Full-Body Scan Technology Deployed In Street-Roving Vans
by Andy Greenberg / 8/24/2010
As the privacy controversy around full-body security scans begins tosimmer, it’s worth noting thatcourthouses and airport security checkpoints aren’t the only places where backscatter x-ray vision is being deployed. The same technology, capable of seeing through clothes and walls, has also been rolling out on U.S. streets.
American Science & Engineering, a company based in Billerica, Massachusetts, has sold U.S. and foreign government agencies more than 500 backscatter x-ray scanners mounted in vans that can be driven past neighboring vehicles to see their contents, Joe Reiss, a vice president of marketing at the company told me in an interview. While the biggest buyer of AS&E’s machines over the last seven years has been the Department of Defense operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, Reiss says law enforcement agencies have also deployed the vans to search for vehicle-based bombs in the U.S. “This product is now the largest selling cargo and vehicle inspection system ever,” says Reiss. Here’s a video of the vans in action.
The Z Backscatter Vans, or ZBVs, as the company calls them, bounce a narrow stream of x-rays off and through nearby objects, and read which ones come back. Absorbed rays indicate dense material such as steel. Scattered rays indicate less-dense objects that can include explosives, drugs, or human bodies. That capability makes them powerful tools for security, law enforcement, and border control. It would also seem to make the vans mobile versions of the same scanning technique that’s riled privacy advocates as it’s been deployed in airports around the country. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) iscurrently suing the DHS to stop airport deployments of the backscatter scanners, which can reveal detailed images of human bodies. (Just how much detail became clear last May, when TSA employee Rolando Negrin was charged with assaulting a coworker who made jokes about the size of Negrin’s genitalia after Negrin received a full-body scan.) “It’s no surprise that governments and vendors are very enthusiastic about [the vans],” says Marc Rotenberg, executive director of EPIC. “But from a privacy perspective, it’s one of the most intrusive technologies conceivable.”
AS&E’s Reiss counters privacy critics by pointing out that the ZBV scans don’t capture nearly as much detail of human bodies as their airport counterparts. The company’s marketing materials say that its “primary purpose is to image vehicles and their contents,” and that “the system cannot be used to identify an individual, or the race, sex or age of the person.” Though Reiss admits that the systems “to a large degree will penetrate clothing,” he points to the lack of features in images of humans like the one shown at right, far less detail than is obtained from the airport scans. “From a privacy standpoint, I’m hard-pressed to see what the concern or objection could be,” he says. But EPIC’s Rotenberg says that the scans, like those in the airport, potentially violate the fourth amendment. “Without a warrant, the government doesn’t have a right to peer beneath your clothes without probable cause,” he says. Even airport scans are typically used only as a secondary security measure, he points out. “If the scans can only be used in exceptional cases in airports, the idea that they can be used routinely on city streets is a very hard argument to make.”
The TSA’s official policy dictates that full-body scans must be viewed in a separate room from any guards dealing directly with subjects of the scans, and that the scanners won’t save any images. Just what sort of safeguards might be in place for AS&E’s scanning vans isn’t clear, given that the company won’t reveal just which law enforcement agencies, organizations within the DHS, or foreign governments have purchased the equipment. Reiss says AS&E has customers on “all continents except Antarctica.” Reiss adds that the vans do have the capability of storing images. “Sometimes customers need to save images for evidentiary reasons,” he says. “We do what our customers need.”
The x-ray view of the inside of a truck where 513 illegal immigrants were found in Tuxtla Gutierrez, northern Mexico, on May 17 in handout photo provided by ythe Government of Chiapas. Authorities detected two trucks with immigrants from at least nine countries, while the vehicles crossed a checkpoint with x-ray. According to National Migration Institute authorities this is the most important finding of immigrants in the country. (Government of Chiapas via EPA)
Security Measure, or Invasion of Privacy?
by Diane Macedo / October 22, 2010
Privacy advocates worried about x-ray scanners making their way around U.S. airports may be surprised to know the technology is also making its way onto America’s streets. The Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. military and even local law enforcement agencies are buying and deploying mobile X-ray vans that can see into the interior of vehicles around them.
The Z Backscatter Van (ZBV), manufactured by American Science and Engineering (AS&E), can be used to detect contraband such as car bombs, drugs and people in hiding. But the vans, which can also see through clothing and into some buildings, are raising privacy concerns as well as questions about health risks — and what might happen if the technology gets into the wrong hands. FoxNews.com was given a rare ride-along in a ZBV at a U.S. seaport in Elizabeth, N.J. Like airport scanners, the ZBVs use Z Backscatter technology to detect materials that contain low atomic numbers. This allows them to detect organic matter that doesn’t show up well in traditional X-ray images — including explosives and plastic weapons – in addition to metal and other materials. The technology also works in such a way that the X-Ray mechanism has no need for a detector on the far side of an object, allowing it to be extremely mobile, versatile and capable of being into a commercially available van. Once equipped, the van — which looks like a standard delivery van — takes less than 15 seconds to scan a vehicle; it can be operated remotely from more than 1,500 feet and can be equipped with optional technology to identify radioactivity as well.
