Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Technology

RFID Will Stop Terrorists? 365

Posted by michael from the can't-make-this-stuff-up dept.
W33dz writes "Retailers and manufacturers around the world are enamored with the new radio frequency identification, or RFID, devices. The problem? What about when a thief or the police want to find out what you have in your house? Oddly enough, according to a Wired magazine article, the United States' largest food companies and retailers will try to win Dept of Homeland Security approval for radio identification devices by portraying the technology as an essential tool for keeping the nation's food supply safe from terrorists. This will give them blanket immunity from all law suits related to the product."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RFID Will Stop Terrorists? More

RFID Will Stop Terrorists?

Comments Filter:

  • Article has wrong focus (Score:5, Insightful)

    by corebreech ( 469871 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @03:56PM (#6649070) Journal
    The danger isn't in criminals scanning your home to see what you have, but rather the government installing/having access to scanners in public places that will allow them to track your movements.

    Obviously, these things aren't just going to be attached to foodstuffs. They'll be used in clothing and other personal effects that you'll carry with you at all times.

    The article fails to mention this. Frankly, the article reads like the sort of propaganda piece the industry would put out.
    • Yah... illegal search & seizure and all that jazz.

      Think how cool it would be for the individual though. You could instantaneously inventory your belongings. Lost your keys... just whistle up the RFID embedded in your keychain.

      What I'd like to see is a way to uniquely setup "ownership" of RFIDs. Like you enter your uid and pwd into a scanner, and all of "your" RFIDs in range reply.

      • What you describe sounds an awful lot like WozNet [slashdot.org].

        And that would be great, provided it wasn't corrupted too, that is, that governments weren't able to hijack the system and use it to track its citizens.

    • Re:Article has wrong focus (Score:5, Funny)

      by Knife_Edge ( 582068 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:25PM (#6649434)
      So, you are saying that it would work like this. I go to the store, and buy a pair of shoes with a credit card. The RFID in the shoes is scanned in order to bring up a price to charge my card. So conceivably there could be a database somewhere that matches my financial info, including my name and address, etc, to an RFID tag in my shoes. Presuming the government could get access to a database like this, they could track people with some kind of device that could read the RFID tags from a distance. Thereby tracking my movements with my shoes.

      With each step in this process I have detailed, things become more and more implausible. Retail store having database records of purchases, likely, I am willing to believe. Government getting access to database, not too likely but possible with warrants or something. Government having device that can read the tags from a distance great enough to use it to effectively track your movements, probably next to impossible. I doubt these things are detectable at a range that would make tracking people practical. If you are willing to believe the government has the resources to put the trackers everywhere, on every streetcorner, without anyone knowing or getting upset, for budgetary if not privacy reasons, well...

      Another obvious problem is what happens if I resell my shoes, or donate them to charity, or any number of other things that could cause inaccurate information in the database.

      Finally, isn't it legal to observe people in public places? That is the very definition of public, a place where you cannot control being observed by others. The government might as well be looking at you if ten or twenty people you don't know personally are. I'm not saying that if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide, or some other silly thing. I just think expecting privacy in public is unrealistic.

      However, such a system would make this exchange possible -

      Spook #1: Hey, she's going to the mall again.
      Spook #2: Looks like the shoe store. Lemme see, yep, she's buying more shoes.
      Spook #1: Why does she keep selling them off for cash? It makes her harder to track.
      Spook #2: Dunno, maybe she likes to keep up with shoe trends.
      Spook #1: I think she's a goddamn terrorist.

      • Fourth Amendment (Score:3, Informative)

        by missing000 ( 602285 )
        Finally, isn't it legal to observe people in public places? That is the very definition of public, a place where you cannot control being observed by others. The government might as well be looking at you if ten or twenty people you don't know personally are. I'm not saying that if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide, or some other silly thing. I just think expecting privacy in public is unrealistic.

        Time for a law lesson!

        The Fourth Amendment:
        "The right of the people to be secure in

        • Re:Fourth Amendment (Score:3, Informative)

          by Knife_Edge ( 582068 )
          Time for a you're a dick lesson. There are exceptions to this, and one of them is if evidence of a crime is in plain view of a police officer. What, did you think it was illegal for cops to look at you while you are in a public place, that they have to get a warrant with your name on it first? That would make enforcing any laws at all nearly impossible!

