Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

RFID Tags on Mach3 Razorblades Snap Your Photo

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Jul 20, 2003 08:13 AM
from the now-thats-just-creapy dept.
peteo writes "Think RFID tags are harmless? Look at how they are being used in the UK: "At the Tesco Cambridge store, a camera trained on the Gillette blade shelf, and triggered by RFID tags, captures a photo of each customer who removes a Mach3 pack. Another photo is taken at the checkout and security staff compare the two images to ensure they always have a pair" According to the spokesman,"there are certainly not any privacy concerns" in relation to these tags. He adds that there is plenty of in-store signage indicating the supermarket's use of CCTV cameras. ""
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived.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.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Buh-wah? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by felistigre (673891) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:15AM (#6483619)
    When were razor blades so valuable to warrant this?
    • Re:Buh-wah? (Score:3, Interesting)

      Last time i bought some replacement electric razor blades (little round blades and screens) it cost $25.

      Phibz
    • Re:Buh-wah? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Morologous (201459) * on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:19AM (#6483635)
      In my local grocery store they were such a frequently-stolen item that they had to be removed from the aisles. Now, if you want a pack of Mach3s you have to go up to the pharmacy and get them to hand them to you personally.

      That is, of course, after you show two forms of picture ID, at least one showing you with a beard. They then perform a cursory measurement of your existing stubble and review your past purchases of razor blades to determine whether you actually need the blades or not. Cap it all off with an American-as-apple-pie dirty look and you've got your shopping experience.

      -jason
      • by hiryuu (125210) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:31AM (#6483681)
        I shave sometimes with a razor, sometimes with an electric shaver. The Mach3 blades cost something on the order of about 15 USD for five.

        All this for something that you're using to cut off a part of yourself that grows back in a short time.:P

        Before even taking into account physiological differences due to genetics, no matter how much you spend on the blades, you're going to have to shave again tomorrow (some men even sooner). Which is why I gave up the price battle and just use an electric razor for most times, and a pack of the cheap safety razors around for use other times. If my body is going to force me to spend money, I'll certainly make it as little as possible.

        • by AndroidCat (229562) on Sunday July 20 2003, @09:01AM (#6483794) Homepage
          I've always thought that if I could grow a reasonable looking beard that didn't irritate the hell out of me, it could be worth a few thousand more in the job market.

          A solid beard lets you look sage while stroking it and giving a measured Hmmm and a nod, while you try to figure out what the hell to do next.

          Alternately I could extend my moustache to a Fu Manchu and try out for the next Evil Overlord position that opens up. (I've got the laugh, but an extreme moustache is a job requirement, bastards.)

        • Razor Blades, in my mind, fall somewhere around cigarettes and crack. I asked for a pack as a stocking stuffer last Christmas and was promptly told that things that sell for $25 deserve their own box.

        • The solution: (Score:4, Informative)

          by MattRog (527508) on Sunday July 20 2003, @02:23PM (#6485808)
          The best shave [gentlemans-shop.co.uk] is with an open razor.

          It's a lot of fun, too. Not to mention a lot of time and effort -- but if you have the time the results over electric and the Mach 3 are nothing short of fantastic.
      • Re:They are... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Martin Blank (154261) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:41AM (#6483724) Journal
        Pack of four costs me US$8, pack of eight costs US$12.

        When they're in stock. And they *are* placed at the checkout lines (though at the Ralph's where I shop, they're out so you don't have to ask for them, provided there are any left in stock), which has reduced shoplifting but the damned things are so popular that I've taken to shopping for the eight packs when I can and looking for replacements when I start in on the second cartridge of four.

        The Mach3 has got to be one of the best examples of taking a common product and making a seemingly simple change that makes the product indispensible overnight. I picked one up a few months after they came out, and I can't believe I used to put up with other razors. Now if I use a normal two-blade razor, even one of the better ones, I tend to see shaving nicks all over the place. I know of a lot of women that use the Mach3 (or its successor for women, the Venus3) as well because it's less likely to leave nicks on their legs and under their arms.
      • Re:They are... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by gilroy (155262) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:46AM (#6483746) Homepage Journal
        Blockquoth the poster:

        The worst part is that I tried to downgrade to a cheaper shaver. It seems that they not as good and do not hold as long...

        The funny thing is, this is preceded by

        It is totally outrageous. Talk about a monopoly!

        Of course, these statements are essentially contradictory. Obviously Gillette does not have a monopoly, because there exist alternatives. They apparently offer a superior product, but at a higher cost. The whole point of the free market is, you get to choose what you pay for. If the cheaper blades were as good, people would move to that system and Gillette's price would come down.


