I suppose it's to be expected, since it isn't exactly shielded in the way you'd expect it to be, but if this thing is just spewing radiation all over the place, I can't imagine what's going to become of the people that actually work near it all day long. My privacy is one thing, and I do a good deal to avoid the Backscatters, but this is potentially an actual life and death situation that people may not have even considered, or worse, that is drowned out by all the discussion about our freedoms.

detst 16y ago
In another post, I made the comment that anyone that opts out of going through these machines should use this fact to plant fear in the minds of TSA agents. Every one of them should at least be a little concerned about this and it would be great to see them oppose these machines for their own safety, if nothing else.
- johnglasgow 16y ago
  You act like TSA agents came up with the idea to grope and body scan everyone in the airport. This is a huge pain the in ass for them, and they know that it poses a health risk for themselves. However, this is their job, and they are carrying out orders from their superiors. So there's no reason to make snide remarks to the agents.
  - dwwoelfel 16y ago
    They can quit.
  - detst 16y ago
    > This is a huge pain the in ass for them I'm sure it is. > However, this is their job, and they are carrying out orders from their superiors. I fundamentally oppose this reasoning as justification for doing something you think is wrong. > So there's no reason to make snide remarks to the agents. Saying this as you out opt isn't snide: "I'm a little concerned about the radiation myself but I can't imagine what it's like for you to stand near this machine all day. It must be worrying". I would argue that many of these people are told that the machines are perfectly safe and don't even consider that they are being exposed while standing outside.

Ahmes 16y ago

Free startup idea: wordpress blog giving a $10 bounty per back scatter image submitted, post adwords, simultaneously profit and raise an uproar.

dfranke 16y ago
In what sense is that anything other than bribing government officials?
- sigstoat 16y ago
  what's your point? bribery isn't a one-sided thing. if there are government officials that'll sell out for $10, we all very much need to find that out before someone offers them more than $10 for something more valuable than a nudie pic.
  - dfranke 16y ago
    My point is that this business plan is a quick ticket to somewhere where you'll get a considerably more invasive search than you'd get from the TSA.
- makmanalp 16y ago
  It's not really a bribe per se if you offer a bounty to the public and an official responds. It probably violates privacy laws and such though.
  - dfranke 16y ago
    As soon as you pay out to said official, it's a bribe. Besides, who would you expect to respond?
mofey 16y ago
Do it! Wordpress is ez to use.

waratuman 16y ago

What! The spec are always right! Always.

mv 16y ago

heh, this 'leak' probably was on purpose and from a machine that is so old/blocky/pixilated to make the public see this as a non-issue. The images leaked look NOTHING like the ones at http://dontscan.us/ http://dontscan.us/ .... If the general public see this as what is being fought against, they'll probably think it isn't even worth a fight. Nevermind that this is proof that the government broke a promise to never store/transit the information from these machines. That won't raise enough of a fuss because people are used to being lied to. That and we have a bunch of spineless politicians backed by spineless scared populace who would trade every liberty for just a little more 'security'. Nothing makes me more angry than people who don't want to be responsible for their own actions.

AndrewMoffat 16y ago
The conspiracy theorist in me agrees with you. The quality of these images are shit, and the first thing that came to my mind was "well these aren't so bad."

macrael 16y ago

To be clear: these images came from the US Marshals Service scanning people entering a courthouse in Florida, not from the TSA. The TSA maintains that their machines are unable to store images: http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/08/tsa-response-to-feds-admit-storing.html http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/08/tsa-response-to-feds-admit-stori... These images were not leaked or snuck out by an employee or anything, they were acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request. I think the TSA's scanners are an unjustifiable invasion of privacy, but I think that people should make their arguments with the facts. This article is shamelessly caching in on people's outrage without really adding much to the discussion. The US Marshals' statement on the subject: http://www.usmarshals.gov/news/chron/2010/080510a.htm http://www.usmarshals.gov/news/chron/2010/080510a.htm

loewenskind 16y ago
>The TSA maintains that their machines are unable to store images They may maintain that but they've done one lie after another about these machines. An actual TSA screener seems to indicate here [1] that they do indeed store the images, they just choose to delete them if they aren't pertinent. This sounds much more likely, if they find something they will probably need the photos for any court case that comes later. Note that this would also mean that the images can be retrieved from the machines and possibly in a very convenient manner. [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/e49v8/by_request_iama_tsa_supervisor_amaa/c156b75 http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/e49v8/by_request_iama_...
marze 16y ago
These images are from a different type of scanner that produces much fuzzier images than the x-ray based scanners being used on air travelers. It would be naive to think the government responded to the freedom of information request and released these images now during the controversy about the TSA pat downs and x-ray scanners by chance, as it will give those not paying attention the impression the images are not very detailed.
watchandwait 16y ago
TSA is lying about storage. The machine's specs REQUIRE storage of images in a "Test Mode", and even allow export of the images through a USB thumb-drive. Check out pages 10 and 16. http://epic.org/open_gov/foia/TSA_Procurement_Specs.pdf http://epic.org/open_gov/foia/TSA_Procurement_Specs.pdf

heyrhett 16y ago

I counted 8. And these aren't the scans everyone is talking about.

yatsyk 16y ago

I bet a number of porn movies are filmed already when these scanners are used in story :)

Tarski 16y ago

"While the fidelity of the scans from this machine are of surprisingly low resolution, especially compared to the higher resolution “naked scanners”" The pictures don't quite live up to the title of the article.

stretchwithme 16y ago

Not to worry. The TSA scanners don't store images so there's no way anyone will every see them. I saw it on the news. And they even showed one of the images that are impossible for anyone else to see.

huadie 16y ago

╭⌒╮WELCOME http://www.onseeking.com/ http://www.onseeking.com/ ----- ~ ¤ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╭⌒╮╭⌒╮～╭⌒╮ HANDBAG 35$ ,））））,''）~~ ,''~） ╱◥█◣ ╱◥█◣ SHOES 35$ ｜田｜田｜｜田｜田｜ CLOTH 15$ ╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬ 2010 NEW Your fashion! Your season! Michael bag fashion tidalcurrent.the fashionable element "bag" you - glamour infinite. Mass commodity, low discount, the buy cheaper. { www. onseeking .com } mall price can buy eligible products and services. Select all kinds of women, men's shoes, etc, { onseeking .com } shopping navigation! In addition, the company has a good reputation, quality standard, At a reasonable price. In the past few years, have been deeply overseas My friends for their support. Therefore, please rest assured purchase. ====== Free transport====== !!!!!!!!!!!!!! (http://www.onseeking.com/ http://www.onseeking.com/) !!!!!!!!!!!! input this URL: (http://onseeking.com/ http://onseeking.com/) you can find many cheap and fashion stuff (jor dan s-h-o-e-s) (NBA NFL NHL MLB j-e-r-s-e-y) ( lv h-a-n-d-b-a-g) (cha nel w-a-l-l-e-t) (D&G s-u-n-g-l-a-s-s-e-s) (ed har dy j-a-c-k-e-t) (UG G b-o-o-t) WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!! ----------------------

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]