TSA Response to Universal Criticism of Behavior Detection: More Behavior Detection


The Transportation Security Administration is turning to video technology to double down on its embattled effort to figure out our thoughts based on our behavior.
In a released last week, TSA revealed that it is field-testing (heads-up if youll be traveling through the airport in Providence, Rhode Island) the Centralized Hostile Intent program, which will assess whether behavioral indicators of malicious intent can be observed on a live video feed by TSA officers in remote locations.
The program is part of TSAs larger Behavior Detection and Analysis programformerly Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOTthrough which thousands of behavior detection officers in airports across the country scrutinize travelers for signs of mal-intent. According to , those signs can include conduct as menacing as being late for your flight, yawning, or having body odor (we need you now more than ever, ).
I hesitate to call the TSAs behavior detection program controversial, because that implies that it has at least some meaningful support. Virtually everyone outside the TSA who has reviewed the program , members of Congress from , has concluded that it is flawed and wasteful. Weve been critical of the program as not only divorced from science, but also for encouraging discriminatory racial profiling. In March we filed a lawsuit for more information about the programand perhaps any insight into why TSA continues to fund it.
So we were confused and disoriented (those are also among TSAs signs of deception!) when we learned of the Centralized Hostile Intent experiment, which uses techniques that the TSA says would allow it to expand the scale of its behavior detection program. To test the program, TSA is sending volunteer actors into airport screening areas, filming them while they mimic passengers who exhibit suspicious behaviors with hostile intent, and then seeing if behavior detection officers watching the video can detect the suspicious behaviors.
Im not a social scientist, but trying to detect volunteer actors pretending to be suspicious hardly seems like a bulletproof validation method. The results are likely to reflect the acting (or over-acting) ability of the volunteers as much as anything real. More troubling, however, is that TSA still seems oblivious to the fundamental problems with behavior detection: even if officers can detect these behaviors reliably, theres no indication that the behaviors actually reflect deception or mal-intent, as opposed to everyday innocent conduct. That being the case, its difficult to see how these programs amount to anything more than what a former behavior detection officer a license to harass, and another a racial profiling program.
The picture gets darker still. This weeks privacy impact assessment also stated that video data from the project will be used to develop tracking algorithms for multi-camera person and object detection to determine a persons path or possible associates in an operational environment. So if TSA officers in think youre too fidgety, too sweaty, too harriedand this is at the airport, remembertheyll use video technology to track you, identify your family and friends, and track them, too.
On the same day that the TSA disclosed the Centralized Hostile Intent program, the Department of Homeland Securitys Inspector General issued a scathing to Congress on TSAs lack of stewardship of taxpayer dollars, questionable investment in security, and failure to understand the gravity of the situation. Those are apt descriptions of the mind-reading and surveillance schemes that make up the TSAs behavior detection programs.