          How is a system that tracks your movements through a public place any different than a police officer looking at you? I think if you are in public, you

      • Re:Article has wrong focus (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Kallahar ( 227430 ) <kallahar@quickwired.com> on Friday August 08, 2003 @05:42PM (#6650288) Homepage
        Apparently you haven't heard of Catalina Marketing [catalinamarketing.com]... They're one of the companies behind those store cards that get you discounts. In return for getting that discount, you're letting them put your buying habits into a giant database (250 million transactions per week for Catalina). It's already tied to who you are, and it already tracks what you've bought and when and where. The government doesn't have to get a search warrant for every store you visit, they just need one for the giant corporation that collects all that info from its clients.

        I'm sure they can come up with an algorithm for when you sell/give something. Say you're always carrying 15 RFID's at a time, if one of those shows up on another person then it'll get flagged as being shared.

        The more you think they can't do it, the more they're able to do it without you noticing.

        Privacy is not a crime [privacyisnotacrime.com].

      • Answers (Score:5, Informative)

        by zurab ( 188064 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @06:07PM (#6650552)
        Most of what you describe is quite possible and feasible as well. Here are the answers:

        So, you are saying that it would work like this. I go to the store, and buy a pair of shoes with a credit card. The RFID in the shoes is scanned in order to bring up a price to charge my card. So conceivably there could be a database somewhere that matches my financial info, including my name and address, etc, to an RFID tag in my shoes. Presuming the government could get access to a database like this, they could track people with some kind of device that could read the RFID tags from a distance. Thereby tracking my movements with my shoes.


        They already have you beat on this one. Gov't can already access commercial databases without your consent when you purchase an airline ticket and get to the airport. This is a new color-coding system that they assign a color code to each passenger and to their "threat level".

        With each step in this process I have detailed, things become more and more implausible. Retail store having database records of purchases, likely, I am willing to believe. Government getting access to database, not too likely but possible with warrants or something.


        See above. If they do it to the airline industry, they can extend it to other industries as well. E.g. they can get your threat level before you enter a railroad station, public parade area, football game, concert, etc.

        Government having device that can read the tags from a distance great enough to use it to effectively track your movements, probably next to impossible. I doubt these things are detectable at a range that would make tracking people practical. If you are willing to believe the government has the resources to put the trackers everywhere, on every streetcorner, without anyone knowing or getting upset, for budgetary if not privacy reasons, well...


        They could equip FBI, local police, and maybe even security guards with such devices - I don't see a problem here. As far as privacy concerns - yes there are and will/would be a lot, but the attitude that you express doesn't help that. Even with the airline passengers color-coding system, where did these privacy concerns get? Almost nowhere with only one major admission that the gov't will not store your color-coded data for more than certain period of time.

        Another obvious problem is what happens if I resell my shoes, or donate them to charity, or any number of other things that could cause inaccurate information in the database.


        Charities that are accreditted as charitable organizations by the federal gov't could be required to report all RFID tags that they have received or transferred.

        Will these types of devices draw us closer to licensing products to you and not selling them? Could it be illegal to sell an object equipped with RFID because it contains someone's IP, plus you'd probably be supporting terrorists? That's a far-fetched, yet interesting thought.

        Finally, isn't it legal to observe people in public places? That is the very definition of public, a place where you cannot control being observed by others. The government might as well be looking at you if ten or twenty people you don't know personally are. I'm not saying that if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide, or some other silly thing. I just think expecting privacy in public is unrealistic.


        This has already been answered by others. Gov't cannot invade your privacy by tracking your every move and recording it without a probable cause, at least according to the U.S. Constitution anyway. But who's paying attention to that silly thing nowadays?
    • Chiiilll man.

      I think the article sounds pretty skeptical to me. Title is "Claim: RFID Will Stop Terrorists"--already they're distancing themselves from that assertion. In fact, I'd say the article is pretty cut & dry in saying "RFID companies are trying to speciously use the issue of terrorism to push privacy-eroding RFID into nationwide use."

  • No Supprise. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Irvu ( 248207 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @03:59PM (#6649092)
    Having watched the SSSCA (now CBDTPA) run through the paces this makes perfect sense. If you have a bill that you want to sell, wrap it in the current craze so that anyone who passes it can claim that "they have worked on X" where X is the issue dujour.

    The way the game is played.

