NYT on RFID Tags

indros13 writes "The NY Times is running a story on the radio tagging of merchandise. Companies like Gillette want to make sure their razors are in stock and stores like Wal-Mart want to make sure you can find your paisley panties, size 10. But what happens to privacy when everything you buy can be tracked from store floor to door?"

Comments

is this really a privacy concern?

[rtphokie]

These retailers are more than welcome to track anything and everything until I've paid for it because until that point, it belongs to them.

Re:is this really a privacy concern?

[Dr.Enormous]

Well, the question is whether they'll be deactivated after you've paid for it. Because I'm not seeing a whole lot of incentive for retailers to bother to do that, and if people are walking around with these things on them, somebody will eventually decide to make use of it; it's only a matter of time.

Re:is this really a privacy concern?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if it is simply a GUID stuck in there then anyone who wants to read it will not get much. It needs to be tied into the WalMart database to glean information on whatever it was you got.

I assume, though, it would be like the thick plastic armoring that music stores encase CDs and Tapes in. It keeps the item in the store and they remove it when you buy it.

Re:is this really a privacy concern?

[Wyatt Earp]

The anti-theft tags are deactivated after you pay, so why wouldn't these?

Imagine the pain the ass a mall full of RFID tags would be, because of course the stores are going to use them as anti-theft to kill two birds with one stone.

Re:is this really a privacy concern?

[Black Copter Control]

Imagine the pain the ass a mall full of RFID tags would be

Wouldn't be a pain in the ass at all -- unless you're worried about your privacy.

Imagine something vaguely along the lines of what's done for ethernet -- .
How about a 64bit message from each tag. The first 32 bits would identify the manufacturer and the last 32 bits would give you the model number and serial number.

At that point you have a mall full of walking marketing information. When you walked into a store they could figure out what you'd bought, where you bought it, whether you only buy stuff on sale -- and possibly even guess who your girl/boy-friend was (by who bought your underwear).

Imagine being blackmailed because an intrepid data miner figured out that your socks were a birthday present from your wife Cheryl, but your underwear was a birthday present from your secretary Vivienne.

Re:is this really a privacy concern?

[YrWrstNtmr]

There is absolutely *no* reason what so ever to put the rfid in the product itself!

No reason for *us*. Plenty of reasons for them.

Privacy?

[Maeryk]

Nothing happens to your privacy when tracked from floor to door, as long as it ends there.

I dont know where you guys shop, but the 17 year old moron or the "hire the handicapped" person at the checkout at stuff-mart looks at every single thing I buy.

You have _no_ right to "privacy" if you are patronizing someones store. Deal with it.

(This isnt meant to be a flame.. it is meant to point out that they track everything you buy anyway, and almost guaranteed, if you use credit or debit cards, there is a file SOMEWHERE that lists everything you bought, if you dont, like me, get that list on your statement every month.)

Now.. if the RFID tags follow you home.. thats another issue. But the show I saw on it. (Tech Tv? Might have been?) Did not seem to think that was possible.. they are a direct scan sort of thing, rather than a "scan from black helicopter" sort of thing.

Maeryk

Re:Privacy?

[ergo98]

You have _no_ right to "privacy" if you are patronizing someones store. Deal with it.

Well one issue I have with it is the cost (a cost which each and every one of us will bear. While people will say "Yeah, but it'll be made up in reduced shoplifting", realize that shoplifting generally is dramatically less of a economic hit for retailers than you've been led to believe. They lose far more to employees taking stock home or skimming the tills): Currently the RFID tags, for those who didn't read the NYT article (i.e. most of you), cost $0.30US a piece, with the price expected to drop to $0.05US. Add in the cost of the detection equipment (they're talking about every rack having a detector so it can monitor stock and "alert security" if several items are taken at once...hope you shop every week and don't dare buy multiple items at once), the IT infrastructure: These sorts of things end up cost tens or hundreds of billions of dollars.

This isnt meant to be a flame.. it is meant to point out that they track everything you buy anyway, and almost guaranteed, if you use credit or debit cards, there is a file SOMEWHERE that lists everything you bought, if you dont, like me, get that list on your statement every month

Your credit card or debit card company knows what you bought? Funny, but mine don't. They see that I spent $107 at Fortinos and $89 at Walmart, but they DON'T see that I bought Lays BBQ chips and a big tub of jellybeans, and Walmart doesn't see what I bought at Fortinos and vice versa.

Nothing happens to your privacy...

[tgd]

You don't have an RFID tag, and they're item-type specific anyway, not item-specific (ie, they might say you're carrying a pink size-16 thong, but not which thong and they don't know who you are)

There are things in this world to be legitimately paranoid about, but this isn't one of them.

Move along.

What they REALLY want...

[huckda]

...is to reduce their loss to shop-lifters.
The marketing issues involved they can track via their sales registers, they have no need for radio tracking to gain this stuff. Why do you think they ask for your zip code or phone number at many shops when you are at checkout, and why grocery stores have those little "savings" cards...

