Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Benetton Clothing to Carry RFID Tags

Posted by michael on Wed Mar 12, 2003 12:55 AM
from the welcome-back-to-benetton-mr.-smith dept.
Privacy
An anonymous reader writes "Clothing manufacturer Benetton has announced that they will begin embedding RFID tags in clothing for inventory control purposes. You can read more about this at SF Gate." morcheeba adds more information: "EETimes is reporting that Benetton will be embedding a Philips RFID chip into the label of every new garment bearing the name of Benetton's core clothing brand, Sisley. The 15 million chips expected sold in 2003 will allow monitoring of garments from production to shipping, shelves and dressing rooms. The I.CODE chip (tech info) used in Benetton's labels will include 1,024 bits of EEPROM and operate at a distance of up to 1.5 meters. RFIDs look like they would be extremely uncomfortable in some Sisley clothes."
+ -
unknown
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Benetton Clothing to Carry RFID Tags 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • big brother (Score:3, Funny)

    by Superfarstucker (621775) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:57AM (#5491523)
    big brother is watching you... *through* your underwear....!!!! <BR><BR>At least ill have an excuse to have big holes in my clothes now huh

  • How do you disable them? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:57AM (#5491524)
    Assuming that you cannot locate the chip, any info on how to 'burn it out'?
    • This [chefdepot.net] should do the trick.

    • Re:How do you disable them? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by shadwwulf (145057) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:14AM (#5491611) Homepage
      A trick that the US Navy has used to for years as an electronic counter measure would work for this on a much smaller scale. The navy uses planes with high powered radio transmitters in the noses of them. They fly over and blast the target with high powered RF and fry the reciever, and pretty much everything else in it's path(light bulbs, FM radios, 2way radios, computers, etc). Well in your case you should just have to get close to a high powered transmitter such as a 1500 watt radio transmitter and put it REALLY close. It should fry out in a heart beat with the clothes none the worse for wear[pun intended].

      SW

    • Re:How do you hack them? (Score:5, Funny)

      by tchdab1 (164848) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:46AM (#5491772) Homepage
      How can i make my underwear scan like a can of ravioli?

      Can I fool scanners into thinking I'm wearing original kilobuck designer duds, or that they scan as tools from the hardware store?

      I can forsee the web sites popping up for scan code exchange, and I know there will be tons of creative hacks that I can't yet imagine.

      • Re:Power supply? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) <<ten.tsacmoc> <ta> <relyo.nhoj>> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @05:47AM (#5492468) Journal
        The scanner supplies it in the form of microwave energy. The more primitive versions of this would rely on a coil, that recieved the microwave, turned it into just enough juice to power the transmitter and send data.

        I think with this though, that they've managed to integrate it into a single piece of silicon though.

        Ok, so are we gonna have a contest for the most fucked up thing to hack your clothes to scan as? Sextoys of one variety or another seem to obvious, though I bet you'd get the best faces when the security guard sees 27" Monster Double-headed Jackhammer Dildo pop up on the screen.

      • From the article. .

        The I.CODE chip used in Benetton's labels includes 1,024 bits of EEPROM and operates at 13.56-MHz carrier frequency. It can be operated without line of sight up to 1.5 meters. The label requires no internal power supply. Its contactless interface generates power and the system clock via the resonant circuitry by inductive coupling to the reader.

        Inductive simply means a magnetic field is generated by the reader, activating the curcit in the chip, much like high-security keyless entry systems work today.

        • Re:How do you disable them? (Score:4, Informative)

          by 1u3hr (530656) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @08:10AM (#5492900)
          So I don't think you can make anything catch on fire actually.

          A colleague was warming a bread roll. She thought it was tough, so she gave it a few more minutes. Actually, of course, it had by then completely dried out and the next step was, if not actual flames, a choking cloud of smoke. I've noticed some plastic bowls get very hot in a MW. In complex molecules there will likely be a resonance with the water frequency, weak or strong, so eventuslly everything heats up.

          Anyway, all this "disable" discussion is silly. Of course, as the FA states, the tag is in the label. So cut it off.

  • When do they stop? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JakiChan (141719) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:00AM (#5491537)
    If they want to monitor the garment in their shipping system and store that's fine, but I hope they remove the tag after purchase...otherwise they're sitting there with someone's credit card number and some sort of tracking device and that means all of a sudden someone's trip through the mall is like an episode of the Crocodile Hunter where they track the habits of some migratory animal. I'm not quite sure I trust them to not abuse this technology.
    • I hope they remove the tag after purchase...