  • So if ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rick.C ( 626083 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @03:59PM (#6649107)
    a terrorist doesn't have a can of Campbell's Tomato Soup in his cupboard, then he's obviously poisoned the tomato soup supply!

    Drown him!

  • Prediction (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Tin foil will replace vinyl siding as most popular home exterior.

  • Great... You Want Chips With That? (Score:5, Funny)

    by spun ( 1352 ) <loverevolutionary&yahoo,com> on Friday August 08, 2003 @03:59PM (#6649110) Journal
    I can see it now... Immune from lawsuits, they start putting chips in the food, "To keep it safe" of course. Eat the food, eat the chips, instant tracking implants in everyone.

    Sorry, let my paranoid side get the better of me for a minute. I'm sure it's all for the best ;-)
    • well the chips are in the packaging ... and if someone's going to tamper with the food they are probably going to use the same packaging anyway - I don't understand how this really helps.

      Besides - if the legal protection is only for if the object (rfid) fails during a terrorist attack I don't see the point - surely it would only fail .... by working (and therefore giving a false positive)

      • ...and if someone's going to tamper with the food they are probably going to use the same packaging anyway - I don't understand how this really helps.

        That is because you are solving the wrong problem. This is not about terrorism but about earning money. RFID tags have no influence on terrorism at all, but with the level of understanding the public has of these things, they are just trying it. Remember when the US gouvernment claimed that outlawing encryption would prevent terrorism? Turns out that terror
    • I don't usually reply to my own comments, but, at the risk of my karma: Mods, that's not insightful. It's meant to be a joke. I really doubt rfid chips would function from inside your gut. Besides, they already put rfid chips in shampoo to track you, why would they need to put them in food?
      • Yes, they would work from your gut. The strength of the signal is not dependent on the chip, but rather the raw power of the exterior detector. The chip merely modulates the incoming signal before it "echoes" it. Using a powerful enough detector, they could probably track you from blocks away.

        Remember, these things are designed to be detectable in the bottom of a stack of pallets. Your gut ain't no problem.
    • Of course when the thought police comes looking for me and tracks me down to the bottom of container #4 at the city's waste processing plant, I'll have the last laugh....

  • Yes! Ultimate Solution! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kenshin ( 43036 ) <kenshin@lunarworks . c a> on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:00PM (#6649116) Homepage
    Just put an RFID tag on all terrorists. That way when they try to board a plane, you can detect them!

    Or maybe not...

  • Hmmm... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Robert Hayden ( 58313 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:01PM (#6649121) Homepage
    So they just arrest everybody that buys the fixins to make falafels?

  • hmmm. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:01PM (#6649125)
    With Ridge's approval for RFID, the food and drug companies and retailers hope to win over a wary public. They also may get legal protection under the Safety Act of 2002 -- a tort-reform law that offers blanket lawsuit protections to makers of antiterrorism devices, should those devices fail during a terrorist attack.

    What major backlash is coming from the "weary public"? I have said this a billion times before. No one outside of our geek culture has any idea what this is. If it's not on Network TV's latest reality show, it's not real. I am too lazy to find my other posts about my attempted discussions with co-workers about their privacy being invaded with Patriot I and II and how they look at me as if I am speaking Greek. "You mean you do something other than watch Paradise Hotel?" (this isn't a slight exaggeration).

    People have NO FUCKING clue what is going on in the world around them. I deal w/100's of people daily who freely give out their SSN to me to look up their records. I specifically ask if they know their student ID first (even though it's a unique identifier, it's not as bad as just throwing out your SSN everywhere) and people just utter, "uhhh, no, but I know my SSN!"

    So if people are so willing to just give up their nationally unique identifier, you really think that they are paying attention to RFIDs? Go outside of your cube and ask any non-geek, "do you know what an RFID and how it impacts you personally?" or possibly, "do you know what the Patriot Act is?" I guarantee that they won't have a clue what an RFID is and they will say something like "do you also talk in letters?" and they will seriously believe that the Patriot Act is something having to do with the military giving missles to another country (if they are even THAT clueful).

    Post your results here please, I am seriously interested if this is just a localized phenominon here where I live (my gf, her co-workers, my friends, and my co-workers are 100% clueless when it comes to anything privacy related), I would like to know what the rest of the non-geek world sees.

    • In life there are huge numbers of issues, which are important, but people are of the opinion that they not worth their time. (e.g. physical looks, financial situation, the plight of the aboriginal peoples of the Antartic.)