        Are you alleging that Gillette somehow uses its market presence to squeeze out the other players?


        Not every high price indicates the boogey-man of "monopoly". Higher quality sometimes demands higher price.

  • by blowdart (31458) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:15AM (#6483620) Homepage
    I only know this because they have a do it yourself barcode scanner for shopping and razor blades always come up as "Declare to cashier".

    Last week I asked why. The cashier said it's because kids go in and steal them a lot, then come back the next day and ask for the money back (a pack of 8 is rather expensive, and they are easy to slip into pockets). So Waitrose watch the blades carefully and always check reciepts.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:15AM (#6483621)
    Seeing as this is the fourth time this month you've purchased genital wart cream, perhaps you'd be better off moving up to Genwartrexol?
  • by 26199 (577806) * on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:16AM (#6483625) Homepage

    ...than plain old CCTV? Alright, so it's a little unsettling to think of someone with a photo of you taking something off the shelf comparing it with other photos to see if you bought the thing... but odds are if there's a CCTV camera then they're watching you as you take things off the shelf then, too.

    Hmm. Doing this without telling people, however, is certainly cause for objection... there should be a sign of some sort, I suppose...

    I would imagine that legally it doesn't require anything more than 'CCTV in use on these premesis', since the camera would have been there anyway...?

    • by aking137 (266199) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:41AM (#6483722)
      Possibly - here, they're demonstrating the ability to link your identity with what you buy, and fairly automatically, en masse. Potentially, this could allow the authorities to track practically every "new" object you bought. Imagine if five years down the line, the police raid your house because they suspect you of something, and then they look at the RFID tags of lots of items in your house, and are able to tell exactly who bought what item and when (from their big database that's full of dates, times, photos, places, lists of items, etc). Or they might just simply keep track of all the stuff you're buying over a set period of time and then start drawing conclusions from it.

      My understanding at the moment is that you do have to display a sign in the UK if you're filming the public. I doubt you have to do anything extra if you're attempting to link this footage with what's being taken off your shelves too though. It's no doubt being rolled out all over the place already.

      I've already quit my job to avoid having a need for one of those identity cards, I've already sent back my driving license and made do with a push bike to stop them tracking me by my number plate, and I got my mobile crushed last week. Looks like I'm going to have to start an allotment now too!
      • by Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Sunday July 20 2003, @11:00AM (#6484568)
        Possibly - here, they're demonstrating the ability to link your identity with what you buy, and fairly automatically, en masse. Potentially, this could allow the authorities to track practically every "new" object you bought.

        Um... Most of the major supermarket chains in the UK, including Tesco and Sainsburys, have a "loyalty card" scheme that allows them to do just that, in exchange for a small discount on your shopping. These are used to target advertising, adjust product lines according to customer demand, etc. They don't tell you in as many words that this is what the cards are for, but everyone with an ounce of brain matter knows it, no-one really makes a secret of it at the stores, and it seems the vast majority of their customers voluntarily get such a card, supplying the required information in exchange for a discount.

        So yes, they can theoretically track every new purchase you make, as long as you use the card with it. That's the whole point. If you don't like that, don't get the card, but the vast majority of people don't seem to care.

        I'm curious to know what they gain by this arrangement, though. There are already scanners on the door at that Tesco (my local branch, half a mile from my home) that are supposed to detect anyone walking out with security tagged goods that haven't been paid for, and a security guard by the door. (The same is true of pretty much every major supermarket over here, and most high street clothing stores etc. where there's a big risk of theft.) What does this gain them, a picture if someone manages to get through the alarmed section and past the guard without setting them off? In that case, what if someone else picked up the tagged item, got photographed, and then replaced it on the shelf, prior to a second person stealing them? Oo-er, doesn't sound promising. Maybe I'll just buy my razors from Sainsburys (the other big supermarket, half a mile in the other direction) instead...

      • You'd be less afraid of this if you knew the horrid state most government computer systems are in.

        I imagine this theoretical database would be the most horrible conglomeration of utter shit you'd ever have seen. The chances of any useful searches being done on it would be nearly nil, considering what the average government dweeb is like.

