Home Security's security checkpoint measure "mal-intent" characteristics
Tech Fragments reports on Homeland Security's Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST), which will screen people for "mal-intent" as they walk past checkpoints.
The system uses cameras to detect slight alterations in pupil sizes, blink rate and even direction of gaze. A laser radar called BioLIDAR measures heart rate and changes between heartbeats. The BioLIDAR can even monitor a persons respiration and track movements in the face, neck, and cheeks. Stressed out? A thermal camera will pick up on this too by gauging changes in the skin temperature.
Homeland Security ran a test in September of 140 volunteers using a FAST prototype. The system was very accurately able to pick out people with hostile intent. "We're still very early on in this research, but it is looking very promising," says DHS science spokesman John Verrico. "We are running at about 78% accuracy on mal-intent detection, and 80% on deception."
the latest
latest episodes
And about time, too. A lot of people might carry grudges over the last year, not to mention the last 8.
Is a 4/5 success rate is "very accurate"? Honestly, I'm surprised that they're reporting rates even that high - maybe their definition of "deception" is different than yours or mine.
We are running at about 78% accuracy on mal-intent detection
How exactly do you prove that someone had mal-intent? Before you made them want to kill you by strip searching them.
I was pretty worried about this kind of nonsense when I last flew.
I have ADHD, I have a lot of tendencies as a result (especially while queuing in a line) that are easily mistaken for anxiety or, perhaps, a guilty conscience. I don't take medication for the disorder anymore, given that the stuff is just speed with a brand name on it... so the visible symptoms manifest themselves pretty freely.
I have a feeling that I would consistently be finding myself in the "false positive" statistics, and that really pisses me off.
The key will be how well it worked at not picking people who did not have hostile intent (i.e. avoiding false positives)? Even if false positives are 1 in 100, you would still ID a huge number of innocents in any practical application (airport, shopping mall, rail station, arena...).
I bet it easily identifies all the people who are upset or nervious while going through airport security (like those who have had their > 3 oz liquids seized)
Mal-intent is doubleplusungood.
Hard to imagine how anything could go wrong under this system.
Great. I used to dread going to through TSA lines because of my name. Now I can dread it because I am dreading it. Much simpler that way.
What can they do with this information, anyway? Could I be locked up for the rest of my life because I think about mauling a TSA agent every time I go through airport security?
Tyrell: Is this to be an empathy test? Capillary dilation of the so-called blush response? Fluctuation of the pupil. Involuntary dilation of the iris...
Deckard: We call it Voight-Kampff for short.
Notice they don't mention false positive rates with this spiffy new technology. Cranky passengers are going to be tasered by security for grumbling at delays while the real terrorists work out how to bypass the system completely.
This is infuriating and as such tantamount to entrapment.
Who ISN'T stressed out when they're at the airport???
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr7PsYmWKbg
I {} :( colon open bracket .
A 1:5 false positive rate means it will identify 60 passengers of 300 on a typical flight as potential "malintenters". Can't see that being taken seriously by the DHS for long (though I expect they'll be annoying innocent passengers with it for a lot longer than that, no doubt.)
It's a darned good thing no innocent person is ever tense or agitated at an airline security checkpoint.
You've been prescreened and taken aside for questioning for possessing the emotional characteristics of having a bad day or PMS.
Thank you, come again.
Polygraph from a distance, and about as "accurate" too, I'm willing to bet.
@8 - Yeah.
@14 - Wouldn't be the first time.
thank goodness the TSA finally have a tool to take away all the guess work of their job! get out your tasers, the mal-intents are comin. kudos, fellows! get those terrists!
Spigot: Hah, are you kidding? This is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than polygraph. It will be much more accurate, we swear! No, you don't need to see the price, and I'd rather you didn't get so close to the machine. Is that an earring in your ear, weirdo?
FYI, malintentery.com is available, but malintent.com is already a squatter linkfarm.
How the hell do they know the people they caught with this had "mal-intent"?
Telling someone to pretend they have mal-intent is not the same as actually having mal-intent.
The people who tried to pass this crap off as scientific research should be reported to the Waste, Fraud, and Abuse hotlines of the GAO and CBO and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Thoughtcrime, much?
Their definition of "very accurate" and mine are not particularly similar.
So if I am taking a guess, I will be right 50% of the time, and this device has only 78% accuracy rate! And this is in a simulated situation, with "volunteers" - how the #%$&* does this work? Volunteers were trying to look nervous? And this relates to terrorists how??
Aaah...government incompetence at work
Witness the rise of the Bene Gesserit rebels.
Outlaw yoga.
140 volunteers. Hah!
78%. Haaaaaahahahaha!
This is so hilarious I can almost forget about how genuinely bad it is that this is happening.
I call 'gimmick', overpriced at any price.
Having just finished reading Little Brother 5 minutes ago, I can truly appreciate the quality of a 78% accuracy mal-intent screening device.
They just need to get that up to 99.9999% and it will be useful.
It will catch mostly annoyed angry people. The types who are ticked off about waiting in line and would just like to punch the source of the wait in the nose. The ones who just had an argument with a significant other. The goth kid who's angry at the world and not really intending to do anything about it. Any normal person having a bad day.
And will totaly miss psychopaths.