1%

[$$$$$exyGal]

Typically, 15 percent of shoppers leave clothing stores without getting what they want; during the test, fewer than 1 percent of Gap shoppers left empty-handed.

How in the world can that be true? Sometimes I go into a Gap store just to use the bathroom. Other times I walk through it just to get to the other side of the mall. What if I'm with a group of friends, and only one of us makes a purchase? What about my poor boyfriends of yesteryear who were just there to hold my bags ;-)?

1%? I don't believe it. Just like 100% of voters voted for Saddam.

--sex

I don't see how this maters in privacy

[DarkOx]

I assume these tags are removed when you purchase the item and leave the store so how is this any differnet from when you check out? I assume most of use are not yet such fanatics that you only use cash for purchases right? Because you do realize that if you use credit or debit its not at all hard for a merchant to log your purchases and equate them with your name. I doubt most of them do but still. Why does it matter if they know you're carring it around the store when they are gonna find out you have it at the register anyway? Unless you don't plan to visit the register and mother tought you stealing was wrong right?

Everyone is watching...

[Dielectric]

RFID tags are the least of my worries. At least that tracking stops at the store's door. The range on an RFID tag is pretty limited. The important thing is how you paid for the purchase...

I recently got a letter from my credit card company, which broke down by percentage, etc, what I bought and what it was for. Travel, entertainment, food, pr0n, etc. I find that truly terrifying.

If you're paranoid and want to leave the grid, pay cash for everything.

Safe until you pay, so use cash

[phorm]

If you're walking around the store with RFID tagged merchandise... it doesn't matter. Nothing tags that RFID to you in particular. However - as is mentioned - once you pay, they could tag the RFID to your customer card, the name on your credit card/debit card, whatever. But really, the could do the same with barcodes, etc.

Otherwise, you could wear a similar frequency device near the tags to stymie them...
Cordless phones, two-way radios, local wireless networks and other communications devices...can interfere with the signals...waves have a hard time penetrating metals and liquids

In the end though, paying cash is probably your best bet at not being ID'ed... until the hidden RFID in your boxers tells them who you are, that is.

Protect your property

[kfg]

Until the moment you buy it the things in a store belong to them. Period. They can do anything they want with it, including tracking.

This is no different than putting a tracking device in your laptop or in your car. Or having a "Lost phone" beeper in your cordless.

As a store owner though I certainly wouldn't want a supplier being able to track my inventory without my permission, or perhaps even knowing about it. It isn't any of *their* business, per se. I can see where the large chains would find this useful though.

But in MY store, I put the tags on, if I bloody well feel like it.

As a customer the tags had better come off as soon as I buy the merchandise. From that moment on it's mine, not theirs. Note that that would be *before* I get to the exit.

KFG

That's not really the problem.

[FreeLinux]

Sure, they can and perhaps, should track any and everything in their store. The problem is that RFIDs are not deactivated. They continue to work forever. Or, at least until the washer has worn out your panties.

The fact that they continue to work for a very long time and the fact that they are, or can be, completely unique means that a store can identify YOU by your panties. National chains such as Walmart could track YOU and your panties all across the country. Suddenly they don't sound very nice, do they.

Now, let's take the paranoia to a slightly higher level. Let's suppose that stores share their RFID and customer databases with trustworthy groups like, NSA CIA, FBI, SpamKing marketing. Suddenly You and your panties are trackable in every store you go to, or security checkpoint you pass through or toll booth you drive through. Now you can't go anywhere without the beadie little eye of some agency watching you at all times.

Did you ever get the feeling that you were being watched?

Re:That's not really the problem.

[stinky wizzleteats]

Did you ever get the feeling that you were being watched?

Usually in these arguments, I'm on the same side you are, but according to the article, the RFID is on the package, not the actual merchandise. This is different from embedding them in tires.

This is a good thing on many fronts. First of all, it creates the possibility that I can buy something without having a cashier see what it is and a computer monitor display the description in bright screaming colors (or, worse yet, text to speech). Moreover, this has the chance to obviate the checkout procedure altogether. Who wouldn't consider that a giant step forward?

There is also the problem of privacy motivated shoplifting, which is the reason why preparation H is the most shoplifted piece of merchandise in the country.

Re:That's not really the problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another reason not to wear panties.

Or you could try spoiling their tracking system by wearing someone else's panties.

RFID, meet EMP

[peacefinder]

I'm not especially worried about RFID tags in stores. Yes, it could be a serious privacy problem if a store tracked everything you picked up looked at in horror and disbelief, and set back down again hastily. (Like the Teddy Grahams bedsheets I saw the other week in a surplus store... a kiddie marketing tie-in gone horribly too far.) They might conclude that people were actually interested in such things.

But I digress.

