Hacker News Reader

Comment by minaguib | Hacker News Reader

Since their introduction, I've had no issues telling the agent "I'd like to opt out of the scanner". This adds ~10 minutes as I have to wait and perform a manual pat-down, but personally that's not something I mind. Others obviously may feel otherwise for varying reasons.

I've found this article (10 years old now, : https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/are-f... ) to be fairly well-rounded. I wonder if, since then, there has been a better analysis of actual/measured results of these technologies.

View on HN

I have always opted out of these scanners as a matter of principle. (To wit, I think it’s an erosion of privacy.) But you should know that the TSA changed their guidelines such that granting a request to opt out is effectively up to the discretion of the TSA agent at security. Their new guidance says:

>While passengers may generally decline AIT screening in favor of physical screening, TSA may direct mandatory AIT screening for some passengers.

I found out about the change as I was going through security and opted out. The folks in line behind me said “I didn’t know you could do that” and a queue formed of folks opting out. They made everyone else behind me go through the scanner, saying that it was a security risk to have folks queueing to opt out. (It’s a security risk to form a queue inside a long security screening queue?) The reality is that this rule change was needed so that they could avoid the screening process grinding to a halt if everyone requests a manual screening.

https://onemileatatime.com/tsa-scanner-opt-out/

Interesting. In EPIC v. DHS, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled that the TSA body scanners were constitutional, partly because "any passenger may opt-out of AIT screening in favor of a pat-down, which allows him to decide which of the two options for detecting a concealed, nonmetallic weapon or explosive is least invasive."

It seems like anyone who is denied the right to opt out could have a good case against the TSA in court. This Forbes article says: "Contrary to TSA’s statement in its new policy, TSA may not legally direct mandatory AIT screening for any passengers. Not according to EPIC, and not according to TSA’s own lawyers. EPIC v. DHS requires as a condition of a finding of constitutionality of the TSA screening procedures the ability of passengers to opt for pat-downs in lieu of AIT screening."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisabrownlee/2015/12/24/tsa-bod...

The nudie-scanners have been gone for over six years and the current scanners are nothing more than (at a high level) low-resolution "difference" detectors.

The only way they'll invade your privacy is if your genitals are made out of metal. And no, genital piercings don't trigger them.

With ATR (automated target recognition) scanners it is literally, definitely, assuredly, irrefutably impossible to reconstruct any image or representation of the human body in any capacity approaching useful or attributable using 2020 scanners.

What are the privacy ramifications of 2020 airport scanners?

Not 2014 scanners. I do not care about something that does not used anymore.

I would assert that a patdown is an infinitely greater "erosion" of privacy than the post-feature and contour extraction comparison of phase history data to a generalized model of the human form.

Who cares if there aren't privacy implications? It's still security theater and should be opposed on principle. Anything beyond metal detectors is pointless. You can't hijack airplanes anymore because the other passengers won't comply with hijackers anymore; that was proven on 9/11, long before any fearmongering bureaucrats imposed any of their corrupt theatrical horseshit.

In what way is it security theater?

It’s real and it works better than the technology it replaced.

Would you be interested in purchasing a tiger-repellent rock from me? I can guarantee that if you purchase one of my rocks, no tigers will eat you. They're real rocks, I assure you.

I tried to refuse walking through yet another xray upon arriving in Laos in 2014 and 10 agents appeared out of nowhere. So you walk through the xray.

None of this shit is even necessary in the first place. In more civilized countries you can be through the whole security screening before you even realize it. Pivot the make-work program to casting and smashing bricks, instead of inconveniencing everyone else. They could even keep their fancy uniforms.

Do you also opt out of millimeter wave scanners? I did opt out of the backscatter ones, but do not do that anymore.

I do, largely for political reasons, partly for trust reasons.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com