Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

radsec.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 65 posts

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#11

Post by darkmighty »

jamoes wrote: post #10
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Backscatter x-ray technology was removed from airports. [1] All airports now use millimeter wave technology. [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner

Millimeter wave scanners still subject the body to radiation, even though they don't have the work "X-Ray" in the name. Radiation damage to your body is cumulative throughout your life, so if you care about your longevity, you'd be wise to opt-out of subjecting your body to this radiation whenever possible.

Note that this view of "cumulative ratiation" is a myth, and a costly one. A recent note on this: http://atomicinsightscom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/C...

(there's not only a treshold, there may also be some hormesis, i.e. a slight decline in cancer rate for small doses)

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#12

Post by devindotcom »

nardi wrote: post #5
devindotcom wrote: post #3

They removed these machines from airports in 2013 but are still using them elsewhere - prisons, gov't offices. So while you may not be able to bomb a plane, you can still take a gun into court. Lovely!

The airports I frequent (in particular San Jose International) are very much still using full-body scanners. Edit: Do you mean this particular model is no longer in use? If so, are newer models not susceptible to these attacks?

Sorry, yes, different models with different techniques - but the result is largely the same (and I would guess the weaknesses as well).

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#14

Post by dangerlibrary »

kmowery wrote: post #13

Hi! Lead author here. We'll be giving a talk on this work tomorrow at the USENIX Security, but I'm happy to answer any questions you have here before then.

Theoretically, how many of these (or similar) techniques would work against the millimeter wave scanners currently deployed in US airports?

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#15

Post by saryant »

Calcite wrote: post #6
devindotcom wrote: post #3

They removed these machines from airports in 2013 but are still using them elsewhere - prisons, gov't offices. So while you may not be able to bomb a plane, you can still take a gun into court. Lovely!

Aren't the machines in use today using the same technology? Instead of showing the full image, they are applying pattern matching and only showing suspect regions to the operators. Supposedly to protect privacy...

Backscatter machines (the big blue boxes) were removed. Millimeter wave machines (the clear plastic cylinder) are still in place.

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#17

Post by CamperBob2 »

jamoes wrote: post #10
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Backscatter x-ray technology was removed from airports. [1] All airports now use millimeter wave technology. [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner

Millimeter wave scanners still subject the body to radiation, even though they don't have the work "X-Ray" in the name. Radiation damage to your body is cumulative throughout your life, so if you care about your longevity, you'd be wise to opt-out of subjecting your body to this radiation whenever possible.

Sigh. Using bullshit to argue against bullshit just leaves the whole world shittier.

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#18

Post by toufka »

jamoes wrote: post #10
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Backscatter x-ray technology was removed from airports. [1] All airports now use millimeter wave technology. [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner

Millimeter wave scanners still subject the body to radiation, even though they don't have the work "X-Ray" in the name. Radiation damage to your body is cumulative throughout your life, so if you care about your longevity, you'd be wise to opt-out of subjecting your body to this radiation whenever possible.

Millimeter wave scanners are of an entirely different kind of 'radiation' than backscatter X-rays in the same way 'red light' is of a different kind of radiation from 'alpha particles'. Yes, technically they are are the "radiation" of an emitted particle from an interaction. But they are of significantly, quantitatively, and oncogenically different kinds of 'radiation'.

Backscatter X-ray radiation is of very high intensity and almost certainly can cause damage to biological surface tissue. Millimeter wave uses non-ionizing radiation - it does not have the capability of causing what we generally refer to when we speak of biological damage by radiation. It might do something else - though this seems to be debatable, and largely hypothetical, it is simply incapable of the damage that a backscatter X-ray machine could realistically cause.

Here's the letter authored by significant scientists written to the White House in regards to their thoughts on the backscatter machines [1].

[1] http://www.ucsf.edu/sites/default/files/legacy_files/concern...

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#19

Post by kmowery »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #14
kmowery wrote: post #13

Hi! Lead author here. We'll be giving a talk on this work tomorrow at the USENIX Security, but I'm happy to answer any questions you have here before then.

Theoretically, how many of these (or similar) techniques would work against the millimeter wave scanners currently deployed in US airports?

We don't have one of those machines to test on, so we can't say for sure.

We think it's likely that they went through the same sort of evaluation process that put the Secure 1000 into service, and that they should be publicly reviewed by independent researchers.

Re: Security Analysis of a Full-Body Scanner

#20

Post by jodrellblank »

joshfraser wrote: post #9

These machines are such a blatant violation of our Constitutional rights. We shouldn't be searched like this without probable cause or a search warrant. Whether they are effective or not is irrelevant.

We don't have a constitution.

(Not everyone on the internet is American, and of those who are, none can do anything about erosion of your rights. Complain to your local political representative, who potentially can).

Post reply on HN