      Respect their opinion and don't get too excited about things you can't control. You'll live longer and get along with people much better.
    • I echo this same frustration on a daily basis. I must admit that, over the years, the lack of interest and total apathy towards understanding this stuff has quelled my enthusiasm for sharing what I know with others.

      At some point, after talking to yourself for so long, you just throw in the towel and do what YOU need to do . Let everyone else fend for themselves.

      Remember, you are an "armed" techo-geek. The very fact that you know and understand this stuff puts you MILES ahead of everyone else. That

    • Re:hmmm. (Score:2, Interesting)

      by PIPBoy3000 ( 619296 )
      That means you accept students SSN as a valid proof of identity? I work for a healthcare organization and we come across this issue all the time.

      SSN is a wonderful identifier. The problem isn't that someone knows my SSN, the problem is that far too many organizations use it as a password. That, IMHO, is a very bad thing.

      As for radio tags, I think of them as cookies in the physical world. If they were encrypted properly, you could even block other people from knowing what the tag really says. All
      • That means you accept students SSN as a valid proof of identity?

        We go above and beyond was is required of us by FERPA.
    • Post your results here please, I am seriously interested if this is just a localized phenominon here where I live (my gf, her co-workers, my friends, and my co-workers are 100% clueless when it comes to anything privacy related), I would like to know what the rest of the non-geek world sees.

      You sound like this is some sort of surprise. Well, it isn't to me; people are clueless in general. Huge swaths of humanity don't know how their car works, which century the Civil War was fought in, that the sun is a st

    • Clueless people are a global problem. They are part of why we loose our rights and freedoms at a blindingly fast pace these days.. ( due the power-grab taking place by the governments, ' for our own safety' )

      Its also how a fascist/totalitarian/police/etc states come into power... By the time the little guy notices.. its too lat....
      • Clueless people are a global problem. They are part of why we loose our rights and freedoms at a blindingly fast pace these days..

        Not a new phenomenon and democracy does only help so far. After all Hitler was voted into office. All it took was a stalemate between the other powers, a talent for making speeches and the right promises.

        Make no mistake, people: Any democratic government can be replaced by a totalitarian one if the voters are blind for a decade or two. Signs aof this happening: Constitutional
    • As cynical as I am, it's not as dismal as it seems. I find once I find something that strikes the right chord with a friend or family member, they get it, and what's more they tend to be very indignant because it was right under their noses.

    • Re:hmmm. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Travoltus ( 110240 )
      [populus Romanus] qui dabat olim imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat, PANEM ET CIRCENSES"

      "The people who had once bestowed commands, consulships, legions, and all else now longs eagerly for just two things, bread and circus games."
      - Juvenal

    • Re:hmmm. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ScrewMaster ( 602015 )
      This comes under the heading of the "so what did you expect" department. Other national populations may be different, but we are so complacent here in the "world's only remaining superpower" that we don't want to hear anything that might upset our delicate emotional applecarts. Forget anything that might take research and some actual thinking. To be honest, the whole flapdoodle over 9/11 just astonishes me. The average Israeli or Palestinian citizen wouldn't have been particularly bothered by the attack

  • They hardly ever do it and only after threats from goverment agencies.

    For meat products, by the time that they do get around to recalling things, the vast majority of the product is already sold. The longer the companies wait, the less they have to accept as returns.
  • Not ONLY will RFID prevent terrorism, but it will save our children in the process. If that's not reason enough to let companies see what products are inside our homes (after all, what do you have to hide?? eh??) I don't know what is.

    :(

  • RFIDS are not invincible (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Amadaeus ( 526475 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:04PM (#6649159) Homepage
    RFIDs, like bar codes, are not emitting devices, meaning that they don't send out signals. They interact with an external data source, like a scanner, to retreive data and to respond to data requests.

    As such, they can easily be evaded. In fact, it's easier to tamper with RFIDs than barcodes simply because of the fact that tampered RFIDs are as not visually identifiable as barcodes (i.e. The naked eye can see if someone's ripped out the barcode or taped something over it). Any man with motivation can buy a RFIDs reprogrammer on EBay, walk into Walmart, and effectively make all boxes of whole wheat cheerios identify as gold-pressed latinum. Imagine the riots that could occur at the checkout lines when old ladies have to pay thousands of dollars to satisfy their daily intake of fibre.

