Slashdot Mirror
RFID: The New Big Brother ?
Makarand writes "The possibility that we could be tracked not because we have a microchip implant but
merely because we wear clothes, eat and carry objects around is real
according to this article on C|net news.
A technology called RFID (radio frequency identification) consisting of miniscule microchips
the size of a single grain of sand that listen to a radio query and respond by
transmitting their unique ID can make this possible.
Most RFID tags use the power from the initial radio signal to transmit their response and hence can be placed anywhere imaginable.
Retailers are adoring this concept and soon
everything more expensive than a Snickers bar will sport RFID tags
making tracking possible through our own personal possessions.
The privacy threat comes when RFID tags remain active once you leave a store and currently the RFID
industry seems to be giving 'mixed' signals about whether the tags will be disabled
or left enabled by default."
I'm sure it would work.
Just be careful. Certain synthetic fabrics (nylon for one) will catch fire fairly quickly in a microwave.
To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
Cost: $.50 per tag.
Range: 15 feet "optimally oriented in front of a reader in free space."
While the chips themselves are small (grain of pepper is mentioned), the antennas are 1/2" to 4" long.
Sure, this is interesting news (from a technology perspective), but I for one don't fear their use by big brother just yet.
Yes it will work, its how half of the theft prevention devices work. Look for the square stickers with the coil wrapping around a center square. These are the earlier counterparts to what they are talking about. The gates that check for the tag listen for the response from the tag by emmiting relatively low power signals. To disable the tag, higher power is output, frying the circuitry.
So to "clean" your, you could emit broad spectrum high power RF noise and nuke the little bastards.
I work in the packaging industry and have seen firsthand some of the RFID application processes on folder gluers. First of all, the defect rate hovers around 10%, which makes relying on this technology a dubious proposition.
I doubt that the practical size is approaching "half a grain of sand," which would make application a nightmare to try to control. And most importantly, RFID tags are like UPC barcodes: they're coded to a single frequency and product, not to each instance of the product! If an RFID tag is enabled on your North Face jacket and you walk in a store, they may be able to tell that you're wearing the jacket, but that doesn't tell them who you are.
So if I've helped reduce the paranoia level a little bit, I'll now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
RFID tags need to be printed on paper
Wrong.
For one, it depends on the type of device. The ones you see embossed on paper are essentially just antennae that resonate at a certain frequency. There are other versions that are MUCH more sophisticated, though, AND active to boot, and manufacturers ARE anticipating imbedding them in a lot of products permanently (if for no other reason than to save the stores the labor costs of removing them.)
Do you think the little mylar strips in US money are for COUNTERFEIT protection??? haha. Stack up a few 20's and it wouldn't be hard to spot them at all using the same technology (i.e. finding the resonant frequency of a passive radiator consisting of an array of mylar strips of known size stacked a known distance apart.)
To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
These anti-theft stickers are not RFIDs. They do not store and respond with IDs. Instead they are simple oscillator circuits which influence the frequency of the detector oscillation. They are not disabled by microwaves but by a magnetic pulse which induces a current high enough to trigger the builtin "fuse".
There's two types, the magnetic and the RF. Technically the magnetic ones don't have a fuse, but instead are disabled by magnetically saturating the metal. These are the most commonly used tags. The others are actual RF circuits. They don't transmit IDs, true, I shouldn't have given that impression, but the do respond to the broadcast in much the same way the rf tags do.
Working for a rather large corporation that is working heavily with RFID technology, I can atest that this article is entirely FUD (and misinformed FUD at that).
RFID tags are not the size of "grains of sand" but rather the size of an oversized stamp. They are based on passive RF technology. When probed, they absorb a little of the energy and use it to respond. Outside an RFID scanners range, they are just circuits and have no function.
The price point the article quotes is also very wrong. Costs are much lower but still 2x - 3x what they need to be.
So what is this technology being developed for? To replace UPC labels! Instead of having to scan a bar code, you bombared an RFID with energy. An RFID is just as useless as a bar code in the absence of a scanner. The only difference it's a lot harder to mess up scanning an RFID than a bar code (not to mention that bar codes can degrade much easier than RFIDs).
This article was absolutely FUD. Just someone trying to cause a ruckus over nothing.
RFID technology has been around for years. Have you purchased a CD or DVD in the last few years? Remember the check-out guy "beeping" it before you left? That's an RFID tag at work. In this instance, it's just a proximity tag that will alert the store if you (ahem) neglect to purchase the product. (The official term for this is "inventory shrinkage.")
Checkpoint Systems makes RF Electronic Article Surveilance (RF-EAS) tags (the US site is not responding, but the Japanese one is, showing the bulk tags.) And here's a company that sells machines to auto-insert the RF-EAS tag into DVD carriers.
An amazing amount of effort has gone into reducing the cost of the RFID anti-theft tags. They're typically screen printed, and usually are destroyed when you purchase the product. It's not cost effective to make it re-programmable, as the retailers are playing a statistical game - they're weighing the probability of someone stealing a returned (or defective) unit against the reprogrammable cost that burdens EVERY unit going out the door.
One step up from this application is the ubiquitous personnel badge that most of us drones are required to wear at the orifice. Here's one from TI (PDF datasheet.) This costs a little more, and is definitley capable of identifying who you are.
This Stanford seminar gave a good overview of the underlying technology.
most of whom don't understand how the microwave works
Including, apparently, the poster.
The microwave oven beam is directional only until it hits the "stirrer", a rotating paddle designed to spread the microwaves all over the interior of the oven (for even heating). Plenty will leak out the front if it isn't shielded.
The screen does a wonderful job at stopping the (microwave) radiation, since the holes are far smaller than the wavelength -- it "looks" like solid metal to the microwaves.
As for the energy -- there may be higher total wattage in the microwave beam, but per-photon the higher-frequency light waves have much higher energy. That higher frequency also means the wavelength is small enough to easily pass through the holes in the screen, so you can watch your dinner cooking, or the pretty light show from nuking an AOL CD.
-- Alastair
You all are tripping. I worked on these things over the last year. The first approach should be the old fashioned Hammer.
These are the same Tags that have been around for YEARS. Its what they tag whales with. Now their in your cars as passive anti-theft devices on the Luxury and expensive models. The keys have a chip in them.
I dont think you will be frying this thing with any low power RF noise. Thats everywhere, and I have yet to loose an electronic device to it.
This think is not a tick. It will not absorb energy till it pops.
Microwave is an excellent idea. If its too small to be seen, its power output will be too low to be of consequence.