        This doesn't scare me much actually, nor do I care if a store wants to film me while I buy things. I got accused of theft by some rent-a-cop back when I was about 18 - this would have assured that experience would have never happened. I still hope that guy develops a nasty case of genital warts nonetheless.
      • by Ella the Cat (133841) on Sunday July 20 2003, @09:56AM (#6484126) Homepage Journal
        I am tempted, should this arrive at my local Tesco, to carefully put the damn things in my basket, smiling for the camera, walk to another aisle, and put them on another shelf. Just out of interest, am I deemed to have bought them when I pick them up, or when I go through the checkout?
        • by plugger (450839) on Sunday July 20 2003, @01:51PM (#6485627) Homepage
          I imagine that you are logged when picking up the razorblades, and again when you pay for them. I guess that any discrepancy is flagged and you picture is added to a list of 'suspicious characters'. According to an article in the Guardian yesterday, Tesco say that they store the pictures 'temporarily'.

          What you could do is consistently pick up the razorblades every time you visit, place them on another shelf whilst you are shopping and check out without buying them. Then, write to Tesco's Data Controller and ask if they are holding any information on you. Tell them what you have been doing and state that you believe they might have a photo of you. Pay the £10 charge and supply a photo of yourself to help them check. If a few thousand customers did this, they would probably find running the scheme very expensive. They might also be unable to respond within a reasonable time (not sure if there is a statutory response time). That would then put them in breach of Data Protection law.
      • by beebware (149208) on Sunday July 20 2003, @09:58AM (#6484145) Homepage
        Or what happens when a family are shopping and adult A picks up the razor blades, decides they don't want them and gets child B to return them. Then they get to the checkout and realise they do need them, so they get child C to fetch a new pack - and finally adult D pays for the goods.
        That's really going to screw up any "photographic auditing" system!
  • by Yakman (22964) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:17AM (#6483627) Homepage Journal
    Tin foil hat privacy issues aside, the reason for this is because Gilette Mach 3 Razor Blades are the most shoplifted item in Britain [smh.com.au]. This is due to Gilette's "strategy" of giving away the razors and charging through the nose for the blades.
    • Which is why us Canadians figured it out. We put the noname razors on shelves and the expensive super-uber-quality gilettes behind the counter. Whoa.

      Though I agree with another poster. It is just a scam. I mean you can buy 100x the weight in metal for the same price... there is a problem :-)

      Which is why people shouldn't shave. Too much hassle and really does it matter? Stop feeding stupi corporate three-razor extra-close super-smooth this bitch will fuck you if you use them razor companies.

      Tom
  • Don't worry (Score:5, Funny)

    by SlashdotMakesMeKool (610077) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:17AM (#6483628) Homepage
    Just shave before the checkout and you won't get caught.
  • Obvious problem (Score:5, Insightful)

    by squiggleslash (241428) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:17AM (#6483629) Homepage Journal
    Am I the only person who changes his mind when he's at a shop, and occasionally puts something back?

    Is everyone who picks something up, decides they prefer to get a 12 pack, or the cheap disposable, or whatever, going to get investigated by the police?

    • Re:Obvious problem (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dizco (20340) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:45AM (#6483742)
      Not unless you maul the package, take out the rfid chip, and hide it in your sock. If you put it back, the store knows, because hey look, the 8 pack of blades just showed up back in stock. If you put it down elsewhere, the RFID reader at the door never sees it leave, so it never sounds the alarm.

      Besides, it won't be long before they can track items anywhere in the store with RFID, at which point when you put your 8 pack of blades in with the potato chips, they'll send a stock boy out to put 'em back.
    • Re:Obvious problem (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Alan Cox (27532) on Sunday July 20 2003, @09:24AM (#6483903) Homepage
      That is the same problem as hotel automated mini-bars, and one of the long standing ob electronic people jokes - removing all the items from the minibar then putting them all back.

      Needless to say its very hard for the manager to explain the automated bar bill that appears as a result.

      The police aren't the only problem with RFID though. If I have the RFID data for a range of products I can do several things that favour the criminal - consider a mugger sitting with a PDA zapping people going past and getting valuations on them..

      Estimated $350
      Notes:
      Take the ring, take the phone

      [OK] [CANCEL]

      Teenage kids (or bad newspapers) using RFID to obtain the colours of passing womens underwear and bra size is at least merely going to irritate rather than get people targetted.

  • Suddently splitting up and asking your significant other to pick something up for you in a different part of a store warrants a crime.

    - Serge Wroclawski
    • Suddently splitting up and asking your significant other to pick something up for you in a different part of a store warrants a crime.

      The thing is, it doesn't. If they build a technical mechanism to catch shoplifters and that mechanism isn't reliable, it's not your problem. "Crime" is a concept defined by law, not technology.