    All that tampering can be done without drawing attention to the culprit: you can hear a person cut or rip a box apart, but you can't hear binary code being reprogrammed through a contactless RFIDs programmer.

    There are greater dangers than old ladies not getting their recommended daily intake of fibre.

    • Re:RFIDS are not invincible (Score:4, Informative)

      by silas_moeckel ( 234313 ) <silas@@@dsminc-corp...com> on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:18PM (#6649353) Homepage
      Funny most of the RFID chips I have seen are a simple serial number imprinted at manufacture. The device goes through a fiield gets charged up and emits that data as an rf pulse.
    • There are greater dangers than old ladies not getting their recommended daily intake of fibre.

      My mother-in-law lives with us.

      Sorry, but you are totally-wrong, squared, dude-guy.
    • (This time in the right thread!)

      Any man with motivation can buy a RFIDs reprogrammer on EBay

      At least until the RFID manufacturers take a page from DirecTV's book and sue anyone who buys an RFID reprogrammer.

    • Oh how wrong you are (Score:5, Informative)

      by zapp ( 201236 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:29PM (#6649484)
      RFID tags cannot be reporgrammed. and they do send out signals (on request from scanner).

      RFID tags have a very small amount of READ ONLY memory on board, which is used to store their unique ID. Furthermore, the devices to not have the functionality to write to the memory, even if it was writable. So you can be sure no one will ever buy a RFID reporgrammer on Ebay, well... maybe they will, but you can be sure it's a hoax and they got ripped off.

      Secondly, they DO send out the signal. barcodes need a clear direct line of site to a scanner to be recognized. RFID tags work in a much different manner. A scanner could be put in every light post in a city to monitor the RFID tags planted in tires, and track individual cars (or general traffic patterns). Worse, due to the nature of the technology a directional antanne could be used to read an RFID tag from large distances.

      In conclusion, your comment is crap.
    • Any man with motivation can buy a RFIDs reprogrammer on EBay, walk into Walmart, and effectively make all boxes of whole wheat cheerios identify as gold-pressed latinum.

      (a) I would assume the great majority of RFIDs (and certainly the ones on the cereal boxes) will be read-only. No point at all in making them rw.

      (b) How much are you willing to bet we won't get a law saying reprogramming a RFID is to be considered a terrorist act..?

      (c) It should be trivial to detect a RFID reprogrammer in operation -- it
  • What if the RFID's have some effect on the nation's food supply themselves? OK, ok, hear me out on this - it's hypothetical, not a tin foil hat thing (although, will tin foil have RFID's in it?).

    Say the RFID's are manufactured with a fault which releases something into the food, a far shot I know. What if the RFID readers/etc cause some effect with the radio waves...

    Far off theories maybe, but having immunity from something like this...
    • Say the RFID's are manufactured with a fault which releases something into the food, a far shot I know. What if the RFID readers/etc cause some effect with the radio waves...

      That would be the "Fear" part of FUD, right?

      Seriously, read what you wrote and go think about it. I recommend doing so while making popcorn in your microwave. Or enjoy some food while talking on your cell phone.

      Sheesh.

      -T

    • Any man with motivation can buy a RFIDs reprogrammer on EBay

      At least until the RFID manufacturer's take a page from DirecTV's book and sue anyone who buys an RFID reprogrammer.

  • RFID tags (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ihummel ( 154369 )
    Any electronic marking device that isn't removed when I buy the item is an outrageous violation of the privacy of my home. I can understand tags being used to prevent shoplifted, or to somehow safeguard against tampering, but they really need to be removed by the store at purchase, easily removeable by the end consumer, or at least able to be turned off in such a way that they cannot be turned on again remotely.

  • I want RFID because... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by vrmlguy ( 120854 ) <samwyse AT gmail DOT com> on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:08PM (#6649204) Homepage Journal
    I want a robot that can pick up my dirty clothes, look up their washing instructions based on their RFID tag, sort them based on said instructions, and load them into my washing maching along with the proper amount of soap and/or bleach.

    I'm still working on how to get them dried and folded.

    • I can hear you getting fatter from here.
    • While I, too am all for robot slaves, there is a hell of a lot more involved here than simple RFID tags in your clothing. It's a good first step, however.

      I, for one, am perfectly willing to sacrifice a measure of privacy for robot slaves. WHO'S WITH ME??

