Yes but a celebrity body scan might be worth a lot on the tabloid market, show up any enhancements etc.

Not this old chestnut again, stop making a fuss, go through the machine and get on the plane........ if not [LIFTED] off and find another means of transport.

Yes but living on an island does limit the options. Who is to say that ports will not be forced to use these soon? I would use them. As far as the question if you are asked just before checking in with a couple of customs or police officers nearby to take you to a room for cavity search if you say no, might be an influence.

maybe the problem isn't in the body scanner but the person using it? same with the NHS records. I had a medical record on a chip card for years, and it's brilliant as i can go anywhere in France and drs know what i have been prescribed, what's recurrent, allergies etc...

I'll quite happily {LIFTED] off and find another means of transport if this becomes mandatory. I reserve the right to discuss it though.

My only reason for commenting in the first place was the assumption that because they'd asked 977 people from my country then "People" must be happy using body-scanners. I'm not and it's an erroneous statement.

A medical card with all that information is fine. you have the card and can limit who it is shown to. A database here is not the same. Anyone can look at it change it all without your knowledge.

And that's my only issue. We have no idea who's doing what with the information, if I had my medical information on a chip I could carry around with me and control the use of then fair enough. With people in charge who have the reputation of leaving very important information on trains or losing thousands of pieces of sensitive information there'e not a cat-in-hells chance I'll trust them with mine...especially since we don't even know who "they" are.

We've had a problem with poorly implemented IT projects in the UK for some time. Oh, and leaving personal data on CDs, USB sticks and whole laptops on trains and in cabs.

The NHS one is the most recent. If your own GP says to opt out, there must be something very seriously wrong with it somewhere, don't you think?

Geiseric, I'm sorry, but why does the whole populations of a country have to be assumed to a terrorist before we are free to travel anywhere? Surely the authorities are tracking likely suspects and can target them without having to force the entire population to undergo invasive scans before they can board a plane? Will we need to pass through scanners to get on the bus next?

I just think there are better ways of dealing with this whole security thing, instead of knee-jerk reactions and putting a whole population under scrutiny.

I doubt that the card contains the data, merely a form of ID. I'd be much happier having my data contained somewhere secure than have the risk of someone pinch it from my bag. All we need is suitable measures to prevent abuse, as with these scanners.

Is there any way to get an actual image off of the physical devices, do people even know?

Yes, there was a news story of a guy who'd scoped an image of one of his female colleagues, an image was shown as part of the story and it was pretty clear and very intimate. Apparently they can be saved and copied even though "they" say they won't be.

lock the ports, ensure that the images are erased after 3min... done!

They might have to be saved as evidence incase it goes to court. For example they could see something on the screen request a strip search, and then trouble could ensue. The image would show that there was probable cause to request a strip search. So they would need to keep it.

Were are being told that the images won’t be saved. They exist for the time they are on the screen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/manchester/ ... 440198.stm



So you are telling us that they are kept? Who is right?

Why would they need to do that? They don't need an equivalent at present - just delete them.

I am not saying that they are kept. Just that they might use legal proceedings as a reason to keep them.