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."
You know...I find it interesting when retailers are talking about a newer technology (that is better than barcoding) for tracking movement of inventory that your link to the mark of the beast should be made.
Principally because the exact same thing was (and is still) said about barcodes.
Do you think the little mylar strips in US money are for COUNTERFEIT protection
Do you think they're for TRACKING YOU? haha.
Lord. My brother used to work on the theft prevention systems they use at stores -- you know, the little magnetic strips on clothing and other goods that would set off the alarm if not deactivated first. This is not considerably different from RFID or the mylar strips in bills.
Do you have any idea how easy they are to defeat? Bend the strip and you change its resonant frequency. Put two strips up against one another. Wrap them in tinfoil. Any one of a half dozen other methods.
As usual, they only work against the idiots, which so happens to be 90% of your criminals.
And, of course, your rampant conspiracy theorists who don't actually have any bloody clue how reality works.
Before anyone panics there are several things to consider:
1. Unless the receiver can determine the distance to the RFID tag (and this is usually not the case), the tag's location cannot be determined with any greater accuracy that the distance to the nearest receiver. To "locate" a tag, there must be many expensive receivers no how many cheap tags there are. Remember, we live in three dimensions.
2. The range of passively powered tags is only a few meters, and they all tend to reply at the same time when a bunch are pinged, causing interference.
These difficulties can be solved, but not soon.
I would imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to program a cheap microcontroller to give out thousands of random numbers every second.
In theory this could be defeated - if you only sent out thousands a second.
Suppose they read your ID for 5 seconds. Chances are they are going to get random numbers, plus a single number repeated 100 times. Guess which one is the real ID?
Or, suppose they get the real ID just once. And suppose you sent a million false IDs. They check their database, and they find that only one of the IDs is present - so that is the real one. Why is only one present? Well, there are 2^64 possible combinations, so if you send 10^6 values, there is a 10^6/2^64*(number of valid IDs) chance of you hitting a valid ID. Suppose there are a trillion IDs in existance (a pretty big number). Then the chance of hitting a valid ID is 0.005%. That is assuming the real RFID code is only sent once, and of course assuming the receiver can read the barrage of IDs. While I'm sure this would cost more, keep in mind that while the ID has to be very cheap, the receiver does not.
Also, note that the only people who are going to build receivers that do this are people who are INTERESTED in tracking you. Having a jamming device like this is going to advertise "I have something to hide" to anybody who looks at the logs. (Not that this SHOULD be the case, but the fact is that it will be - just like sending PGP'ed email while that isn't the norm.) You really want a jammer which either is undetectable, or which completely blocks the ID itself so that while it might set off an alarm, you remain anonymous. (Of course, if this were a real security checkpoint you could be detained or photographed.)
All technology (hell, even nuclear technology) can be used for good and bad purposes. I can imagine many uses for RF tags that I would actually appreciate. For example, as I walk to my car, it automatically unlocks and starts the engine. Or, the front door of my home automatically unlocks for me as I grasp the doorknob. When I enter a room, the lights automatically adjust to my preferred lighting level. Provided the tag is embedded within my body, there's not much risk of it being stolen.
But as everyone here points out, there are many possible nefarious uses for such a device. And indeed, there are nefarious uses for any technology. I could use wall current to electrocute you, blind you with a laser, or carve an "anarchy" symbol into your forehead with the sharp edge of a broken silicon wafer (ok, that's a little facetious, but you get the point).
My question for everyone is, how much are we willing to limit our technological advancements because of possible risks?
Let me give another example that might sound silly. Scientists are, right now, dreaming up technology to move asteroids around. One day we might use this to bring them closer, and mine them for materials. We could also use it to push an incoming asteroid out of a collision course with Earth.
A sufficiently funded terrorist, however, could also use this technology to take the world hostage. Or, if he's having a bad day, he could endanger the survival of the human race by actually doing it, and flinging a huge rock toward Earth. Should we stop developing this asteroid-moving technology because of this risk?
When does scientific and technological advancement become irresponsible?
I consult for very large retailers... for all the privacy rants on /., when RFIDs become widespread, I bet you you will hear practically no complaints? Why? instant checkout.
That's what has grocers drooling over this (well, the super-automation of the supply chain and a tighter control on shrinkage too, but this is the killer app). Walk up to the register with your shopping cart, hand over your credit card and get back you receipt and a bunch of shopping bags. Wheel shopping cart to your car and pack your groceries there.
No loading-reloading at the cashier's, almost no lines, fewer employees at the store. Even a small error rate for the RFIDs will be acceptable just due to the payroll savings involved. And for the tinfoil-hat wearing crowd: for most goods sold at retail (not currency, or expensive stuff like high-end clothes, watches, etc) RFIDs are practically not different from bar-codes. So what's the problem there?
As another reply stated, this is the sort of crime one must witness.
What if you buy a candy bar for a friend and HE litters with the wrapper? What if your wrapper just happened to fly off of a garbage truck?
Man, people are just itching to make a criminal out of anybody...