      • I, for one, am perfectly willing to sacrifice a measure of privacy for robot slaves. WHO'S WITH ME??

        Well I, for one, welcome our Skynet Overlords!

        -T

      • > I, for one, am perfectly willing to sacrifice a measure of privacy for robot slaves.

        Hey, coppertop, didn't you ever watch "The Matrix"? What about "The Terminator"? It's people like you who'll cause the greatest catastrophe mankind has ever seen!

        I say, if you want slaves, buy some Republicans or clergy; that's all they're really good for.

        I'd suggest you go with "helper monkeys", but anyone who's seen the Planet of the Apes movies knows where _that_ leads.
  • has been determined to be an effective tool to prevent terroristic identity theft" says Department of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. "Remember, not allowing us to burn numbers into your forehead and the foreheads of your loved ones means the terrorists have won."
  • Evil Megalomaniac "Yes Mr Bond, Once I have control of the world's supply of Bagel Bits I will be rich beyond measure". Mr Bond: "Ah, yes, but there is one thing you forget. Every Bagel Bit has a RFID tag on it. You can't make a billion bagel bits disappear into thin air without people noticing. The discard wrappers will give you away". Evil Megalomaniac: "Darn!"
  • Grow, eat, preserve and enjoy your own food. Buy stuff at a local food co-op if you can't have a garden. If you are worried about RFID on foodstuffs, give this a try. Knowing where your food really comes from changes your perspective on everyday life. Anyhoo, any company who wants to use such a nefarious technology is most likely the producer of food you don't want to eat for any number of reason.
  • If they put RFID on food products, then they'll be able to detect whether or not I've bought the ingredients for falafel and hummus and if I eat those, I must obviously be a terrorist!

    Those ignorant clods!

  • Everyone's up in arms about identifying things we buy, and I'm sensative to that. I have no 'good ole boy' network that I fence diamonds through from Rio, no drug involvement, and nothing that I couldn't account for, standing in front of my Mom...so as long as the information is correct, I have nothing to worry about tracking.

    But the uncertainty comes in them getting it wrong; one byte's difference might be all it takes to identify me as someone else, and that, for me, causes the stress.

    There's one thin

  • I design RFID stuff (Score:2, Insightful)

    by lcsjk ( 143581 )
    I am presently designing to use RFID to help keep foods safe. RFID for foods, especially meats,will include time, temperature and bacteria sensors. As for the tracking issue, there has already been enough outcry about Bennetons attempt to put hidden RFID in clothing that they had to resend the idea. (RFID JOURNAL) We are aware that there are privacy problems and no-one wants to have things that allow tracking in the home or other areas. Right now, the trend/plan is to kill tags at the cash register when
    • ...and all it takes is a decent magnet to kill the RFID tag anyway, right?
    • Thanks but my food has always been safe so far.

    • Re:I design RFID stuff (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ewhac ( 5844 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:54PM (#6649731) Homepage Journal

      Right now, the trend/plan is to kill tags at the cash register when the item is purchased. You may have noticed that that is already being done to enable you to leave the store without setting off an alarm.

      Uh huh, right.

      Assuming the RFID has a globally unique serial number in addition to a UPC code, then all that has to happen at the register is for that serial number to be marked as, "purchased." Then when you walk out the door, the computer sees the serial number, looks it up in the database and sees that it's been purchased, and doesn't sound the alarm. A software-only solution that's much more "cost-effective" than designing the extra circuitry for a killable RFID.

      It also has the added "benefit" of allowing the retailer to scan the cloud of RFID numbers coming off you as you enter the store (or even as you stroll past the entrance), thereby triggering special discounts or incentives ("We're having a special on shirts that match those pants you're wearing.").

      In effect, what you're working on will afford unprecedented snooping powers to government agencies as well as corporate entities (who, unlike government agencies, don't even have to pretend to be accountable). And, of course, it will do absolutely nothing to improve public safety.

      Schwab

  • In Soviet Russia, RFID Tag wears you!

  • Nuke the suckers! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jgabby ( 158126 )
    How much power would it take to fry the RFID tags? I doubt they could survive a couple of seconds in a microwave oven. Simply nuke your clothes right after you buy them, and you'll be free.

  • Paranoia (Score:5, Funny)

    by t0qer ( 230538 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:12PM (#6649255) Homepage Journal
    A few months back /. had an article on sewer traversing robots. Does anyone know why they made these? I mean the REAL reason why these were made?