      If you read the part where they said that returned items automatically go back into inventory, you could deduce that they are not removing the tags.

    • Re:When do they stop? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Herr_Nightingale (556106) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:28AM (#5491924) Homepage
      Eh. I just hope that the video stores around here catch on with this RFID tagging... Have you ever phoned to reserve a movie, been told it's there, and spent an hour trying to locate the damned thing in a store with 10 thousand movies?
      I see this as a major convenience.

    • Refunds? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ukryule (186826) <slashdot@[ ]e.org ['yul' in gap]> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:53AM (#5492004) Homepage
      The whole reason they're doing this is to track the clothes through their inventory system. However, they'll probably want to be able to identify refunds too: if it's simple for them to track which batches of clothes have a higher return rate (due to defects), then it'll help their quality control.

      The flip side of this is that it'll probably annoy the hell out of them when the clothes you're wearing while trying to buy a new item start registering at the checkout :)
      • They should remove it for the same reason they remove those big bulky things that set off the alarms--they're selling you the _CLOTHING_, not the stuff they stick on it for their own benefit. I'd like to see what would happen if you went into a store an purchased a piece of clothing and demanded they give you that thing because it was _YOUR_ property because _YOU_ paid for it.

        • Re:Why should THEY remove it after purchase? (Score:5, Funny)

          by Pofy (471469) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @04:26AM (#5492231)
          The next thing you know, they won't sell them to you, they will license you to wear it. You will find a huge piece of paper when you first try to put them on. It will say you did not in fact buy the shirt only licensed it and by weraing them you agree to the license. Of course, you are then not allowed to let anyone else use the shirt. IN fact, they may at any time actually enter your homw to check that you actually have license for ALL your clothes and they may even at any time modify their short (that you licensed) in any way they want, like puting in short sleeves instead of long and changing thr colour of it. Well, it is a 10 page thing, I won't go through it all here.

          Oh well, on the other hand lets hope not...

  • EMP, folks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by namespan (225296) <namespan@@@elitemail...org> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:01AM (#5491548) Journal
    Now's your chance to make money. Make a handheld, heck, set up a kiosk in the mall.

    Or perhaps the manufacturers will decide to do this at the checkout counter.

    • Re:EMP, folks (Score:5, Funny)

      by catch23 (97972) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:24AM (#5491658)
      If you guys really hate Benetton, you could get a handheld emp gun and zap their entire store rendering all their rfid tags useless. If enough people did it, they would probably stop doing using it. Alternatively, the easy solution would probably to just get a microwave oven and leave the door open during operation.... although that might get you into some trouble.

      Salesperson: "What are you doing with the microwave?"

      Joe Freak: "I'm just warming up my lunch"

      Salesperson: "In the underwear section?"

      • Re:EMP, folks (Score:5, Funny)

        by blincoln (592401) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:30AM (#5491688) Journal
        you could get a handheld emp gun and zap their entire store rendering all their rfid tags useless.

        This assumes the ability to travel to a parallel universe or future time where handheld EMP guns actually exist.

  • Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mr_Tulip (639140) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:02AM (#5491551) Homepage
    Will this help me find matching socks?

  • Cool an EEPROM (Score:3, Funny)

    by MegaHamsterX (635632) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:04AM (#5491560)
    Cool they're using an EEPROM, that presents some interesting possibilities, although lugging a laptop into a department store to give yourself a price markdown might be a little obvious.

  • New Title: Benetton clothing to lose my business (Score:3, Interesting)

    by wirefarm (18470) <jim.mmdc@net> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:04AM (#5491565) Homepage

    IMHO, their ability to track their clothing stops when I pay money and take ownership of it.
    I doubt they'll remove all the tags. I doubt consumers will know to.
    I already found a sweater of my girlfriend's with one. She had asked me to snip off a scratchy tag and lo and behold, sewn inside the tag was an RFID tag. (Ann Taylor sweater? Not sure, so I won't say for sure.) Either way, if she wore it back to the store, would she show up as a repeat customer and be treated differently?

    I just don't trust these things, even though I know they are pretty benign, so don't try to convince me otherwise.

    Cheers,
    Jim, the stubborn Luddite

    • What happens to an RFID tag if you put it in a microwave on high power for 30 seconds? Should we make it a regular practice to nuke any new piece of clothing we buy nowadays? Just watch out for zippers...

