Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
Aviation Regulation, Environment and Operation
2011 - 1 - HES2986A
Sasa Ruzicka
I.D 7184069
1
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
Question number 2
On July 20th, 2010 the US Homeland Department of Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano,
announced that advanced imaging (body scanning) technology would be rolled out at 28 airports across
the United States of America. Critically evaluate the validity of using this type of equipment. In particular
address the possible privacy violations that may flow from using this technology.
The implications of full body scanners in airports across various airport in the USA which have been
introduced only within the last few years has created argument and debate over the validity of
advanced imaging (body scanning) technologies. According to the US Homeland Security Secretary, J.
Napolitano, these security precautions have been deemed necessary. However, others have taken
different views over the use of advanced imaging technology. Many reasons have been sounded over
the issues that go hand in hand with the implication of these security measures. There have been many
different religious groups which have expressed concern over the religious implications associated with
the revealing of the apparently naked body. Secondly, the immediate invasion of privacy due to the
imaging of this technology presents a serious concern to many if not all who would be subject to the use
of this technology. Another issue which has been raised is the potential delays that will be caused by the
use of body scanners adding to the already existent delays from baggage screening which will create
even more passenger discomfort. Furthermore, which could be the biggest issue, bodies being directly
impacted by radiation activity involved with the use of scanners has been the reason many questions
have been brought to attention in relation to the safety of the general public. All of these factors must
be taken into account when discussing the validity of using advanced imaging technology, which leads to
the question, “are the safety hazards, privacy violation and inconvenience worth the aviation security
and safety risk?”
On Christmas day 2009, there was an incident which involved an attempt at bombing a transatlantic
flight from the UK to Detroit, US. This incident gave need for the security measures in airports around
the world to be drastically improved. The increased use of body scanners is clearly an attempt to tighten
security at airports in the US, with the scanners being able to disclose hidden objects that traditional
metal detectors cannot find (Hall 2010). The technology works based on imaging techniques, which
enable a 2 or 3 dimensional complete body image of an individual to be processed. The image then
contains a picture of the skin’s surface, including anything that is on it, however nothing that is inside
the body (Cavoukian 2009). However, to minimize passenger embarrassment, such scans are only taken
in private booths, away from regular security check lines. The images presented on the machines are
deleted immediately with the machines rendering no capacity to store or save images (Sacirbey 2010).
There have been other benefits which arise from the use of such technology other than the detection of
non-metallic objects that the conventional metal detectors cannot detect. Body scanners, according to
airport authorities, are designed to be a more convenient and desired choice for passengers when
compared to strip-searching or body pat-downs (Cavoukian 2009). Other critics have claimed that these
2
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
strip-search
search and that the result is more or less the same. However,
machines only operate as a virtual strip
there has been an increase in privacy measures which are being implemented to defend passenger
privacy. Scanning options can be implemented on certain machines so that private features, including
facial features, can be blurred (Cavoukian 2009).
http://morrisonworldnews.com/wp
http://morrisonworldnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Body-scanner-at-airport-reveals-weapons.jpg
weapons.jpg
The images above contain samples of 2D images of people taken by the body scanners. Both of these
images were created using ‘backscatter’ technology.
http://www.walyou.com/img/airport_security_body_scan_tech_1.jpg
3
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
The image on the previous page contains a sample of a 3D image taken of a person by a body scanner.
This image was created using Millimetr
Millimetre-wave technology, creating a 3D image, however the woman’s
face has been blurred for privacy.
It is also important to note that if something of interest is detected by screen operators, the image that
is transferred to fellow
low security personal is not that of the body scan taken by the machine. Instead, the
image is that of a generic person, with the area of concern highlighted on the body so that the security
officials are notified of the area of interest on a passenger (Ca
(Cavoukian 2009).
http://www.sds.l-3com.com/advancedimaging/AutoDetectMannequin_L3SDS.jpg
3com.com/advancedimaging/AutoDetectMannequin_L3SDS.jpg
The above image gives an example of generic imaging indication an area of interest.
These examples prove that although advanced body scanning images may seem invasive, when
combined with privacy filters and operation is kept strictly appropriate, it can constitute a great
advantage and a more secure approach to aviation security.
