Slashdot Log In
Passport Chip Could Attract High-Tech Muggers
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:11 PM
from the what,-no-trust? dept.
from the what,-no-trust? dept.
Orangez writes "Wired.com reports that 'business travel groups, security experts and privacy advocates are looking to derail a government plan to insert remotely readable chips in American passports, calling the chips homing devices for high-tech muggers, identity thieves and even terrorists.' and that 'The 64-KB chips will include the information from the photo page of the passport, including name, date of birth and a digitized form of the passport picture.'"
This discussion has been archived.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
Loading... please wait.
Tin foil wrapper (Score:5, Funny)
Actually that might be part of the plan (Score:5, Interesting)
My question at that point is: why not use another technology? The whole point of RFID is that it is readable from a distance without jumping through any hoops. If TFA is correct they are negating the whole point of RFID and fighting it's inherent nature to do so. It seems that some kind of optical technology would be perfectly suited to do exactly what they want to do with RFID.
Parent
Re:Actually that might be part of the plan (Score:3, Insightful)
RFID is and will be considerably cheaper than an equivalent optical solution or any other present technology.
Re:Actually that might be part of the plan (Score:5, Insightful)
I know, a mag stripe can have its data changed. But wait! So can an RFID tag! So you're going to end up doing public key crypto signing of the data anyway. Why not use technology that is proven to be cheap, safe, and reliable instead of something that is potentially expensive, dangerous, and has no real history of reliability that requires additional expensive hacks to prevent abuse?
Parent
Re:Actually that might be part of the plan (Score:5, Insightful)
My question at that point is: why not use another technology?
Because they want to be able to read them from more then 8cm. They know perfectly well that, with the right equipment, these 8cm devices can be read up to 10m away and they intend to use that feature themselves - they even talk about the ease of tracking people in airports and such as part of the justification for this implementation.
So, you have what basically amounts to spin control. Enough of the general public has latched onto the meme that RFID is a danger to their privacy. So instead of working to eliminate the entirely valid risks that RFID brings to this particular application, they are just trying to cover them up - literally and figuratively.
Your tax dollar at work...
Parent
When will people realise that remotely readable... (Score:5, Insightful)
If they government can read it for legitimate purposes, other people can read it for illegitimate purposes.
Re:When will people realise that remotely readable (Score:3, Informative)
Re:When will people realise that remotely readable (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:When will people realise that remotely readable (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:When will people realise that remotely readable (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Why biometrics are bad: (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:When will people realise that remotely readable (Score:5, Insightful)
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not want people to be able to identify you. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to circumvent the system as well.
At what point did the unwilling martyrs at the twin towers win the balance against the millions of lives willing sacrificed so that we could taste freedom? It wouldn't matter if planes were crashed into building every day, it is no reason to take away freedom.
Parent
I hate you (Score:4, Funny)
If you really loved America, you would know that only terrorists fear having their freedoms taken away. Real, law-abiding, god-fearing, red state Americans have nothing to hide!!!!!!!!one one
Parent
Re:When will people realise that remotely readable (Score:5, Insightful)
If the government can read it for legitimate purposes, then the government and other people can read it for illegitimate purposes.
Parent
why are travellers worried? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:why are travellers worried? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:why are travellers worried? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:why are travellers worried? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would a terrorist want your passport information? They have perfectly reliable ways to get entirely legitimate papers of their own. If they want to kill you, they will, and pick up your passport from your body later as a souvenir, whether it has RFID or not. On the other hand, thieves, swindlers, identity thieves could very well take an interest in your vital statistics. Why do TERRORISTS!!!! have to be part of every security discussion?
Parent
Re:why are travellers worried? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because terrorists/kidnappers can set up a remote reader to look specifically for people carrying this type or passport. Kidnapers can use it to find people from specific other contries that they think are richer than they are and ransom them off for big bucks. Terrorists can use it to find people from specific nationalities. Bin Laden said to kill all americans everywhere, not just americans in the US. This gives them a leg up in finding people carrying around their passports when overseas.
That said, if they go through with this, they definitely need to build in a faraday cage into the passport case.
