New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

A Better Defense

Shoring up security means more than high technology

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Visiting the White House is not unlike preparing to board a plane. Bags pass through x-ray machines and visitors through metal detectors. The White House, though, benefits from some augmentation: specifically, so-called backscatter x-ray technology, in which devices capture the radiation bounced back from objects. It can generate more detailed images than conventional x-ray machines and can even call out organic materials, such as liquid explosives.

Such technological fixes have rapidly come to the fore in the wake of recent terrorist revelations--and not for the first time: backscatter was widely touted as a solution to hijackings and other air travel incidents as long ago as the 1980s. Other high-tech solutions--millimeter-wave sensors for personal screening, quadrupole resonance to detect things like bombs in shoes, neutron-bombarding devices to precisely establish the chemical makeup of objects, as well as a host of others--can detect an array of threats, for a price. Already the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has installed at least 100 trace detectors, designed to pick up minute quantities of various suspect compounds on clothing, luggage or people, at major airports throughout the country. But ultimately, technology can never provide the perfect security answer.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe