Dogs are known for their incredible ability to detect odours, extracting them from a “complex” environment and recognising them. This makes sniffer dogs precious assets in a broad variety of security applications. However, their use is subject to some intrinsic restrictions. Dogs can only be trained to a limited set of applications, get tired after a relatively short period, and thus require a high turnover. This has sparked a drive over the past decade to develop artificial sniffer devices—generally known as (...) “chemical sniffers” or “electronic noses”—able to complement and possibly replace dogs for some security applications. Such devices have been already deployed, or are intended to be deployed, at borders, airports and other critical installation security checkpoints. Similarly to dogs, they are adopted for detecting residual traces that indicate either the presence of, or recent contact with, substances like drugs and explosives. It goes without saying that, as with sniffer dogs, the use of artificial sniffer devices raises many sensitive issues. Adopting an ethical and legal perspective, the present paper discusses the privacy and data protection implications of the possible deployment of a hand-held body scanning sniffer for screening passengers at EU airport security checkpoints. (shrink)