Slashdot Mirror
Labelling RFID Products
John3 writes "Following Wal-Mart's recent announcement that they plan to push RFID in their stores, CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) has posted proposed legislation that would require a product to be labeled if it contained an RFID tag. Beyond the label requirement, the proposed legislation also sets up some strict restrictions on the use of RFID data. Even though RFID is not in widespread use, it's probably best to start working on these types of protections before the products are on the shelves."
Katherine Albrecht of CASPIAN also has another very informative site on RFID. It's pretty scary stuff. Also, check out her appearance last week on Rense. Link to streaming MP3.
...maybe I don't get it, but how are RFID tags a violation of your privacy. They have an effective range of a few feet. They are the next logical evolution up from barcodes. Are we that paranoid and afraid of technology? Somebody please enlighten me...
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
me when I lined my trechcoat with copper screening in highschool!!! Whose laughing now suckers!
People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
If there is no rugulation on this technology pretty soon we can see RFID tags that point you out in a mall, and tell the mall owners what shops you've gone to and what you've bought or looked at. So this is logical that these people are trying to limit the technology in its early stages.
Useless sig.
We're terrified of barcodes.
Where have you been, man?
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
that these RFID tags would be susceptible to a low power EM pulse. A little high school level physics ought to be enough to keep them from being a problem if they bother you that much.
it right...
Privacy? You don't have any privacy. Get over it!
Their proposal seems to be quite well-prepared, albeit a little too general. However, I would really like to see another section under "Privacy", which would require the users of RFIDs to include them in a way that would make them easy to remove. People should have a choice whether to drive with the tags all the way home or remove them on the spot.
From the website, the summary of the RFID Act (summary is pretty long though):
RFID Right to Know Act of 2003
Proposed legislation to mandate labeling of RFID-enabled products and consumer privacy protections
SUMMARY OF THE BILL
AN ACT
To require that commodities containing radio frequency identification tags bear labels stating that fact, to protect consumer privacy, and for other purposes.
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This section shortens the title of the bill to "RFID Right to Know Act of 2003."
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE FAIR PACKAGING AND LABELING PROGRAM.
This section amends the Fair Packaging and Labeling Program by inserting language under subsection (a) of paragraph (6). This section requires that a consumer commodity or package that contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag shall bear a label as provided in the paragraph below.
It also defines the term "radio frequency identification" or "RFID" to mean technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify individual items. It defines the term "tag" to mean a microchip that is attached to an antenna and is able to transmit identification information.
Finally it describes that the label should state, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase; and be in a conspicuous type-size and location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT RELATING TO MISBRANDING.
This section amends the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by inserting language under the sections relating to misbranding of commodities. It says that a food, cosmetic, drug or device is misbranded if the product or package contains an RFID tag, unless it bears a label stating, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase. It also prescribes that the label must be in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 4. AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL ALCOHOL ADMINISTRATION ACT.
This section states that a person shall not manufacture, import, or bottle for sale or distribution in the United States any alcoholic beverage unless its container bears a label. That label must state at a minimum, that container contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase. The label must also be in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 5. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 15, CHAPTER 36--CIGARETTE LABELING AND ADVERTISING.
This section states that a person shall not manufacture, import, or package for sale or distribution in the United States any cigarettes unless its container bears a label. That label must state at a minimum, that container contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase. The label must also be in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 6. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 15, CH. 94--PRIVACY.
This section goes directly to protecting the privacy of consumers. First it directs that a business shall not combine or link an individual's nonpublic personal information with RFID tag identification information, beyond what is required to manage inventory. Second, a business shall not, directly or through an affiliate, disclose to a nonaffili
The privacy folks worry mostly about RFID tags in cash.
But earlier and later in the FAQ, they mention tags placed into the soles of shoes. Since this is done during the manufacturing process and would require slicing open the sole to find/destroy the tag (if you even knew where specifically it was), it doesn't seem there is an effective tag killer in this instance (and any other where the tags are deeply embedded).
So, anybody else know of an effective tag killer that doesn't involve destroying the item and/or setting it on fire?
Think of how much easier it would be to kidnap people from airports
What a load of crap. By your own statements most of these "slaves" come here to find arranged jobs. Why have "tags" and risk being caught in a crowded airport with some kind of radio. "Officer that man just waved somekind of radio at me. Stop him I think he is a terrorist!"