    The goverment is out to get us man, they want to know every fart let in your house. THE MAN is trying to KEEP UP DOWN. Sure they may say that these sewer traversing robots are for laying down CAT5 in the sewer, but I know the real reason.

    Each of these robots is SECRETLY equipped with a miniature spectrometer, which takes your sewer water, and breaks it down to determine its chemical makeup. All this information is then passed back to the DEA to assist so they can profile which houses do, and which houses do not have drug users living in them.

    Now they are preparing phase 2 of the program for use by the USDA to profile the eating habits of Americans. By secretly implanting RDIF tags into your food you poop becomes a "stool pigeon" on your eating habits. The USDA will use this information to adjust prices on certain key products to help promote growth in our sluggish economy.

    Just say no to RDIF. It's worse than you can imagine.
  • This will give them blanket immunity from all law suits related to the product.
    No, it won't. It will give them blanket immunity assuming thier anti-terrorist watermellons or terror-proof mach-4 razors fail during a terrorist attack. They are still free to be sued for any non-terrorist applications failure. This is of course still America.
  • typical consumer items (storing up their money for explosives, plane tickets, guns, etc.), sending government vans to scan peoples residences for items like consumer electronics, sneakers, new furniture and the like would be an effective way of pinpointing the terrorists among us.

    And even if they are technically not terrorists, they are an impediment to the recovery that the administration keeps declaring is happening any day now. Which is practically as bad as being a terrorist. Maybe worse. Either way, Hello Guantanamo Bay!

  • What's Wrong with this picture? (Score:3, Funny)

    by 4of12 ( 97621 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:15PM (#6649305) Homepage Journal

    Quick!

    There goes Osama bin Laden out the door of Walmart with a whole case of Gillette razors!

  • Ron Paul R-Texas: seeing the light (Score:5, Informative)

    by paiute ( 550198 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:15PM (#6649312)
    The Wired article links to Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who is opposed to the RFID idea. Republican opposed to the wishes of big business? Who is this guy? I looked at his web site and read his latest speech:
    http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec 2003/cr07 1003.htm

    (sorry about the URL - seems a space gets put in between the 7 and the 1 in cr071003)

    Anyway, who does this guy think he is, calling the Bush gang empire-building big-gummit perpetuatin' neoconservatives?

    He better watch his back out of his rear-view mirror around the two shotguns and three rifles in his pickup truck rack, the terrorist-loving pinko.

  • In other news... (Score:4, Funny)

    by natet ( 158905 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:16PM (#6649319)
    Wal-mart claims that RFID tags will stop ballistic missiles from striking targets in the US, and seeks dept. of homeland security sanction to deploy them in defense of the nation....

  • Two Issues (Score:2, Insightful)

    by saintjab ( 668572 )
    I only have two major issues with this proposal. One, is that in no uncertain terms, this is a direct violation of human privacy rights, and is an open invitation for the powers that be to 'spy' on every facet of our lives. Second, because of the way they are going about getting this legislated (under the guise of Homeland security) is absolutely criminal. This is exactly how they got roving phone taps, and illegal searches, pushed right back under our noses. For the sake of our own "safety". Yeah righ

  • RFID technology (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Just because an RFID tag was within your house doesn't necessarily mean anyone else could read it. The tag and the reader must be properly oriented and the tag signal strength is dependent on the tag size and the readers' power. Getting the right orientation from outside someone's house seems tricky.
  • The "War on Terror" is to the 2000s as the "War on Drugs" was to the 1990s. It can be used to justify almost anything, from depriving people of their civil liberties, to propping up corrupt regimes, to supporting big business.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    Drugs can be a threat to society. Terrorists can be a threat to society. But is our only response always bound to be a blunt-instrument, simpleminded "war"? Non-Americans often perceive us as politically naiive and unrealistic, fo

  • Wow...RFID with new "TERRORISM STOPPING POWERS".
    Next thing you know, RFID will stop kidnapping, child abuse, Spousal abuse...why, with the amazing RFID we'll be able to find out why some guy just bought 10 bottles of amonia; heck that's bomb-worthy product! Or track all those KY jelly and condom sales...that stuff can be used for...uh, sex. And damn, if the Pope doesn't find condom use evil, you can bet your lubricated ass new ways of tracking deviants and listing frequent buyers will be established. And co
  • Walking through the mall, soundwaves from different sources designed to sound like whitenoise individually converge on John Anderton's eardrums producing understandable speech.