Parent
Re:why are travellers worried? (Score:5, Interesting)
Stalking is illegal for a reason. Even if no physical contact is ever made it constitutes harassment. Harassment leads to a degradation of the quality of life, poor performance at work, and after extended periods of time can lead to a psychological breakdown. Creating a population of paranoid schizophrenics isn't all bad. Once they come apart at the seams we can lock them in a cell with a bicycle and use them to produce energy, thus breaking our dependence on oil and negating the need for nuclear fuel. It'll also solve the overpopulation problem if we keep the sexes separated. In the end it'll allow some members of the population, who aren't being harassed or seem to be immune to natural instincts (are they even human then?), to live a life of leisure using the energy of those we have harassed and then locked up.
Parent
Re:why are travellers worried? (Score:4, Informative)
Any passport issued in any country is not your property. It's the property of the issueing government.
In Canada, even our health cards carry that infomation on the back. It says 'card is property of Minitsty of Health, issued to be used by:' and your name + address.
Sorry no 'property rights violations' here. Whatever those are.
Parent
security (Score:5, Interesting)
just a thought
hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
255 bytes: First name
1 byte: Middle initial
255 bytes: Surname
1 bit: Boolean true if user checked the 'Member of Terrorist Group' checkbox
7 bits: CIA National Boxcutter Purchase Monitoring flags
16KB: ASCII-art depiction of tubgirl courtesy of frustrated intern
16KB: Excerpts from Book of Revelation
1 byte: Flags for previous visits to Iran / Cuba / North Korea / Syria / Lebanon / Pakistan / Libya / Yavin
30KB: XML representation of above flags
Parent
Aus Passe (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't get it. I mean, they State Dept. could easily have a reader connected to a network which passes along some hash which is stored on the card, to a server which would verify what passport they should be looking at. Slow? Wtf kind of technology are they using where 64K of stuff would take any time?
"Only contractors who sign up to our foreign policy will be allowed to bid -- We welcome your bid, Halliburton Vacuum Tube Company!"
Re:Aus Passe (Score:4, Funny)
Thank you...I'm here all week! (mostly due to pesky bosses)
Parent
Okay, I might as well post it... (Score:4, Funny)
Think "Windows ME".
Remember, this is the U.S. Gov.
Parent
When will the learn (Score:3, Insightful)
Years from know they will probably say "We made the best decision with the information we had at the time".
Another problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Another problem (Score:4, Insightful)
They could run their scanners in the ticketing area but they couldn't do it for long periods without looking suspicious. Guys standing around in bulky coats to hide the equipment will probably draw some notice.
Since these passport chips are claimed to have a very short range (inches) to be read, guys in bulky coats dry humping tourists trying to get a scan would draw even more notice.
Parent
Re:Another problem - don't be simple (Score:5, Insightful)
In 60 minutes of sniffing they could easily collect a dozen or more candidate "known gone" families, then use that as a short list of houses to check.
Maybe the regular readers will have a range in inches, and 802.11 has a range of 100ft. With the right antenna 802.11 can be extended by a factor of 50. I would not count on tags being unreadable from 24", a nice polite personal space distance.
I'm not saying this will ever happen, but it certainly is a lot easier than your deliberately ridiculous example.
What it really comes down to is...
If the passport issuing officials want a system that keeps a secondary reference copy of your information in a difficult to forge format, that is only readable with a special reader and is encrypted to prevent unauthorized use, then there is no reason to use a remotely readable device. A high resolution two dimensional barcode of encrypted data will do a nice job of it without exposing people's data to risk additional risk.
Parent
Sounds like the next big thing... (Score:3, Funny)
Not that I have any naked pictures on my passport chip... yet.
Blame the terrorists. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Blame the terrorists. (Score:3, Funny)
Because remember, they're everywhere. They're anyone, anyone who doesn't
Re:Blame the terrorists. (Score:3, Insightful)
While I'm not a big Michael Moore fan, one thing Bowling for Columbine drove home was the "media of fear" idea. He certainly beat it to death, but there's no denying the prevalence of vague fear in todays (U.S.) media and government.
That word (Score:5, Insightful)
that word that cannot be named (Score:3, Insightful)
Identity (Score:5, Funny)
I guess that's one more reason to get a passport
The Gov should slow down... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a dupe - no, wait ... (Score:4, Interesting)
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/28/1
Or is it a trip?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/23/2
A quad? (Quap?)
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/27/0
Quint? Penta?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/22/0
So
Re:This is a dupe - no, wait ... (Score:3, Funny)
RFID for passports - succumbing to a fad! (Score:5, Insightful)
However, all of the legitimate uses of the passport involve a human being handling the passport anyway - and using a non-RFID smart chip will suffice.