Many different religious groups around the world have commented specifically on the use of full body
scanning technology in airports around the world. Claims have been made that not only do body
scanners cause direct offence to different religious codes, they also break defining laws of the various
religious faiths. An Islamic religious council known as the Figh Council of North America, have issued a
Fatwa (religious edict), which states that the use of the new scanner technology directly violate Islamic
laws. The Islamic faith follows modesty, the body is considered very personal and should no
not be seen by
others. This is evident in the strict dress code of Muslims whose purpose is to cover the entire body. Not
only is it difficult for the Muslims because of their dress standards, but the issue of airport security is a
very sensitive one with thee Islamic people. On one hand they want to combat terrorism but at the same
time want to respect Islamic beliefs and customs (Sacirbey 2010). The CEO of the Orthodox Union
(2010), Rabbi Steven Weil, has commented that the scanners also violate the Jewish llaw
aw of Modesty
(Tzniut). Jewish law states that a man or woman must not be seen exposed by the opposite sex, which in
4
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
turn creates the need for separate body scanners for men and women which are to be monitored and
screened by officials of the according gender. The Buddhist faith has taken a more conservative and
literal approach to the scanners, according to executive director of the Barra Centre for Buddhist Studies
Andrew Olendski (2010), stating that if the sole purpose of the advanced imaging technology is to
protect, then it is considered a good and welcomed device, however, if the body scanners are designed
to oppress and be operated in an incorrect and invasive manner, then it has no place in society. Suhag
Shukla (2010) of the Hindu American Foundation has made it clear that in true Hindu tradition they
believe in sacrifice for the greater good. In the issue of the body scanners the good that comes from
using this technology far outweighs the bad that also comes with it. In this modern day and age 84% of
the world’s population believes in a religion in one form or another. No matter how different the laws
and traditions of each religion, all of the various religions should be considered of the high priority and
consulted with in this sensitive subject so that a solution which tries to meet all different concerns as
best it can will be found when it comes to the implementation of advanced imaging technology in
airports around the world.
Another equally if not more important issue which comes with the implication of advanced body
imaging at airports identifies the health risks that are associated with the use of radiation to produce
these images. Dr Allen F. Hresja (2005), who received his doctorate in low energy nuclear physics from
the University of Notre Dame, states that society has indeed developed a fear of radiation however
small it may be. Dr Hrejsa cites cartoons such as spiderman and The Incredible Hulk as well as more
realistic factors such as past government negligence involving nuclear testing for the fear of this
element. The risk involved with scanners used at airports is in fact extremely low that in order for an
individual to be exposed to above quota or dangerous amounts of radiation, they would have to pass
through the scanner 2500 times in one year (NCRP Commentary No. 16: Presidential Report on
Radiation Protection Advice: Screening of, December 15, 2003). The chances that a single person would
visit an airport and be subjected to that much body screening in one year is quite obviously extremely
low. Although these issues have been addressed in a way, Dr Hresja has commented that passengers
which are to enter the scanners, sign a consent form agreeing that they are indeed aware of the
implications of the use of this technology on them. This simple procedure eliminates the possibility of
individuals claiming that they were unaware of what this technology used by airport security is exposing
them to such as x-rays thus also eliminating potential court cases where individuals are after quick and
easy money leaving the airports liable. The collection and storage of these consent forms may also act as
a reference leaving a history of those who have been exposed to low level radiation emitted by the body
scanners. With the use of these records and future testing it is possible to research the long term effects
of the use of body scanners, as of today the long term risks associated with the use of advanced imaging
technology many years into the future is still not known. Is it really possible to confirm that the
increased security measure outweigh the possible medical risks in the future (Hresja 2005)? Until
someone has produced the technology to see into the future it remains quite obvious that this question
will go unanswered for many years to come.
