- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Ratbox2600
- Aug 21, 2006, 08:15 PMAs I was reading through this article, this part caught my eye: "The primary fear of a suicide bomber is to be caught, according to Yeshayahu Horowitz, former head of the police's polygraph division and current chief scientist at SDS. The system is based on the belief that the terrorist's fear will be reflected in measurable psycho-physiological parameters."
The system is based on an assumption that suicide bombers will be afraid to be caught, and that this fear will be reflected in physiological measurements.
I don't think the assumption holds water because a suicide bomber has accepted the mission, as it were, and a risk of getting caught would not be of much concern for him (end result is still the same whether he blows up the plane or blows up a section of the airport terminal).
The system is based on an assumption that suicide bombers will be afraid to be caught, and that this fear will be reflected in physiological measurements.
I don't think the assumption holds water because a suicide bomber has accepted the mission, as it were, and a risk of getting caught would not be of much concern for him (end result is still the same whether he blows up the plane or blows up a section of the airport terminal).
Posted by EosJupiter
- Aug 17, 2006, 03:10 PMCesium,
It appears to me as just another screening tool, with highly suspicious usage. With the appearance and technique to make the traveling public feel all warm and fuzzy. It may actually have some theatrical value watching all the people react to it. But it should be interesting watching this pan out, and how many false hits they get along with how many pissed off travelers too.
Regards ....
It appears to me as just another screening tool, with highly suspicious usage. With the appearance and technique to make the traveling public feel all warm and fuzzy. It may actually have some theatrical value watching all the people react to it. But it should be interesting watching this pan out, and how many false hits they get along with how many pissed off travelers too.
Regards ....
Posted by cesium_133
- Aug 17, 2006, 04:38 AMQuote from: Lienot on Aug 17, 2006, 01:29 AMUntil you know what is being measured and the questions being asked, how can you form an opinion regarding the use of this technology?
(Edited for syntax and spelling)
As George mentioned, this is very likely a galvanometer (a GSR-measuring device). Pulse might be measured, too. Unless they're measuring body temperature, a test which I don't know exists, that's about all you can measure accurately. If they're reading palm prints, then welcome to George Orwell's 1984.
They won't waste their time asking irrelevant questions, presumably. If airport authorities have in mind to keep evil people off planes, they'll ask your itinerary, the purpose of your trip, if you've ever done this or that, and so on. That's not a big stretch. The technology, btw, already exists, and it's bundled into the fraud we call a polygraph.
QuoteNo one on this or any other board is even remotely familiar with the instrumentation, questions, research or actual results.
Perhaps not specifics, but again, the technology that does exist for "lie detection" or the scanning of parts of the body (retinas, palms, fingerprints) lends itself in good part to this idea. There is no instrumentation out there as of now for this, nor has anyone written questions for its hypothetical use, and there thus can be no actual results. Research, while not specific to this conjectured device, can be had by studying the galvanic readouts on polys and their subsequent (mis)use. They're not going to reinvent the wheel to put this thing in the terminal; the government will simply ask someone with expertise in the channel to be studied to come up with, well, whatever they want to use.
QuoteHow can you make such definitive statements? I would think one would want information and research to back up such statements.[/b]
I do want research and information. I am theorizing here, but I can't see it as a huge stretch to submit that a GSR palm- or finger-reader will be the preferred choice, if this ever comes to fruition. I hope this clears up that I am not trying to tell everyone what to expect...
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Aug 17, 2006, 04:30 AMQuote from: Lienot on Aug 17, 2006, 01:29 AMUntil you know what is beng measured and the questions being asked, how can you form an opinion regarding the use of this technology. No one on this or any other board are even remotely familiar with the instrumentation, questions, research or actual results. How can you make such defenative statements? I would think one would want information and research to back up such statements.
Lienot,
According to the Wall Street Journal, the physiological measures taken are blood pressure, heart rate, and perspiration rate. What Suspect Detection Services has put together here is a sort of polygraph instrument without pneumographs.