The Z Backscatter vans range in cost from $729,000 to $825,000. The DHS says they have been a huge asset at the nation’s ports and borders, and at major crowd events like the Super bowl. “Using the ZBV vans over the past couple of years, we’ve gotten over a thousand seizures and 89,000 pounds worth of narcotics, approximately $4 million worth of currency, and we’ve also uncovered 10 or 11 undeclared aliens within vehicles,” said Patrick Simmons, Director of Non-Intrusive Inspection at Customs and Border Protection. “Again, we don’t purposely scan for people, but if they’re in there hiding, the ZBV will be able to spot them.” But according to the AS&E website, ZBVs also can peer through clothing and into “lightly constructed” buildings, raising serious concerns among privacy advocates. “A van that can drive down the street and look through people’s clothes, look into vehicles and even peer into your home? I think that’s an invasion of privacy and not what we should be doing,” Utah Congressman Jason Chaffetz told FoxNews.com.
AS&E says the system’s primary purpose is to screen vehicles and containers for contraband and security threats, and it doesn’t violate a person’s privacy in the rare event an individual is scanned. “If a person, such as an illegal stowaway, is present in the vehicle or container being scanned, the system creates only a silhouette with no facial or body detail,” the website says. “The system cannot be used to identify an individual, or the race or age of the person.” But Chaffetz, who is working on legislation aimed at limiting the use of the backscatter body scanners in airports, says the vans need restrictions. “There’s an appropriate use for these machines — at ports for instance, coming across the border and inspecting vehicles, hostage situations. But the company that develops these vans says they’ve sold more than 500 of these roving vans and I don’t know who’s purchased them,” he said. “I think we need to know.”
But it’s hard to know exactly who owns ZBVs, because AS&E has never fully disclosed its buyers. “Due to the highly sensitive nature of the markets that our products serve, AS&E respects the individual requests of our customers to be confidential,” the company says on its website. In a June 2009 press release the company said it sold 400 ZBVs to 85 customers in 46 countries. The company has since raised that number to 500, saying some of those purchases are now going to local U.S. law enforcement agencies.
A search of the site and additional company press releases showed that its clients include:
– U.S. Customs and Border Protection
– U.S. Transportation Security Administration
– U.S. Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
– U.S. Department of Defense, including U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force, and U.S. Marines
– North Atlantic Treaty Organization
– Royal Thai Police
– HM Customs & Excise (U.K.)
– New Zealand Customs Service
– Hong Kong Customs
– Singapore’s Immigration and Checkpoints Authority
– National Customs Agency of Bulgaria
Other releases are more vague, however, identifying the purchasers only as “the U.S government,” a “Latin American customs agency,” an “international government agency,” “U.S. law enforcement officials,” a “South American government,” a “Middle Eastern country,” a “Middle Eastern government,” a “Middle East government agency,” a “Middle East law enforcement agency,” a “South American law enforcement agency,” a “new African customer,” a “European Union (EU) and an Asia Pacific (APAC) client,” and a “Middle Eastern customer.” That ambiguity has Chaffetz worried. “In a hostage situation you want to be able to peer into the house, I buy that,” Chaffetz said. “But in the hands of a private individual? That scares the living daylights out of me. “It was cute when Superman had these powers, but now that it’s reality we need to think through how we’re going to do this. I don’t want a stranger peering through the walls of my home watching my kids.”
Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst for the ACLU, says knowing the vans are being used on the streets, even by local law enforcement agencies, is troublesome. “We don’t know who all those agencies are or what they’re using them for,” he said. “…This technology has the potential to be a tremendous invasion of people’s privacy. FoxNews.com asked police departments in the Department of Homeland Security’s five highest-ranked terror risk areas — New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., San Francisco and Chicago — if they use ZBVs. The New York Police Department confirmed it does but wouldn’t say how. “Yes, we do utilize this technology; however, we’re unable to divulge any specifics of the use due to confidentiality concerns,” Det. Cheryl Crispin of the NYPD told FoxNews.com. San Francisco PD said they do not use the vans. The other departments did not respond.
Constitution Attorney Noel Francisco says most, if not all, state privacy laws would prohibit individuals or private companies from abusing the vans, while the Fourth Amendment prohibits law enforcement agencies from doing the same. “If you take this thing and point it at somebody’s house or point it at somebody’s car, you’re engaging in a search of that individual,” Francisco said. “You can’t do that without a warrant or probable cause.” But since it’s virtually impossible to detect a ZBV search, Francisco said the law would be harder to enforce, raising the need for more guidelines. “It’s certainly very useful for certain types of things, like anti-terror detection, but we may want to put into place some kind of guidelines on where and when they can use that. Much like wiretapping,” he said.