      Sure, they might not want to give you this impression, but it's their responsibility to prove that you are guilty of something and if their technology can't give enough proof, the technology is nothing more but a way to scare people. Picking something from a shelf may be proof in some cases, in some cases it isn't.

      If you know that you've not stolen anything (which should be rather easy to know...), stand up for your rights if you're accused of something.

      • by freeweed (309734) on Sunday July 20 2003, @10:44AM (#6484470)
        If you know that you've not stolen anything (which should be rather easy to know...), stand up for your rights if you're accused of something.

        Yeah, because people are never wrongfully accused, or convicted, based on incomplete or even entirely false evidence.

        Personally, I can't afford the legal fees I'd need just to be able to shop in the UK. I take things off shelves all the time and put them back in the wrong place.
  • well... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:18AM (#6483632)
    I, for one, welcome our new razor blade overlords!
  • Simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BabyDave (575083) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:19AM (#6483634)

    When you go shopping, always have an accomplice - (s)he picks up the blades, hands them to you somewhere else in the store, and you take them to the checkout.

    Of course, this would happen 'accidentally' quite often anyway, but it's always good to make more trouble for stupid schemes like this.

  • by Dark Lord Seth (584963) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:19AM (#6483637) Journal

    So, what would happen if we round up 30+ slashdotters and have all of them pillage the rack of razor blades, only to put them all back and pillage some more? You know, with a bunch of beach balls and a large amount of beer we could have a great time while pillaging razorblades!

  • by BenjyD (316700) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:26AM (#6483660)

    [This trial] is not to do with security or theft, it is a supply chain trial."

    But they then say security staff use it. So what is it for? What supply chain information does it give them that they can't get from the till receipts?

    My local supermarket (Safeways, Shepherds Bush) had huge shoplifting problems with razor blades. Rather than implementing this (presumably expensive) scheme, they took the simple step of moving the blades behind the counter at the store pharmacy. Shoplifting drops overnight, no added cost and no privacy concerns.

  • Why ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Krapangor (533950) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:26AM (#6483661) Homepage
    For preventing theft, the RFID tag would be enough alone.
    So why do they need the photos for ?
    Marketing ? But for customer group identification one photo would be sufficient.
  • by arcanumas (646807) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:26AM (#6483662) Homepage
    I don't know how it is set up, but does it also take your picture if you put it back later? Otherwise the picture on the checkout will register you as a thief..
    God , i would love to be able to make trouble about that. If you live in England , try it and if they mark you as a thief then unleash all your fury. (and i don't mean "Slashdot reader mode" fury. i mean "Quake 3 mayhem mode" fury).
  • Scenario (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Compact Dick (518888) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:29AM (#6483670) Homepage
    • Customer #1 picks up a pack of Gillettes.
    • Customer #1 decides against buying it while in the cereal aisle, dumps it there.
    • Customer #2, also in the cereal aisle, decides to get a pack of Gillettes, spots the rogue pack, picks it up.
    • Both proceed to their respective checkouts...

    • What happens now?
    • What happens now?

      If you read the article, you'd know the whole thing is supervised by human operators. It isn't a case that a machine automatically matches faces and raises an alarm. Presumably one of them would simply ask.
      • Re:Scenario (Score:5, Funny)

        by roystgnr (4015) <roystgnrNO@SPAMticam.utexas.edu> on Sunday July 20 2003, @10:54AM (#6484534) Homepage
        If you read the article, you'd know the whole thing is supervised by human operators. It isn't a case that a machine automatically matches faces and raises an alarm.

        Well, even if you didn't read the article, you've got to realize that there will be a human in the loop somewhere. We aren't quite up to replacing security guards with ED-209 yet.

        Robot: "HALT. PRESENT RECEIPT. YOU HAVE TEN SECONDS TO COMPLY."
        Customer: "It's right here."
        Robot: "YOU NOW HAVE FIVE SECONDS TO COMPLY."
        Customer: "It... It's right here!"
        Robot: "3...2...1... I AM NOW AUTHORIZED TO PREVENT SHOPLIFTING WITH PHYSICAL FORCE." (gatling guns spin up)
        Customer: "Aaahhh!!!"
    • Re:Scenario (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Nimey (114278) on Sunday July 20 2003, @09:57AM (#6484138) Homepage Journal
      Customer #1 decides against buying it while in the cereal aisle, dumps it there.
      ...
      What happens now?
      Customer #1 gets rightfully punished. I hated that when I worked in a grocery store. The worst thing was the wankers who would decide they didn't want a cut of meat, then drop it any old place to warm up and become unfit for consumption.