Pupil size change, heart rate changes, perspiration...so we've got a system that can be fooled by a beta blocker and some eyedrops. Snazzy.
Pupil size change, heart rate changes, perspiration...so we've got a system that can be fooled by a beta blocker and some eyedrops.
Or a hottie in line next to you.
You'll have to train your mind to pass through this of course, perhaps by learning to limit your vocabulary using the Newspeak Dictionary (now with less words than previous editions). Thing will probably be run on a Mac, an ironically Orwellian company if I do thoughtcrime myself. :P
what # 20 said
Hooray, we have arrived at thoughtcrime.
Wow I look forward to the day I ever fly anywhere.
I have nystagmus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathologic_nystagmus
just in case you don't know...
So yeah, that twitchy eyed sweaty heavy set guy that looks like he has had enough of this BS, yeah he's getting a 2nd screening. I guess I'll start bringing my own lube, in a 3oz "approved" container of course.
If we ban disgruntled passengers from airlines we won't need airlines anymore. The airlines primary duty is to piss off passengers. Problem solved!
Mal-intend...gotta love weasel words.
I had some air travel taking up to 40 hours...anyone expecting me to happily swagger through harassment point #26, beaming with eternal spa-bath relaxation is clearly insane.
In fact, this system should be calibrated to flag people who are unaffected by airport shenanigans...probably a better chance to catch a psychopath...just ignore the Dalai Lama.
I don't know what everyone's complaining about. That once-or-twice removed relative of Bush or Cheney have to make their gubmint bucks somehow.
Hey guys! Trust these TSA geeks!
We are gonna totally catch those CYLONS!
ridiculous. What if I get nervous?
Nobody has pointed it out yet, but:
1 in 5 is worse odds than russian roulette. Think about that for a moment.
Just curious, how do you test something like this? Do you use subjects from Guantanamo?
As the amount of people being restricted from commercial air travel increases, it will very soon become a profitable venture to set up a business for the sole purpose of getting 'rejected travellers' to their destination.
Let's call it the underground railroad of today.
Why let TSA have all the fun? Police interrogations, diplomatic negotiations, political debates, courtrooms, contract negotiations, job interviews, dating... the applications are endless.
You can't let the person know they're being tested, of course- it might bias the results. So you work with technologies that can be applied discreetly at ranges over several meters (if not more).
And if people don't know, they won't object, so no messy constitutional issues.
How lucky that of the people that volunteered for testing, some of them had some genuine mal-intent for the machine to pick up on.
These statistics completely miss the point. If you are searching for the "1 in 10,0000" terrorists, only 80% accuracy gonna net you a whole lotta false positives.
Total crap, peddled by bastards who only care about getting themselves and their research departments funded. Pigs, guzzling from the tabloid/fear/neo-con/xenophobe trough while they can.
Come the revolution: first up against the wall.
Due to everyone being stunned by brooklynn not yet being aware of Takuan and the suggestion she check out its profile, I did. Takuan's profile page runs over 7 meg, but an interesting treasure was his first comment on January 3, 2008 on the TSA To Punish Fliers For Facecrime. Since he also seems to be MIA here, I thought I would risk protocol by posting his first ever comment at bb.
You know, I would think that if I had made the decision to sacrifice my life for my cause, that I probably wouldn't have a last-minute case of nerves. When you hear about how failed suicide bombers act when they're in prison, they really don't sound like the nervous, sweaty types. That would be little guys like me who have long hair and beards and get taken aside for a "special search" several times when they fly.
This is great. Barely into the new year and already I get to say "Fuck the Department of Homeland Security and the Republican it rode in on".
Temperature of the skin or color of the skin? This is theater to claim probable cause whenever they feel like it.
"Profiling? I'm insulted! I didn't pull you aside because you're brown. I pulled you aside because the computer says your skin's not the right color... er I mean temperature. Now if you have nothing to hide, then you won't mind just bending over for a moment.."
And how much did this little gem cost the American taxpayers?
Please step into Room 101.
HOW exactly do you prove mal-intent in a volunteer in a trial? This ranks down there with the ABM missile defense tests that manage to take out a pre-signalled missile without any decoys. The important part is that the dollars get spent on the chosen contractor. Who cares whether it works or not? You want to look at EDS's success rate in the UK and how they cleaned up.
Another daylight robbery conducted by the Friends of BushCo. This probably comes from the same geniuses who thought reverse-engineering SERE would produce more effective interrogation techniques than the generations of who had developed theirs based on that old-fashioned, time-wasting, liberal-biased empirical method.
It will reliably catch 100% of un-medicated anxiety neurotics and air-flight-phobes, and that is all. But, none of that matters, because the only real purpose of the thing is to hog at the public trough.
But we have to start leaning on Obama to stop this kind of shit. This kind of abuse of power is always harder to stop than it is to start. And after eight years, the momentum is fierce.
That does it. I'm gettin a Burka, and not leaving the house without it.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n24953505
http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/content/towerhamlets/advertiser/news/story.aspx?brand=ELAOnline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newsela&itemid=WeED23%20Dec%202008%2018%3A11%3A23%3A640
So were some of the people in the tests volunteers and the rest innocent people snatched off the streets and beaten a little to produce some 'mal-intent'?