5
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
Further contributing to the concern of the use of advanced imaging technology at airports around the
world is the addition of yet another security procedure which must be undertaken by passengers adding
to the already time delaying procedures which already exist. In turn this will create further
inconvenience to passengers and potentially chaotic airport delays and missed flights. Airport security
and the US Homeland Department of Security will find answers to put a silence to this question, possibly
suggesting that these delays would be tolerated if in fact they produced an effective aid in the discovery
of a potentially viable security threat. This in turn gives arise to further questions being asked such as
the effectiveness of this technology. Is the body scanning technology going to be effective in discovering
hazardous objects on individuals as claimed? Due to the shallowness of the scan, particularly the 2D
scanners, objects can in fact be hidden in body folds and not be detected by the machines. This problem
is compounded by the increasing privacy components, such as blurring particular body parts (Holtzman
2007). A precaution which has been added to secure individuals privacy may also be exploited which
can then give reason for authorities to abolish set precautions further invading privacy. This will only add
fuel to the already burning fire which is the ongoing debate and discussion over the use of advanced
imaging technology. Business Traveler editorial director Tom Otley (2010) has called for reviewed
profiling techniques, so that those who are chosen to participate in the scan are in fact of particular
interest, for example where a passenger has flown in from, where they are going, their nationality,
where they live etc. Such a system would help curb horrible queues and delays for passengers according
to Mr. Otley. However, this brings questions into the equation as to how a person is profiled in order to
be chosen to participate in the scanning process. How is a person chosen to participate in the scanning
process? Is it random selection? Or are there methods involved relating to race or religion? This will
bring arise to enormous racial profiling which is already existent in airport security and also around the
world in general. Many people will be made very uncomfortable because they are subject to this
profiling. It is these factors that have the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) in the UK very
wary on the issues surrounding the use of advanced imaging technology. The commission has issued a
warning to operators of the machines, nothing that singling out people for scanning, such as Muslims or
Asians, could breach the governmental legislation on the grounds of religious and racial discrimination
(Whitehall 2010). In accordance with the warnings issued by the EHRC, child protection laws in the
United Kingdom may also be under threat from the use of advanced imaging technology. The issues
outlined may only be addressed with an approach that takes a fair but thorough profiling system, maybe
one based on statistics of previous attempted attacks and incidents. Although with the vast problems
and affairs that continually arise in the world, this profiling system will have to also continually change in
order to meet the best possible standard of aviation security. Choosing who will be subject to body
scanning, races, religions, etc, remains and will always remain a contentious issue for airport security
personnel.
6
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
This is clearly an ongoing issue with various facets that will continue to impact people from airport
security to individuals subject to scanning for some time to come. Current research also goes on to show
that there is very little medical risk in using the body scanning machines. If the use of these machines is
abused and used thousands of times per year certain health factors may come to arise, however the
possibility of an individual being subject to body scans that amount of times seems farfetched. Although
an inconvenience, body scanners provide a relatively fast service in comparison to current methods,
whilst adding an extra layer of welcomed security. Despite the fact that privacy issues generally appear
to be the public’s main concern, as long as sensible use of the technology coupled with strict policy is
being followed, it appears that there is no real reason for any individual to feel that their privacy is being
invaded or under threat. The opinions being expressed by the wide spread religious population have
proved to be a tremendous input of various religious beliefs giving a diverse idea of the different
procedures and measures that will be required in order to respect and acknowledge people’s faiths and
beliefs, enabling tighter security coupled with an element of cultural sensitivity. With the technology of
body scanning and profiling capabilities on the rise, in the future these resources may provide a faster
and more efficient service in the attempt to secure aviation safety. Therefore in the end it is clear that
the tremendous security benefits outweigh the issues that have been covered, as emphasized by
Australia’s former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd ‘There can be no higher priority for a national
government than the security of the country; protecting the country and protecting its citizens.
We must take every reasonable measure to underpin the security of the Australian travelling
public using our airports.’ (Hall 2010). When it comes to ensuring the safety of passengers, it is
clear that no security measure is too great.
7
Sasa Ruzicka
7184069
Bibliography
Cavoukian, A 2009, ‘Whole Body Imaging in Airport Scanners: Activate Privacy Filters’ Information &
Privacy Commissioner PhD
Hall, A 2010, ‘Body scanners to be centrepiece of Australian airport security upgrade', BBC Monitoring
International Reports
Holtzman, D 2007. ‘Invasion of the Body Scanners; New airport X-Rays may be a useful way to detect
hidden explosives -- but officials will have to keep a tight rein on their use.’ Business Week Online
Hresja, A 2005, ‘The use of low dose x-ray scanners for passenger screening at public transportation
terminals should require documentation of the “informed consent” of passengers’ Medical Physics, Vol.
32, No. 3, pp. 651–653
Olendzki, A 2010, Referenced in ‘Jews, Muslims wary of full-body scanners’ The Christian Century, pp. 18
Otley T 2010, "Talking point: body of evidence" Business Traveller
Sacirbey, O 2010, ‘Jews, Muslims wary of full body scanners’, The Christian Century, pp. 17
Shukla, S 2010, Referenced in ‘Jews, Muslims wary of full-body scanners’ The Christian Century, pp. 17
Weil, S 2010, Referenced in ‘Jews, Muslims wary of full-body scanners’ The Christian Century, pp. 17
Whitehall, M W 2010, ‘Airport full-body scanners 'break laws on privacy'. Sunday Times London, England
8