I guess we will all be wearing the Emperor’s New Clothes with the new millimeter wave scanners that the TSA is planning to introduce into airports.
What screeners will see is similar to people having no clothes at all. Of course it looks like they have no hair either, and it gives everything a weird metallic look.
It is not an erotic picture at all, but as you have probably heard, there is a huge reaction over privacy concerns.
The TSA is trying to minimize this problem by separating the screeners from the security lines, so they aren’t near the people who are being denuded.
However, this is a clear case where video analytics can make this privacy issue disappear – just as well as your clothes disappear with this scanner.
As I mentioned in my previous post on Big Brother versus Little Brother, analytics have the potential to improve privacy with video surveillance:
http://spotonsecurity.com/2009/02/13/big-brother-versus-little-brother/
In the case of body scanners: There is no need for screeners to see the whole body. The only thing they need to look at is the area where a gun or potential bomb is located. This can be displayed on a cartoon image of the body, to show them where it is located.
It turns out that most metal objects and bomb materials are easily distinguishable by their brightness or darkness on the scene. This is why the millimeter wave technology works so well. You can quickly spot the foreign objects.
Well, if a person’s eyes can quickly detect the differences, so can video analytics.
I’m surprised that the TSA is pushing this new body scanner without such a capability. I know they are aware of the benefits with adding analytics, because I brought the idea up for them about 5 years ago, when they first started getting interested in millimeter wave. They immediately saw the benefits of using automatic object detection as a way of protecting privacy.
Perhaps they felt there was an immediate threat that couldn’t wait. I don’t know, but they are asking millions of people to give up their privacy for something that may not be necessary.
I’ve read a lot of comments where people say they would choose being scanned over a physical search, because it is much less invasive. And, based on that, people say they will go along with their loss of privacy.
But what if they knew that wasn’t the real choice they had to make. What if their body parts did not have to be made visible unless they had something suspicious hidden in or under their clothes – and then it would only show that area of their body? Now, what would people choose? Would they still think giving up their privacy was worth it?
I don’t think many would think being scanned and viewed naked would seem so great any more. Of course, there will always be a few who enjoy the idea, I suppose.
The good news is that I understand L-3 may be introducing a system that uses video analytics exactly as I’ve described. I’ve heard they are testing it at the Amsterdam airport, where it highlights questionable objects on a “gumby like” figure.
I wonder if the TSA should try forcing the body scanner technology on everyone until a solution with real privacy protection is ready?
One thing is clear: Video analytics does, in this case, offer a chance to put real clothes back on the Emperor and all the rest of us as well.
This is a good example of the power of analytics to improve privacy. It also seems like a no-brainer to me as the right thing to do.