Regardless of the questions asked -- which in any event we know concern whether or not the passenger intends to commit an act of violence -- the aforesaid physiological measures have no clear connection with deception, and what is being attempted here is a screening test for deception.
The National Academy of Sciences in 2002 found polygraph screening to be completely invalid. The same criticisms that apply to polygraph screening will also apply to the use of this $200,000 "polygraph-lite" as a screening device.
Make-believe science yields make-believe security.
Posted by Lienot
- Aug 17, 2006, 01:29 AMUntil you know what is beng measured and the questions being asked, how can you form an opinion regarding the use of this technology. No one on this or any other board are even remotely familiar with the instrumentation, questions, research or actual results. How can you make such defenative statements? I would think one would want information and research to back up such statements.
Posted by DippityShurff
- Aug 16, 2006, 08:47 PMQuote from: cesium_133 on Aug 16, 2006, 04:08 AMThis is a one-factor, one-channel, futuristic-looking doohickey, and that's it.
Countermeasures suggested, if possible: tried and true ones. Spray or stick antiperspirant, just not in huge amounts, applied right before you have to dump it in the trash because of current restrictions. You don't want to leave the screen looking like Pat Riley just touched his head to it. If they even bother to train the operator in CM's, claim you're nervous about flying and being confronted like you're a terrorist.
This won't stop anyone; it's a psychological ploy, just like all the other similar things discussed here. I'd like to see them forbid all inconclusives and basically everyone else not scored as "pass" to board their flight. Talk about lawsuits...
But then, this is a Brave New World (Order). And I agree with George's statement about racial profiling. While I can't say I am totally opposed to such a concept if applied rationally and sparingly, this easily could become a way to keep blacks and Arabians off planes with less proof than is required against Whites. Then again, this was developed by an Israeli concern, and Israel openly and unapologetically uses racial profiling at checkpoints, on El Al, and elsewhere...
Yes they do. And on the plus side, terrorists don't board El Al. I flew them. Here's how it went. As I entered the terminal, I was met by a beautiful girl who simply struck up a conversation. Had I failed that little test, another someone speaks to you and if you fail that, they simply refuse service. I don't disapprove of profiling until it is used simply to deny a particular race, culture, class etc anything based simply on said categories.
Posted by cesium_133
- Aug 16, 2006, 04:08 AMThis is a one-factor, one-channel, futuristic-looking doohickey, and that's it.
Countermeasures suggested, if possible: tried and true ones. Spray or stick antiperspirant, just not in huge amounts, applied right before you have to dump it in the trash because of current restrictions. You don't want to leave the screen looking like Pat Riley just touched his head to it. If they even bother to train the operator in CM's, claim you're nervous about flying and being confronted like you're a terrorist.
This won't stop anyone; it's a psychological ploy, just like all the other similar things discussed here. I'd like to see them forbid all inconclusives and basically everyone else not scored as "pass" to board their flight. Talk about lawsuits...
But then, this is a Brave New World (Order). And I agree with George's statement about racial profiling. While I can't say I am totally opposed to such a concept if applied rationally and sparingly, this easily could become a way to keep blacks and Arabians off planes with less proof than is required against Whites. Then again, this was developed by an Israeli concern, and Israel openly and unapologetically uses racial profiling at checkpoints, on El Al, and elsewhere...
Countermeasures suggested, if possible: tried and true ones. Spray or stick antiperspirant, just not in huge amounts, applied right before you have to dump it in the trash because of current restrictions. You don't want to leave the screen looking like Pat Riley just touched his head to it. If they even bother to train the operator in CM's, claim you're nervous about flying and being confronted like you're a terrorist.
This won't stop anyone; it's a psychological ploy, just like all the other similar things discussed here. I'd like to see them forbid all inconclusives and basically everyone else not scored as "pass" to board their flight. Talk about lawsuits...
