It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Body scanners can store, send images

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Body scanners can store, send images


www.cnn.com

The TSA specified in 2008 documents that the machines must have image storage and sending abilities, the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said.

In the documents, obtained by the privacy group and provided to CNN, the TSA specifies that the body scanners it purchases must have the ability to store and send images when in "test mode."

That requirement leaves open the possibility the machines -- which can see beneath people's clothing -- can be abused by TSA insiders and hacked by outsiders, said EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole. So, the "absolutely no way to save images" comment has been proven wrong. The "absolutely no way to transmit images" has been proven wrong. At first I was feeling complacent about this issue, but now I am trying to figure out what exactly are they not telling us.

They have been proven to be lying about the functionality of these machines. Ok, that is what we do know. What about the stuff that hasn't become public yet.

Scary.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


la2

posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...


here is the original thread for this story



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Of course they can store images. Did they think that people would believe that they would just use the "honor code" if they tried to prosecute someone for bringing a weapon into the airport?

"Trust us, we saw a weapon on him but we have no proof because the scanners don't save the images.... BUT IT WAS THERE!"



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Good find.
I'm not a fan of these machines. I believe that any exposure to radiation is wrong, especially if you're just being scanned at random.
I'd love to see a study done on two groups of people of all ages and ethnicities.
Group A and B would be tested for cancer, blood cells, sperm counts, etc.

Then group a and b travel together in the same plane around the world. While travelling you test the jet-lag and see if it takes the people being scanned longer to recover, I believe it will.
Then at random or every stop you do the same inital tests again.

I believe this machine is just another 'weapon' to try and kill us off as quickly as possible and without the public being any the wiser, I mean most mis-informed (almost anyone who has never jumped on a site like this, once) public citizens believe it is for their protection,

IDIOTS!

Anything that seems too good to be true probably is, therefore more studies need to be done. LONG EXTENSIVE STUDIES!!!



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Great scan pornography to be seen in the net thanks to hackers and those behind the national security.

What I don't get is how people will willingly submit to scanning without a question, unless they have some exhibitionist wet dream behind their patriotic duty.

Incredible.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
why should we believe anything they say when they keep lying relentlessly over and over and over again?

Perhaps there is more to this, we gotta ask ourselves why save these images? Is this to be used for a global database in addition to fingerprints?

1) They got all our fingerprints
2) They telephone monitored so many conversations probably have that stored in a database too
3) they probably are going to store this post of mine as well
4) GPS chips in credit cards
5) Even when your phone is off they can still hear you
6) Naked images from these body scanners too now

So, they have a database with our names, fingerprints, naked blueprint-like image but more realistic, and our behaviors and political opinions and know where we are at all times.
Anyone see Gattacca?

Is there anything they are missing?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Anyone see Gattacca?

Is there anything they are missing?


Well don't forget the passports....
anyway, gattacca rings bells, a movie or tv series?
worth a watch? similar to what? Fringe/X-Files/Stargate/1984/Blade Runner?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by kingdogol
 


Similar to fringe, X files and the caste system





posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Similar to fringe, X files and the caste system



Thanks!
My year 10 science teacher I hated because she always did things out of the text book and I'm the complete opposite, I need hands aon and to be creative and allow for new possibilities.
I believe it was in her classroom that I first watched this, well I think it was.
Anyway I've been trying to remember the name of this movie for years now as I remembered it described the current path we're currently headed down.
THIS WAS THE FILM
GATTACCA!
This is the only reason I had any respect for the teacher at all, but even then she was trying to use it to show us we all have dna and that is why we should do the right thing etc, I think she completely missed the point of the whole movie!
I've been dying to see this movie again, only when I was old enough to take my ideas further and more beyond the barriers, for years!

THANKS! HEAPS!
Star for you mate!
Great movie and very very on point of the OP!



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Yeah, I never believed it when they said the machines couldn't save images. Sucks to be proven right, though. It's amazing to me how afraid people must be that they'll readily put up with things like this...sounds like they're the ones letting the terrorists win.

It would be nice if people would stop giving up freedoms for the sake of a false sense of security. I can't believe how many people I've talked to who actually want even more measures taken at airports. The majority of attempted attacks are stopped long before anyone makes it to the checkpoint.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Viscount
It would be nice if people would stop giving up freedoms for the sake of a false sense of security. I can't believe how many people I've talked to who actually want even more measures taken at airports. The majority of attempted attacks are stopped long before anyone makes it to the checkpoint.


Agreed. These devices aren't doing anything to prevent Terrorism, or making Air Travel any safer. All they are doing is making it more difficult to travel, infringing upon Privacy Rights, giving a false sense of security, and adding one more unnecessary cost to Taxpayers.

To be honest, I haven't flown since 9/11. I have chosen alternative forms of transportation not because of fear of Terrorism but fear of the TSA. I personally wouldn't feel any less secure sitting on a plane next to a Arab, but I certainly feel less secure about undergoing all the government imposed scrutiny. When even what I chose to eat on the plane is documented and stored to be data-mined at a later date, I'd rather not surrender that information. I'll just go by auto, train or ship, thank you very much.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
I asked this question in a couple of other threads, but thought I'd repeat it here, to a different audience.

I would like to ask those who know much more about software than me, this question, which could end the dispute over the scanners. If I can pose it in an understandable manner.

Is it possible to have the scanner software examine each pixel of the image and compare them using preprogrammed parameters? If so, could the images only be made visible to a security screener, when a certain number of pixels fall within those parameters?

It appears to me that any potential contraband is visible, due to the lightness or darkness of the pixels, which compose that image. In other words, a metal weapon, such as a knife or gun, is seen as a darker image. A concealed powder or liquid is seen as a lighter image.

So, my idea is that if a person is scanned and no anomaly is detected, by the scanner's software, then no image is displayed on the screener's monitor. Then, everyone would just have to ensure they have nothing on their person, which would activate the software's preprogrammed alerts.

Does that make sense?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 


I predict some celebrity will walk through one and that ohsovery detailed pic will get leaked and go viral hitting every tabloid and email box, lawyers will get richer and terminals will come to a standstill with people refusing to use them.

[edit on 11-1-2010 by riley]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by WTFover
 


Sure makes sense somewhat
well firstly you wouldn't examine each pixel as individual pixels are non-identifiable, meaning they are a little tiny dot, you cannot identifiy anything with that tiny itty bitty dot, it's the formation of several dots that create something identifiable.

What you are suggesting is a good idea
Basically a software can have a pre-stored database of wireframe images and if an object matches it then it flags it.

it's good to ID guns and certain forms of weapons but what do you do with liquids? Liquid can take any shape, what about powder, that can also take any shape, also what if ten different passengers all carry different parts of a weapon that they later assemble on the plane.

Also you spoke of lightness or darkness, i believe the images from these scanners are monochrome, so everything would be dark or light.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join