Another issue with the machines is their potential health hazards. “So long as a person is somewhere away, like tens of feet, the dose isn’t that high, it’s very, very low indeed,” Arizona State University Professor Peter Rez, an expert in radiation physics, told FoxNews.com. But if a person were to walk next to the van while it was scanning, Rez said, “Then I would start getting worried.” AS&E says the system is safe for operators and subjects, and that “one scan of the ZBV is equivalent to flying in an airplane at altitude for two minutes.” Rez says the levels would be fine in most cases, but in certain circumstances they could pose a small risk. “Let’s assume a pregnant woman pushing a stroller slowly walks by this van and is quite close to the side of the van, maybe within one to two feet. This woman and her baby could receive a few micro Sv, still not a high number but more than the NS 43.17 standard allows,” he told FoxNews.com.
Kevin McCabe, Chief of U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Antiterrorism Contraband Enforcement Team, says DHS takes all the proper precautions when it comes to safety. “When we utilize these machines we actually have people deployed around our perimeter to ensure that no one is radiated inadvertently… and my general understanding is even if you were exposed to a dosage from one of these machines, it would be equivalent to a chest x-ray or less,” McCabe told FoxNews.com. Simmons adds that given the limited image the ZBVs show of a person, the only reason to scan someone would be to detect contraband, and given the limited image it would show of a home, there’s little use for them outside their intended security purposes. “You’d have to be inches away from the house, you’d be better off just looking into the window,” Simmons said. “And, again, a house has a pretty thick foundation. If it was brick or something like that I’m not sure the ZBV’s even powerful enough to get through that.”
Rez says one of his students reported using a ZBV at the U.N. while he was serving in the military. “It was a secondary screening mechanism for trucks going into a loading dock, but it was on a public street and they were just scanning people and nobody was being told this was going on,” Rez told FoxNews.com. “That kind of shocked me. …I think they’re being used in a more widespread manner than people would have one believe.” Regardless of whether regulations are passed in relation to the vans, McCabe says the benefits far outweigh the risks. “If local law enforcement had intelligence information that something was going to happen, there was going to be some sort of an attack and they have identified an area… it would be very useful to know where a problem might be before it happens,” he said.
by Patrik Jonsson / September 29, 2010
For many living in a terror-spooked country, it might seem like a great government innovation: Use vans equipped with mobile X-ray units to scan vehicles at major sporting events, or even randomly, for bombs or contraband. But news that the US is buying custom-made vans packed with something called backscatter X-ray capacity has riled privacy advocates and sparked internet worries about “feds radiating Americans.”
“This really trips up the creep factor because it’s one of those things that you sort of intrinsically think the government shouldn’t be doing,” says Vermont-based privacy expert Frederick Lane, author of “American Privacy.” “But, legally, the issue is the boundary between the government’s legitimate security interest and privacy expectations we enjoy in our cars.” American Science & Engineering, a Billerica, Mass.-company, tells Forbes it’s sold more than 500 ZBVs, or Z Backscatter Vans, to US and foreign governments. The Department of Defense has bought the most for war zone use, but US law enforcement has also deployed the vans to search for bombs inside the US, according to Joe Reiss, a company spokesman, as quoted by Forbes. On Tuesday, a counterterror operation snarled truck traffic on I-20 near Atlanta, where Department of Homeland Security teams used mobile X-ray technology to check the contents of truck trailers. Authorities said the inspections weren’t prompted by any specific threat. The mobile X-ray technology works by bouncing narrow X-ray streams off an object like a car and then analyzing the scatter rate of the returning rays. Operators can then locate less-dense objects that could be bodies or bombs.
Backscatter X-ray is already part of an ongoing national debate about its use in so-called full body scanners being deployed in many US airports. In that case, US officials have said they will not store or share the images and will use masking technology to avoid revealing details of the human body. Nevertheless, information security advocates have filed suit to stop their deployment, citing concerns about privacy. Security experts say expanding the X-ray technology for use on American streets is a powerful counterterror strategy. They also point out the images do not not offer the kind of detail that would be embarrasing to anyone. Moreover, law enforcement already has broad search-and-seizure powers on public highways, where a search warrant is often not needed for officers to instigate a physical search.
But others worry that radiating Americans without their knowledge is evidence of gradually eroding constitutional protections in the post-9/11 age. “Regardless of where you fall on the spectrum of national security … you have to be realistic that this is another way in which the government is capturing information they may lose control over,” says Mr. Lane. “I just have some real problems with the idea of even beginning a campaign of rolling surveillance of American citizens, which is what this essentially is.”