RFID Explained 305
SecurityFocus has a nice column summarizing the last year's worth of stories about RFID. Of course, you, diligent Slashdot reader, have read about many of these already. But for your slacker friends that need an RFID education in one easy-to-digest article, here you go.
Concerns (Score:2, Interesting)
How susceptible are these tiny units to small EMP charges? If you drive by a high power radio tower, are the chips in your shoes going to start smoking? While this technology is interesting, I hope it goes no furthur than a replacement for barcodes.
Not just for tagging consumers' chlotes. (Score:2, Interesting)
Slavery is alive and well in this country, and I'm not referring merely to rhetorical or political slavery, but actual slavery. Women from foreign countries, particularly southeast-Asian countries are flown to America and promised low-paying but normal jobs performing menial labor or housecleaning services, but when they arrive, they discover to their horror that the real purpose is to prostitute themselves for the financial benefit of their masters. These women (and even children) are trapped, since they don't speak English, don't have the money to fly home, and don't have the physical or mental stamina to escape their tormentors after so much abuse.
How is this relevant to RF tags? Think of how much easier it would be to kidnap people from airports if all you needed to do was wander around with a small device, picking up the signals from the tags embedded in clothing given to the erstwhile immigrants back in their home countries. No longer would there have to be complicated networks of international communication -- they'd just have to agree on a certain range of serial numbers (of which there are trillions, as the article points out), hand out "free" clothes to people boarding the plane at departure, and sit back while agents at the US airports haul in the "goods".
This never would've been possible if we'd stuck to normal barcodes -- it's simply impossible to read barcodes surreptitiously. And since criminals are always the first to adopt new technologies for these devious purposes, it's only a matter of time before it comes to an airport near you, Thirteenth Amendment be damned.
learning by RF-ID in Linux... (Score:5, Interesting)
For anyone who is interested in looking more at this area and has a Linux box....
For more info [autoidcenter.org] and then Download it here [autoidcenter.org]
If you want to build an RF-ID lab you need some cash to get tags and readers but this would help with the theory.
Ironic (Score:2, Interesting)
[Drum roll]
1984.
The other side (Score:3, Interesting)
However, I've had yet another thought recently, one that I haven't heard in any RFID discussion; I am currently in Hong Kong, home of the wondrous Octopus Card [octopus.com.hk] an RFID-based smart debit card. Octopus is used for every transit system in the HK metro area, and is increasingly used by retailers to pay for small transactions. Now, actual use of the Octopus rocks: you don't have to take it out of your wallet/bag/briefcase, just swap the whole thing over the reader; you can get an Octopus chip implanted in things other than a card, e.g. the back cover of a Nokia phone, etc.
But one other feature is very cool: an Octopus is anonymous. Anonymous as in cash: you can buy an Octopus and charge it with cash and it does not get traced back to you. There's the potential of RFIDs to actually enhance your privacy by reducing the overhead of certain transactions, and that's pretty big in my book.
I guess it's kind of the same thing as GSM SIM cards: yes they can be used to trace you --both phone-record-wise and location-wise via E911 services-- but you can also go to a shop and pay cash for a cell and a pre-paid SIM and you're online anonymously. There are two sides to every coin...
Re:Big Brother? not necessarily. (Score:3, Interesting)
My TV remotes (especially the oft-unused VCR or DVD remote)... it always pisses me off when someone misplaces these and I really want to watch a tape or DVD.
My keys and work badge -- Why is it I always leave these in different places? Guess I'm lazy.
Anyways, it'd be neat to have a home that could tell you the location of an item in your "inventory", at least down to the room... of course, that would require you to have an RFID that you could "contact"... I saw someone posted the idea of having the sensors in the doorways, but I think it'd be more reliable to be able to have the house scan the whole room and VERIFY that the item is in said room.
Of course, I'd also settle for a "base station paging device" that I could stick penny-sized screamers on that would go off if I pushed the right button.... Lost your keys? Hit the "keys" button on the base station and off ya go!
So then what IS the point? (Score:5, Interesting)
(your faith in cellphones is disturbing! Or maybe you get better service than I do.
So Johnny law is hot to get their hands on me, but RFIDs don't do them any good.
What they CAN do is build up over a long perioud of time a limited account of where I go- if my car passes through a Toll Booth, that is. However if I travel the backroads, the would have to trace my credit card purchases. But what if I use cash? They have RFIDs in the bills. But HOW fine grain can they trace that cash? Some random guy cashes his friday paycheck, then gives a waitress a $5 tip (Cheap bastid!), which she then uses to get into a punk rock show, which is then used to pay back a local heavy for a loan, which is then given to the Church collection plate, which is then used to pay me back for the supplies I got for the church picnic (assuming they'd even want to be associated with me)... So I've got this bill that can't really be traced to me, per se.
From the RFID "trace" that's left, there was some money cashed on a friday, spent next week three states away, and the guy who cashed it never left.
SO my conjecture is that Credit Cards and ATM withdrawls are a far more effective means of tracking someone's habits. I understand my example doesn't mean using RFIDs won't be effective, but I think the privacy concerns are a little out of proportion. I welcome any better examples.
Re:disabling RFIDs with mini-EMP? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privacy (Score:2, Interesting)
'Who are you?'
'The new Number Two.'
'Who is Number One?'
'You are Number Six.'
