High-Tech Drafted in Terrorism War
For months, Larry Fullerton got the cold shoulder from federal officials when he tried to peddle an advanced technology that can detect motion through walls and other objects.
But just hours after the Sept. 11 attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, the phones started ringing at Fullerton’s company, Time Domain of Huntsville, Ala.
The House Armed Services Committee called Time Domain executive William Webb, asking if the company could bring its wireless hand-held scanner to New York to assist recovery teams in locating victims in the rubble of the World Trade Center. The Office of Naval Research inquired about military uses of the technology--which is known as ultrawide band and can transmit encrypted electronic messages as well as sound an alert if a perimeter around an object is breached.
“There has been a sea change,” said Fullerton, who founded Time Domain a decade ago. “The [government] emphasis on developmental technologies has changed dramatically in the last two weeks.”
In the wake of the attacks, federal officials quietly are tapping the nation’s high-tech know-how for new tools that may help bolster America’s war against terrorism. The effort recalls the transformation of American manufacturing in the 1940s as companies retooled their assembly lines to help the government fight World War II.
The emphasis this time, however, is not cranking out trucks, ships and tanks for combat. Instead, the government is seeking to develop more powerful electronic and biological technologies that can be used to defend the nation and fight its enemies.
“In World War II, we won with the key technologies of the time--aeronautics, automobiles and other mechanical manufacturing,” said Robert D. Atkinson, an expert on technology and economic policy at the Progressive Policy Institute, a Washington think tank. “This time, the technology of this era--computers and biotechnology--are going to play a significant role in helping us win this war.”
The terrorists who brought down the World Trade Center and destroyed a section of the Pentagon used relatively low-tech means--fuel-laden jetliners that, in their hijackers’ hands, became flying bombs.
But experts say high-tech may be uniquely qualified to provide the kinds of sophisticated tools needed to ward off future attacks and process physical evidence and electronic data to learn about potential attackers and their plans.
Paul Turk, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration, echoed the sentiment of several agency officials when he said: “We are looking into a wide variety of ideas for improvements to security in this setting, and we are open to ideas.”
The Commerce Department, the Customs Service, the FBI, the Defense Department and the General Services Administration are said to have asked for high-tech assistance in recent weeks, particularly on unscrambling encrypted messages stored by hijackers on computers and in providing beefed-up security equipment.
A top government official said the White House, which was to have hosted a meeting with a group of technology executives Sept. 12, may set up a more formal means to solicit and sift through all the high-tech gadgets and technologies that might be useful in bolstering security and fighting terrorist attacks.
Among the devices currently under study are scanners, such as Fullerton’s portable wireless device, and Body Search, which uses X-rays and is made by American Science & Engineering of Billerica, Mass.
American Science & Engineering President Ralph Sheridan said he had talked to more than a dozen federal agencies and departments about using the technology. He said the increased concern over security had prompted the GSA--after months of complaining about lack of funds--to purchase several devices for security at its facilities.
A GSA spokeswoman said the agency uses “biometrics and smart cards” to control entry to GSA facilities. But she declined to comment on the Body Search technology, saying: “With security [paramount], it’s not in our best interests” to say much.
Another high-tech enterprise, Logix Cos., announced last week that the Secret Service had purchased several hand-held ID terminals to provide authentication of government-issued IDs. The Logix system works by reading the electronic codes included on most states’ driver’s licenses, INS cards and military identification cards.
Company founder Anthony Sdao said he had received numerous government inquiries since the attacks. “Right now security devices are very high on everybody’s priority list,” he said.
Indeed, many fancy technologies are being discussed or are on the drawing boards.
Lewis M. Branscomb, a professor emeritus at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, cited airport security as one area that could benefit from high-tech help because airlines--constrained by competitive pressures--have resisted spending money to install state-of-the-art equipment.
But he said the tables have now turned. Among scientists and government policymakers today, he said, “The idea of strong identity verification and screening systems [at airports] is widely discussed.”
One system receiving a lot of interest, he said, is a special automobile and boarding lane for airport customers willing to surrender personal data and provide ironclad identification in the form of fingerprints or eye retina scans. These customers would enjoy speedier airline boarding than those who do not provide such advanced identification to airport authorities.
While civil liberty groups object to such steps as intolerable intrusions, many technology executives believe Americans will accept them.
“I’m hearing much more discussion about how we can use technology to improve security . . . and not be intrusive,” Sheridan said. “People now realize the threat to our nation is ubiquitous. Terrorists do not need to use sophisticated explosives. All they have to do is get hold of a simple device like an airplane. Better technology and security can help prevent that in the future.”