    • Re:New Title: Benetton clothing to lose my busines (Score:5, Insightful)

      by catch23 (97972) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:12AM (#5491604)
      oh please. I doubt Benetton is going to be expecting these rfid tags to still work after people buy their clothing. Stuff like static electricity in hot dryers and just general wear and tear is going to wear them out. And when all else fails, there is the microwave oven.

      I'm betting they are going to destroy the tag the minute you checkout so it won't beep when you walk out the store. They'll probably use the rfid tags as a new way to put security tags on the clothing instead of those heavy dongles you see sometimes on expensive clothing.

      When the whole processor id thing was introduced way back when, people threw a big fit about it. Now what average Joe these days even know about it? Believe me, if big brother wants to track you down, they're gonna track you down and it won't be using unreliable stuff like rfid tags.
      • When the whole processor id thing was introduced way back when, people threw a big fit about it. Now what average Joe these days even know about it?

        That's because the stopped doing it. Motherboard manufacturers even started shipping boards where the default setting was to disable the # in case your chip did have it. Since it's stopped, it's not a very big issue anymore.
      • I'm betting they are going to destroy the tag the minute you checkout so it won't beep when you walk out the store. They'll probably use the rfid tags as a new way to put security tags on the clothing instead of those heavy dongles you see sometimes on expensive clothing.

        If the tags have memory, wouldn't it be possible to have a bought-bit? By setting that you won't beep and they can still track you.

        If you ask me it should be mandatory to remove the tags upon purchasing the product. The abuse risk is just too great.

        Just my two cents anyway.
        • So we boycott the company just because they're using some new technology that everyone is afraid of. Early adopters often get the flak from public, but once everyone starts doing it, nobody cares!

          They've invented a way to purify sewage water into drinkable water more pure than the water that normally comes out of the tap, but nobody is buying into it simply because they know where it came from. But in a few decades when it's too expensive to acquire fresh water for the increasingly high population, they are going to have to use alternatives like purifying sewage. By that time, everyone is going to be drinking purified sewage, yet nobody is going to even give it a second thought.

            • Re:New Title: Benetton clothing to lose my busines (Score:5, Interesting)

              by catch23 (97972) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:17AM (#5491872)
              Do you really think boycotting Benetton will even cause them to give in a 15 minute thought? Benetton markets to non-geeks who have money to throw around. Most of these people don't know what rfid is and probably won't care if they also stuck a bluetooth device in every underwear. There are better solutions than a boycott coming from the slashdot crowd. A bunch of slashdot geeks boycotting Benetton is like a bunch of football players boycotting Transmeta.
    • I'm bemused. This is slashdot talking about a new piece of technology - and yet I've not found a single post talking about installing Linux on it, seting up the first 'underwear web server', or connecting up a 120GB hard disk to it.

      And of course, the very real possibility of having your own personal beowolf cluster of clothes...

  • "Hey baby... (Score:3, Funny)

    by No. 24601 (657888) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:05AM (#5491570)
    That's a beautiful top you got on. What are you clocking in at girl? ooOoOOo honey, i tell you.. with the heat you generating, you must be running at 10 TeraHertz, and ooh baby does it hurtz like hell."

  • Hah! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BJH (11355) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:06AM (#5491574)

    Ottenberg said such tags could be used for "customer loyalty" rewards that could earn consumers such benefits as frequent flyer miles, free music downloads or discount coupons.

    Why, while I read this, did the phrase "bread and circuses, bread and circuses..." keep on looping through my brain?

    Ah well, I suppose a majority of people will be quite happy to give away their right to privacy in return for some extra frequent-flyer miles, dragging the rest of us along by default.

    How much longer before they start introducing niggling little irritations if you buy with cash, and/or larger incentives if you buy with a credit card?

    • Re:Hah! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Evil Adrian (253301) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:35AM (#5491712) Homepage
      How much longer before they start introducing niggling little irritations if you buy with cash, and/or larger incentives if you buy with a credit card?

      When credit card companies stop charging merchants for credit card transactions.

  • "Lucky undies" (Score:5, Funny)

    by ericski (20503) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:07AM (#5491579)
    So now will we'll be able to tell if she's wearing the "I'm getting lucky tonight" panties or the "He's not worth more than dinner" panties. Might help us decide how much to spend on the date.

    Who am I kidding, we'd just be happy to be on a date with.

    • Re:"Lucky undies" (Score:5, Funny)

      by josh crawley (537561) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:12AM (#5491603)
      Then how do you tell if it's "I dont have any" panties?

      • Re:"Lucky undies" (Score:3, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        By the absence of an identifier, of course. That's why these chips should be in all clothing. Especially underwear.