Tinfoil hats aside, the primary response of the RFID proponents to the question of why RFID tags are needed is "Why not?". This is a preposterous approach to implementing a system that handles sensitive personal data that could cause severe distress to the owners of that data, if compromised. Sensitive data belonging to thousands or even millions of people! Assuming the government still considers an individual as the rightful owner of their own personal data.
Some of the conspiracy theories regarding RFID in passports are a little over the top. But there is no denying the fact that the potential for abuse is definitely enhanced by using this technology in this way. Today the scope is for Americans to be targeted using this - either by their own government, or by criminals, or by other governments, or by terrorists. Tomorrow, when more countries follow suit, that scope expands, giving birth to a rich and varied mix of uses - all of which with the legitimate exception of border control are extra-legal or downright criminal. I hate to sound like a troll but the RFID chip in your little blue book could well become the new star of david sewn into your shirt.
disabling chip? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:disabling chip? (Score:3, Interesting)
I will just keep mine wrapped in a few layers of aluminium foil until I am standing in line at immigrations thank you.
I can also see, after the media catches on about identity theft via RFID passports some enterprising company will begin selling lead lined passport covers or something similar. This also begs the
Re:disabling chip? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Here's a link to the standard (Score:3, Interesting)
Document 9303 at the ICAO [icao.int]. Note that it's the international Civil Aviation organization that defined the standard and is pushing it. Note that they intentionally do not encrypt the data so that it's simpler and easier for third world governments to read.
the system is secure, stop the FUD (Score:3, Informative)
The authentication is based on the MRZ (Machine Readable Zone) in the passport (this is text that is read through OCR and not visible unless you open the passports photo page). The MRZ-data is hashed by SHA-1 and the high 32 bits of the hash is taken (this reduce the risk of someone computing the MRZ-data backwards (actually guessing) which MIGHT be possible if you have the hash and the basic structure of the MRZ-data). The hash is sent as an authentication code to the RFID-chip in the passport, if the hash is wrong the RFID responds with a "no valid authentication" message and refuse to send any data.
A state may decide to ignore such measures in their passports (but this is unlikely for the EU and the US). And such states have the option to include metallic jackets for the passport.
The range of the RFID transmission will be around 10 cm. IIRC it weakens with the power of 6 to the distance.
Further, it is not practical to have contact chips in a book-formed passport. It is more practical in ID-cards.
While I dislike this in general and would prefer a passport free world, try to avoid spreading untrue FUD about the technology being used, the data is secure and no person is going to get within 10 cm from your passport, and try an average of 2^31 different hashes without you noticing it. Of course, if the person manage to "borrow" your passport, he will use the MRZ to obtain the key, but in that case, he can take the passport to a photocopier as well (and that is probably cheaper).
Re:the system is secure, stop the FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
We can see the remains of the big bang and could detect the light of a firefly beyond pluto.
Range means nothing to directional high-gain antennas. Sure no one is going to retarget Jordell Bank or the deep space network to snoop for pasport id's but that does not mean someone could not get 10m or more gain from an antenna hidden on the back of truck driven through the airport arrivals zone.
Why include the info on the chip at all? (Score:4, Insightful)
Authorized custom agents could then pass a reader over that chip, which would take the number, connect to a US government's computer, input the number which would return photo, fingerprints, etc. etc.
There seems NO need to put all the sensitive information on a chip, when all you need is a number. Keep the sensitive information on more secure computers, accesible only by valid custom agents.
The nazi's tried the same thing with the jews (Score:4, Insightful)
This system worked very well. It insured that second class citizens could properly receive the proper treatment as such. i.e.: forced to walk in the gutter, rather than a side walk etc. Attend at labour and death camps etc.
Now the american government wants americans to only travel abroad on the condition that they effectively wear electronic armbands identifying them as "AMERICAN" to anyone with a simple detector.
America is at war, and the American government wants its citizens to be required to advertize their status to all possible enemies.
At least the NAZI's were fairly transparent about their desire to oppress and harm jews.
How is electronically broadcasting american citizenship for all to see, going to help americans be safer.
Why not just make a law requiring all american citizens to wear armbands with the Star of David.
Would that be obvious enough for the morons in the whitehouse to wake the fuck up!