But then, this is a Brave New World (Order). And I agree with George's statement about racial profiling. While I can't say I am totally opposed to such a concept if applied rationally and sparingly, this easily could become a way to keep blacks and Arabians off planes with less proof than is required against Whites. Then again, this was developed by an Israeli concern, and Israel openly and unapologetically uses racial profiling at checkpoints, on El Al, and elsewhere...
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Aug 15, 2006, 02:20 PMI don't know whether the trial of Suspect Detection System's terrorist screening technology was actually conducted at Atlantic City, the Wall Street Journal yesterday reported that the system was tested at Knoxville, Tennessee this summer:
http://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=60
http://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=60
Posted by polyscam
- May 10, 2005, 06:44 AMIsraeli Press Release about the "3 minute polygraph"
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Israel+beyond+politics/Israeli+airport+technology+detects+intent+of+terrorists+9-May-2005.htm
I wonder how long before this "technology" transfers to employment screening and criminal investigations...here we go again.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Israel+beyond+politics/Israeli+airport+technology+detects+intent+of+terrorists+9-May-2005.htm
I wonder how long before this "technology" transfers to employment screening and criminal investigations...here we go again.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Apr 29, 2005, 04:17 AMeverclear,
I don't know the answers to your questions. This "test" is essentially a black box: there is no published documentation of how, precisely, it is supposed to "work," nor, to my knowledge, is there any published research about it. It seems like racialist pseudoscience to me, too.
I don't know the answers to your questions. This "test" is essentially a black box: there is no published documentation of how, precisely, it is supposed to "work," nor, to my knowledge, is there any published research about it. It seems like racialist pseudoscience to me, too.
Posted by polyscam
- Apr 28, 2005, 05:47 PMQuoteQuestions come in a variety of culturally sensitive versions.
Racial profiling? ...and liberty and justice for all.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Apr 28, 2005, 02:08 PMFor further reading see, "Fear Detector: SDS claims its screening system can read a terrorist's mind" by Gali Weinreb and Hanan Lifshitz:
http://www.globes.co.il/serveEN/globes/docView.asp?did=906961&fid=1724
http://www.globes.co.il/serveEN/globes/docView.asp?did=906961&fid=1724
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Apr 28, 2005, 01:55 PMI suspect that the device mentioned is a galvanometer, though it might conceivably also measure pulse rate.
Quote
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=555583
Last update - 01:21 23/03/2005
SDS hits jackpot in Atlantic City airport deal
By Zuri Dar
Ramat Gan startup Suspect Detection Systems (SDS) has won a U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) tender to install a system to identify unarmed terrorists.
The Atlantic City, N.J., airport will install an experimental version this year. SDS beat out a host of American competitors, including Boeing, to secure the contract, valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The system was approved by the Israeli security apparatus. People being checked place their hand on the device and are presented with an array of questions. A special detector measures physiological responses. Questions come in a variety of culturally sensitive versions.
The primary fear of a suicide bomber is to be caught, according to Yeshayahu Horowitz, former head of the police's polygraph division and current chief scientist at SDS. The system is based on the belief that the terrorist's fear will be reflected in measurable psycho-physiological parameters.
"Foreigners flying El Al are currently subjected to 10-20 minutes of questioning," says SDS CEO Shabtai Shoval. "The line for U.S. immigration authorities is liable to take 90 minutes. Our system is a type of kiosk making an initial assessment within three minutes. If the system identifies a suspect, he can be sent to a personal agent to complete the investigation."
Shoval, a former division manager at Comverse Technology, founded SDS along with Horowitz and former deputy Mossad chief Amiram Levin. The founders have sunk hundreds of thousands of shekels of their own funds into the company and have secured a grant from the chief scientist of the Ministry of Trade and Industry.
The company, which currently employs 12 people, plans to raise funds from the Defense Ministry's Armaments Research and Development Administration and from TSA.