        I think you've just done the impossible, and advanced a reason for slashdotters to get behind a privacy-destroying technology. Kudos.

        Off to find that old Sony video camera...

      • No X-ray vision required (Score:5, Funny)

        by G27 Radio (78394) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:05AM (#5491835) Homepage
        Start paying a little closer attention. You don't need x-ray vision to be able to tell (unless she's wearing a T-back or G-string.) At first it might be hard to tell, but the more you practice you'll get better at it. It's kinda like the next level up from being able to tell if she's bra-less.

        Damn, I probably just ruined my rep with all the hotties on Slashdot. Oh, wait...

  • wasted effort (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nihilanth (470467) <chaoswave2@[ ].com ['aol' in gap]> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:48AM (#5491779)
    ::sigh:: this really isn't a privacy issue...no matter how fun it is to make it into one.

    you ever worked retail? you evern have to do inventory yourself, instead of having the luxury of a contractor doing it for you? it kinda sucks. becing able to query a transmitter for physical inventory counts is a lot cooler that couting everything by hand/scanner. Since these tags can't be read more than 15 feet or so away, and can be fried by exposure to your microwave oven, i'd say just don't sweat it

    this is just a corp. cost saving tool, to decrease overhead and save the time and money of drudge-like inventory procedures..

    i'm the biggest conspiracy freak when it comes to orwellian surveillance schemes, but this technology just isn't headed in that direction.

    there are much bigger fish for us to fry, if you look around and take notice of them.

    • Re:wasted effort (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Bartmoss (16109) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:49AM (#5491994) Homepage Journal
      It may be intended for just inventory purposes - but unless the rfid tags are disabled or removed on sale, it IS possible to abuse the benign benefit of inventory control to track a person's movement in close quarters (say... embed sensors in the floor of an airport).

      By the way, since rfids respond to a frequency range, is there such a thing as an rfid scanner available that will just try out the entire spectrum and look for hits? (kind of like a port scanner I figure).

  • In other fashion related news... (Score:3)

    by Nathdot (465087) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:03AM (#5491827)
    Winona Ryder has announced her own label, making its debut with a range of chic aluminum handbags.

  • Already in use... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DCowern (182668) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:07AM (#5491843) Homepage

    I'm surprised that no one's mentioned this... this is already in use in the US. The last time I bought clothes, I noticed an "extra" tag on the inside of the garment. It was rectangular, maybe 2 inches long by about half an inch wide. It felt like it contained something hard and had a dotted line near the seam with the clothing. To me, that meant "cut me off". I did and out popped a RFID tag. It looked very similar to the ones that are in some of my work's IBM desktops (for inventory/tracking).

    Removal was simple enough... much easier than getting those $*#() ink tags off when the person behind the desk forgets to. In short, not a bid deal.

    On a side note, as long as the tag is removable, why do we care about it? It makes the cost of doing business cheaper for the store. They have the advantage of hiring0 fewer people to do inventories and doing more efficient inventory. In theory, this should lead to less costly clothes and manufacturer and retailer costs go down. On the flip side, it'll mean fewer "end of season" sales but it should all average out. RFID in this case seems like it's a Good Thing.

  • Where do I get a scanner for this ? (Score:5, Funny)

    by _Spirit (23983) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:58AM (#5492018) Journal
    I want to install this into my home, no more "This bag ? Oh that's just groceries honey" from my wife. Maybe I can keep inventory for her as well, so I can bring my PDA with her closet inventory with me when we go shopping: "See darling, you already have fourteen of those, now let's go buy some books"

  • Another publicity stunt (Score:4, Informative)

    by LiquidEric (658463) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @03:11AM (#5492043)
    This company had an add campaign several years ago which featured death row murders as the spokesmen. This is brutally insensitive to the families of those they murdered. This was a shameless attempt to generate publicity. As a result of their campaign their largest retailer, Sears, dropped Benetton's products (which is commendable). We should all do the same.
    • Because the tags are powerless, they have to be powered via the field induced by the reader. This drops off as the inverse square of the distance. The tag then has to transmit back to the reader - again power is the inverse square of the distance. Therefore, the range is related to the inverse fourth power of the power output of the reader. I.e. to ramp up the range to 15m you'd have to increase the power output by a factor of 10000! You might start melting things at that point.

      The 1.5m range is already with big heavily optimised antennas (like the big theft detection antennas by shop entrances) which are operating at the maximum legal power output.

      So in summary - you're going to have more luck taking a pair of binoculars and war-driving looking out for barcodes

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.