What would bother me is the tracking products by RFID once I was out of the store. If stores are going to use RFID tags, I want them to expire, permanently, the moment I walk out of the place of purchase. And somehow I'm doubting that I can really trust the stores, the government, or the RFID manufacturers to take care of this little detail for me.

So if there's any EE's out there who can tell us, what does it take to reliably kill an RFID tag? (A microwave oven?) If there's no easy way, would it be feasable to make a device that would reliably burn them out?

Easier Checkout??

[Sergeant Beavis]

I'm not very worried about potiential tracking since that is already done everytime I use a credit card. However, I would think this could bring about the easier checkouts that we have been hearing about for the last decade where we just take our items through an automated checkout lane and simply pay up without having to scan our items.

Right now, at certain KMarts, you can check yourself out, but you have to scan each individual item. I tried this once but after waiting 10 minutes as the technically inept attempt to accomplish this otherwise simple feat, I realized that the process was flawed. Putting these tags on all items will make it as simple as walking through a lane, sliding your debit card through a reader (or even simplier if you have an account with the store itself) and walking out the door.

Now if they can only figure out how to automatically bag everything.

two words . . .

[TechnoWeenie]

Pay Cash

Sometimes I think I am the only person in the world who isn't unique in some way.

Privacy issue explained

[tchdab1]

Geez, I can't believe how many posts don't understand the privacy issue. Let me summarize:

1). the tags cannot be deactivated, are not deactivated when you purchase the item.

2.) each tag has a unique ID - buy 3 identical pants, 3 tags have 3 different ID numbers.

3.) pay with a traceable currency, like a credit card, and into the database goes your credit card info AND the IDs of the things you bought.

4.) From now on, anyone with a scanner and access to the database where you bought stuff can know who you are, where you are. Walk into a Walmart on the other side of the world, and your RFID tag can identify you (or at least the purchaser of the goods). Have not only your buying habits, but your shopping habits tracked, stored, and datamined. Buy a shirt at a garage sale and get arrested for being someone else! Have more of your info make it into the Total Information Awareeness uberdatabase.

It's a wonderful world.

Re:Privacy issue explained

[AlphaOne]

Although your points are valid, I really don't think this is a hot an issue as people make it out to be.

Your every action can be, or nearly can be, tracked by other means, so what difference does it make if they put an RF inventory tag on your pants? Does some law mandate you can't remove these tags? Granted, it's highly inconvenient to remove them, but possible none-the-less.

These tags are incredibly low power and can only be usefully read at distances typical to inventory: a couple of clear football fields at best. With all of your clothes in your closet, someone would have to be within a city block to even trigger the things and reading them would be even harder.

As for an uber-database... remembering each RFID tag and what it was associated with is trivial, as is associating it with you when you purchase it. But then what? They already gather that information anyway. Even if you pay with cash, there's always a camera and don't think for one second they can't reassociate that register's receipts with the images on tape.

I just don't see the privacy threat here... what's K-Mart going to do, drive around the neighborhood pinging houses to see if you've got some of their pants?

The government could conceivably slap some database together for all this stuff, but the amount of storage required would be massive for a minimal amount of gain. They can already figure out what you bought and where now anyway.

RFID can be Good For You!

[Marton]

Imagine packing your shopping cart at the supermarket and simply pushing the cart up to the checkout counter, where the RFID tags would be read automatically. You pay, possibly to a machine, and you leave! No more messing around with long queues, barcode readers, etc.

I'd love to see this happen.

I'd also love to see these RFID tags deactivated as soon as I leave the store. There's really no need for my things broadcasting their possibly unique IDs in the air for anybody to read.

this is good.

[geekoid]

it will save you money, and reduce theft. As long as it stops as I leave there door.

There are solutions

[siskbc]

You are right, of course. The idea that anyone would try to make a national panty database sounds ridiculous, but they've done more ridiculous things. I think a law or something stipulating that they have to be removed/deactivated before you leave the store would work. But I don't see *that* happening.

The thing is, there are situations where you will want it to keep working after you leave. Like you return the item, but you don't have your receipt, like it said in the article (yeah, I RTFA! :>) It would be great if the RFID from the item was stored with the purchase price in the database. And that necessitates the thing staying alive.

So stores WILL be able to determine your buying history if you use a CC to pay(Grocery stores do now - with that little card they extorted you into giving them each time). And I bet the RFID manufacturer ends up selling these things in consecutive runs of ID #'s - making it EASY for the feds to determine where the panties were bought and to correlate them with a CC#, then a mailing address, etc.

So what do we do? I think consumers will need to educate themselves a bit - especially with regard to where they buy clothing. We will need a privacy policy law like with the net. Try to pay for clothing with cash. And the greatest hope, I swear to God, will be sensationalist journalism. Even regular people will be creeped out by the idea of being tracked by their underwear. And you know Dateline or one of those crappy shows will do a thing on it if the NYTimes is on it now.

Also, I plan on using a big fscking magnet on my clothes from now on. 5 Tesla should work ;)