    Hello John Anderton, I see from the RFID devices in your stomach, that you ate a Super Combo Taco Deluxe combo meal with extra guacamole for breakfast. Come into CVS and buy some Pepto Bismol - CVS the only price you need.

    Hello John Anderton, you've had those sneakers for a year. They're getting kinda ratty I bet. Come into Sport

  • News just in... (Score:2, Funny)

    by agby ( 303294 )

    The Department for Homeland Security has just announced that putting 'locks' on your 'doors' will stop thieves burgling your house.

    Latest research also indicates that umbrellas keep you dry in the rain, women like chocolate, oranges are not the only fruit and it's dark at night.

  • So what if they can track you? So what if the government knows everything about you? They're just trying to protect us from terrorists. If you're not a criminal you have nothing to fear. Can't you see that the Pentagon's new tracking system went from Total Information Awareness to Terrorist Information Awareness? See you have nothing to worry about if you're not a terrosit :)

  • Any skepticism? Anywhere? Bueller? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:48PM (#6649662) Journal
    I'm not trying to be flamebait here, but is there ANY evidence these things have enough range to really cause concern? Aren't these passive devices that have a range of about 4 feet after they have been activated by a scanner? Wouldn't the police have to be in the house anyway (and thus need a warrant) or the thief (thus he's already broken in and can SEE what I have)?

    Is this another blown out of proportion nothing? Don't we have enough REAL issues to face that we don't need to make up new ones? One poster below talks about how only the geek community knows about this stuff. Fine. But shouldn't the geek community also be able to filter out the real threats from the piffle? If someone has any reliable information that a privacy threat from RFID exists, I'd happily review it, but all I have found is stuff on websites devoted to the black helicopter set that requires these devices to do things that are quite basically impossible.

    It all sounds like the scare a few years back about the metal wires in the new dollar bills that were supposed to magically transmit their values from hundreds of feet away, through walls, to any G-man with a Dick Tracy scanner-watch. I think those people moved on to believing airplane contrails are full of poison chemicals or something.

    So far all I see is a way to get out of a store without having to wait while Grandma writes a check for a pair of socks.

  • The General Rule... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lynx_user_abroad ( 323975 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:48PM (#6649664) Homepage Journal
    Whomever builds the computer controls the computer.

    We do not know what functionality these "remotely controllable mini computer devices" offer today; we do not know what functionality they will offer in the future. But we do know that the functionality will evolve toward the functionality desired by the people who create them. And we know it likely won't be you or I building them.

    Do you want to live in an environment swarming with millions of little computers all working to fulfill the desires of someone-who-is-not-you?

  • Consumer group against RFID (CASPIAN)... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wherley ( 42799 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @05:06PM (#6649909)
    This group, CASPIAN - Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering [nocards.org] has information on RFIDs including Auto-ID: Tracking everything, everywhere [nocards.org]. The group is also against loyalty shopping cards for similar reasons.
    • It's as easy as one person volunteering to be the "blind". Then all you need to do is to know that person's phone number, and type it in. You'll notice that they never complain if you don't have your card - sure, go right ahead and type in your number.

      I am one of a group of about two dozen people who use one phone number on one of our number's card. That ought to be enough to make their data practically useless :)

  • Tremble before the mighty microwave (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Angst Badger ( 8636 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @07:03PM (#6650999)
    I'm as paranoid as the next guy about RFID tags, but folks, remember this -- there isn't an RFID tag on the planet that can survive fifteen seconds, probably much less, in your househould microwave oven. Most of the goods to which they are attached, on the other hand, would be largely unaffected.

    Now mind you, it's theoretically possible that microwaving your shoes would then violate the DMCA, but prosecution is practically unlikely unless Hilary Rosen is sitting inside your microwave right now.

    In which case, set it to maximum intensity for an hour.

  • RFID "Poppers"? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rdmiller3 ( 29465 ) on Saturday August 09, 2003 @07:45AM (#6653815) Journal
    Looks like there will soon be a market for gizmos which can burn out RFID tags. It shouldn't be too hard to drive enough energy into them to make them go "pop" somwhere inside.

    Small ones could become a problem for store owners who try to rely on RFID to catch shoplifters though.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close