      I know, your time is valuable, blah blah blah, but it's damned rude and inconsiderate.

  • Cigarettes (Score:3, Interesting)

    by afternoon (310303) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:29AM (#6483673) Homepage
    You have to wonder why they don't just put them behind the counter, as with cigarettes.

    Is it some kind of subtle lure? Do they fear the drop in sales resulting from the less control of POS presentation? How would that stack up against the losses from shoplifting?
  • by Erik_ (183203) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:30AM (#6483677)
    I'm now going to make sure I keep all RFID tags I find, and each time I go buy some new blades I'll take them along to swapping their sensors... ;-)
  • by ivan256 (17499) * on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:39AM (#6483709)
    So, you mean instead of training a camera on you continuously as you shop, now they can capture only a few key moments?

    You'd think people would be declaring this a privacy *win* since you'll be video taped less now, and only at the points that matter.
  • by peterprior (319967) on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:58AM (#6483783)
    Everyone knows linux hackers and users don't shave, and the more hair the better.
    Also, simply using the Tesco Online Grocery Shopping [tesco.co.uk] system would get round the problem.

    :)
  • Such a system is very easy to abuse.
    1. Pick-up some blades, making sure you are snapped by the camera.
    2. Move outside of the camera range
    3. Dump the razor blades somewhere else in the store
    4. Pass at the cash
    5. When you are stopped by store security, insist that they call the police to search you - only the police has the right to search you
    6. When the police has found nothing at all, sue the store for false arrest (the manager will perhaps make a counter-offer for free merchandise - I have an aunt to got herself a free mink coat this way after she was arrested by store detectives at Eaton's [Macy's equivalent])
    7. ????
    8. profit!
    After 10-20 people do that trick, mabye the store will reconsider it's policy...
  • by panurge (573432) on Sunday July 20 2003, @09:04AM (#6483807)
    Of course, this arises because supermarkets try to create as little added value as possible. They hire expensive psychologists who tell them that because we are basically hunter/gatherers, we can be conned into pushing the trolleys round the store and collecting the goods ourselves without realising that we are doing all the work, being exposed to all the advertising and subtle pressure to buy, and they are getting all the money. So, rather than prevent theft by the traditional means (sell things from behind the counter on request) they decide to try RFID - which we pay for - so we can have our privacy invaded at our expense.

    No, I do not have a loyalty card. No, I do not want an application form. I would tell you why, but then I would have to charge you at my usual hourly rates...

  • by Alsee (515537) on Sunday July 20 2003, @11:33AM (#6484753) Homepage
    RFID works on frequencies and power levels that are perfctly legal to receive and re-broadcast. Imaging walking around with a tiny device that constantly listens for RFID codes and randomly rebroadcasts the last 5,000 codes it's stored.

    Another cute device but trickier to make might listen for RFID codes to start and jump in in the middle drowning out the last half of the code with random garbage.

    -
    • Re:Honestly, (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ninthwave (150430) <slashdot@ninthwave.us> on Sunday July 20 2003, @08:55AM (#6483769) Homepage
      CCTV is used very widely in the United Kingdom and it is fairly well posted on signage going into to stores. But even outside of shop fronts in the United Kingdom entire high towns can be under CCTV. The debate was fought awhile ago here in the United Kingdom and because of IRA threats and a constant belief in any culture that crime is always worse than it used to be, people generally supported the idea of CCTV and recorded imagery used for security and police use.

      But RFID adds so many issues, the fact is the rfid is unique and can be followed back to your residence if you have the right scanners so you now have a photo an item if this information is gathered elsewhere you can follow individuals and some facial recognition elsewhere and tie down a persons where abouts with other rfid purchases that may be worn, in theory at least. How close is that theory from reality and should the philosophical and political issued be discuessed now or later. I personally believe if this debate is not stated more clearly and in a broder context of these few products we see on the market the later systems we fear will be in place before we have a voice to do anything about them. But who knows the future is unwritten.

    • Re:Obviously... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by WCMI92 (592436) on Sunday July 20 2003, @12:29PM (#6485096) Homepage
      "The solution here is to break the system. Take razors off the shelf then leave them elsewhere within the store. You're not shoplifting and you can cause enough noise that the system is worthless."

      Until Fritz and Berman pass the Digital Millenium Shopping Act that makes it a felony to "circumvent" (or obfuscate) any hair brained "shoplifiting protection system" even if you don't steal ANYTHING.

      Sooner or later the day will come when we are guilty of a crime for simply making it DIFFICULT for private and government authorites to track our every move...