'I am not a number - I am a free Man!'
as much as the constitution doesn't explictly define a right to privacy, it doesn't either require one to diseminate their own information. thus, it allows privacy. it also restricts unreasonable searches and seizures on your property which does provide a level of privacy.
you don't seem to mind others profiting from your personal information and the collective information as a whole. that's fine, give out our personal information. there are those of us who would prefer to not have our personal information, likes, dislikes, purchasing habits, etc used to further the marketing and sales efforts which will ultimately fatten the pocket of a few CxO's.
it seems the only people concerned about privacy are trying to hide something
it's odd that exercising certain rights raise suspicion, while exercising other rights are perfectly normal. we have a right to vote, and doing so is quasi-normal. but... if a police office comes to your house and askes to come inside (just to talk), and you tell him to go get a freaking warrant, you're viewed as having something to hide. merely for exercising your rights.
Re:Concerns - answered in follow up to article (Score:2, Interesting)
But each of your points apply to today's technology.
Moore's law tells us range will increase, size and cost will decrease, storage will increase, etc. etc.
So the sky isn't falling today - but tomorrow - that's another story.
Re:Privacy (Score:2, Interesting)
It's about power, and how knowledge is power. Politicians (as you mentioned), CEO's, and other powerful high profile people will tend to protect their privacy while seeking to violate ours. They can project any image of themselves they want so long as their privacy is intact, and anyone who challenges their authority automatically gets whatever skeletons they have in their closet dragged out into the public eye.
The situation is exacerbated by our tendency to develop our definitions of normal by, at least in part, observing high-profile people. Even if buying swank is statistically normal, you can bet it would damage your reputation if it a newspaper wrote an article about it. Even if we all agreed it's normal and you're not a pervert, you would be known for buying swank instead of whatever you wanted to be known for.
It's not at all important that we keep such things private. It's probably even better we all admit to surfing for porn and getting high at parties. However, it's even more important to keep from having a double standard of privacy.
Re:Interesting technology (Score:2, Interesting)
Or that somebody could come upto your home, maybe scan your burglar alarm to find out what type it is and check up on the 'net to see if it can be easily disabled? Somebody could scan through your window (or wall?) and see what type of computer, tv, vcr, dvd player you have? see what type of clothes you have in your cupboards? what dvds/cds in your collections?
Theives are always 5 steps ahead of companies, wherever you look. Who's to say this won't be a theives dream? Am I going to have to be scared to walk to streets with anything costing more than afew dollars in my bag?
Re:Shielding RFID against security (Score:1, Interesting)
From our reasearch I can tell you this:
Placing a passive RFID tag in a static bag will prevent a passive tag from transmitting. (Shield your money)
Water and heat will destroy the antennas and chips, so if you wash and tumble dry your clothes it will destroy any RFID devices. RFID in clothing is a moot point unless you don't wash your clothes.
Re:Interesting technology (Score:4, Interesting)
Additionally, it has been said many times that the range of the RFID transmitter unit is not more than 3-5 feet. It's not like the drug-addict burglars are going to be picky and choosy over what model and brand name DVD player I have. "Oh wow, my RFID scan-o-matic says this guys got a brand new Mac G5, we better stop here and pick this thing up before we head to the next place!" Why can't my home security system be programmed with the contents of my living room and automatically set off an alarm if any of those tags leave the premises? We might see a shift in the way we look at home security. Instead of just trying to keep people out, there can be ways of keep our valuables in.
RFID tags to find my TV remote (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Big Brother? not necessarily. (Score:3, Interesting)
More scarily they also had a demo of potential uses that showed it sharing it's data with the Smart TV in the next room so that the ads were targetted. For instance Pepsi could pay to place ads targetted at people that just threw out their last Coke.
Also as for the opt out method - The standard includes a "kill switch" that turns them off.
Re:Interesting technology (Score:2, Interesting)
(1) Visiting places of dissent: There is no need for the cooperation of the organizers of the meeting. The FBI simply does a secret break-in (as allowed under the PATRIOT act) and installs a reader and equipment to record the RFID numbers seen. They retrieve it later, and then track (from the tag manufacturer down) those numbers to the individuals that appeared (not certain, the product could have been a gift, or loaned, etc) to be at the meeting. Using cash might avoid this, but do you recall how you paid for those shoes six months ago?
(2) RFID tags in money: if this comes to pass, I don't imagine that a law requiring a bank to record the identity and currency serial numbers of all people making cash withdrawals - either by teller or ATM. Say I withdraw $100 in 20's, then loan that to a friend who (unknown to me) uses it to buy crack. The police bust the dealer, track the bills, convince a nitwit judge (plenty of those around, it seems...) that that constitutes "probable cause" to issue a search warrant. Perhaps you're fond of your door being broken down at 3AM, but I am not.
Note that neither of the above uses require the deployment of a large network of receivers covering "every 4 square feet"
I'm also doubtful that the police (FBI, whoever) would be using commercial-grade RFID receivers, which are designed in part to be inexpensive for merchants. I strongly suspect that better-engineered (more expensive) receivers and directional antennae would greatly increase the range of the receivers well beyond the two feet cited. That's with present-day technology, as well. If there is a demand from law enforcement for a cheap longer (eg, 50 feet) range receiver, I don't think it would take that long to develop that... and with it the ability to inventory an entire houseful of RFID-tagged products from the outside.
Re:Interesting technology (Score:2, Interesting)
You just have to wire things properly to gather the data.