Security firms
working on devices to spot would-be terrorists in crowd
· Move to analyse behaviour and physiology from afar
· British expert warns of Minority Report scenario
London Guardian | August 9, 2007
By Ian Sample
Counter-terrorism
experts have drawn up plans to develop an array of advanced
technologies capable of spotting would-be terrorists in a crowd
before they have time to strike.
Scientists and
engineers have been asked to devise ways of analysing people's
behaviour and physiology from afar, in the hope they may reveal
clues about their mental state and even their future intentions.
Under Project
Hostile Intent, scientists will aim to build devices that can pick
up tell-tale signs of hostile intent or deception from people's
heart rates, perspiration and tiny shifts in facial expressions.
The project was
launched by the US department of homeland security with a call to
security companies and government laboratories for assistance.
According to the
timetable set out, the new devices are expected to be trialled at a
handful of airports, borders and ports of entry by 2012.
The plans describe
how systems based on video cameras, laserlight, infra-red, audio
recordings and eye tracking technology are expected to scour crowds
looking for unusual behaviour, with the aim of identifying people
who should be approached and quizzed by security staff, New
Scientist magazine reports.
The project hopes
to advance a security system already employed by the US
transportation security administration that monitors people for
unintentional facial twitches, called "micro-expressions", that can
suggest someone is lying or trying to conceal information.
Studies by Paul
Ekman, a psychologist at the University of California, San
Francisco, have revealed that involuntary expressions can often
betray someone's true intentions. If you flash your teeth, lower
your eyebrows and wrinkle your nose for a fraction of a second while
trying to smile, you have just demonstrated the micro-expression for
disgust.
A major hurdle will
be developing technology that can make correct decisions quickly.
"Right now, screeners have typically less than one minute to examine
a traveller's documents and assess whether they are a threat," said
Larry Orluskie, of the department of homeland security.
The project is also
expected to investigate developing a lie detector-type test that can
be used remotely - an advantage because it would not interfere with
the flow of a crowd and it could be used without the target's
knowledge.
Experts yesterday
were sceptical that today's technology will be able to predict
hostile intent accurately enough to be useful. Dr Ekman said a
terrorist might confound security measures by showing a range of
expressions from fear of being caught to distress at the possibility
of dying. "I don't know. No one knows," he told New Scientist.
Anthony Richards, a
counter-terrorism expert at St Andrews University who has worked on
Britain's ability to pre-empt a major terrorist attack, agreed that
the project faced substantial hurdles.
"There could be all
kinds of reasons that might make people behave in certain ways that
have nothing to do with terrorism. If you have heightened security
and there are a lot of police around, it could be possible that you
can feel and look guilty even when you haven't done anything wrong.
"We need to reduce
the motivation for people doing these kinds of things. We shouldn't
just accept that terrorism will remain as it is or worsen over the
next 20 or 30 years and then just put all the technological
solutions in place. Technology is certainly important in the fight
against terrorism but that shouldn't detract from the crucially
important challenge of finding out what is driving terrorism. We
need to have a sensible and honest appraisal as to what is
radicalising young people."
Peter McOwan, a
computer scientist who is developing sensors to detect people's
moods at Queen Mary, University of London, said: "It's just like
something from Minority Report. They have been watching too many Tom
Cruise movies."
|