All you have to do is just wait till the woman shows up at your doorstep to go to work. DUH! They already have a method of rounding up slaves. Your thinking too much. Try again.
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
If stores want to use them for inventory, why not have them in everything -- but -- once the item is purchased, it is disabled like the security tags (for instance, they swipe it over a pad of some kind.)
This would negate the privacy concerns and let them reap the benefits of using RFID inventory.
Remember. RFID isn't perfect. It's operation usually falls under Part 15 of the FCC rules, which is the whole "may not emit interference" and "must accept interference, even if it causes undesirable operation". RFID also uses 900MHz, 2.4GHz, 5GHz, and other public use frequencies, some of which are even also HAM bands. Amateur Radio isn't governed by part 15, so if a ham operator decides to operate on the frequency that RFID transceivers use, and if the HAM radio operator is operating legitimately, it's the RFID tranceiver's owner's problem, not the HAM's. Specific jamming is prohibited by the rules that amateur radio operators follow, but consumer use, nonlincensed devices are secondary users where both licensed and unlicensed spectrum overlap.
so, what happens when someone is checking out, and the computer fails to record all of the RFID tags because of interference, but the person has legitimately purchased something? When they go to return it, the computer could possibly say that it wasn't purchased, and then the individual is left with more headaches.
I think that the FCC should require that business-use devices like this be licensed, and each one individually identified in a publicly searchable database. I also believe that reissues of identification should be prohibited. This would work quite strongly to curtail use of RFID for tracking mechanisms.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
This is tooo funny. All these people paranoid about RFID. OK, two categories of folks to worry about with RFID, PITA marketing and the MIB. Whatever about the marketing, just use a seperate unlisted phone# and a po box and you eliminate huge amounts of unsolicted phone calls/junk mail.
OK, now on to Big Bros. MIB knows that corps want RFID to save bucks (and maybe marketing, see above). Cool, MIB can maybe utilize it too (hey Joe bought a sixpack, how interesting, glad we have all these scanners everywhere). Best thing is, while everyone hoots and hollers about RFID, they fail to notice those "security" cams that can see your face + see what you bought + see the license plate of your car, all of which can be done TODAY, IF anyone really gave a crap that you bought some weiners and diet coke. We won't even talk about the instance when you use your CC. OK, so if Osama buys some slacks from Banana Republic using cash, we'll be able to tell if he tries to hop a Greyhound to Walla Walla because his RFID will set off the scanner. Assuming he's stupid enough to not be aware of the fact that RFID's are EVERYWHERE now, what are the odds that he can either disable, or better yet, make copies and distribute them EVERYWHERE, totally making the system worthless?
Like others have said, privacy, forget it. All us cell phone toting, internet using, CC charging, electricity using folks aint got no privacy at all. If RFID makes Walmart more efficient so it can hire more people, drop more prices, fatten their wallets, I say more power to'em. We techno elitest getting all scared and up in arms about tech, we have to take the good with the bad, once you open the box, you can't filter what escapes.
RFID tags in cigarette packaging? Oh, shit, time to stop smoking!
My journal has hot
I have no problem with RFID tags, as long as they are disabled when you purchase the product (like the tags that are used by many bookstores which are disabled after passing the book over that little pad). Until you actually hand the money over the cashier, it's not your property, it's the store's, and they have the right to keep track of it as they see fit (but not the continue keeping track of it after it's no longer their property).
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
Now that's what I'm interested in. I want to be able to grab the numbers, and then change them. I want to be able to walk into a store and instead of "How did you like those pants?" I want it to say "How did you like those extra-large elephant sized condoms you bought last week?" :)
There are just so many possibilities to hack these things and have tons of fun with retail stores if they use them for anything useful. Maybe I should start my own organization: The Anti-Datamine (TAD). And we'll go around trying to screw with all the data mining techniques out there.
This will be the best thing for grocery self-checkout.
Have you ever been in line behind Joe "I have no idea where the UPC is" Blow and watch him try to get the scanner to recognize his can of Dinty-Moore stew? It's torture watching him wave the thing 3 feet away from the scanner or swing it back and forth in front of it at 100 mph.
With this he can drop his carton full of Lean Pockets on the counter, pay, and be gone!
Oliver's army is here to stay Oliver's army are on their way And I would rather be anywhere else But here today
Wal-Mart doesn't exactly higher the "brightest bulbs in the chandelier" if you know what I mean.
The good thing is that if RFID tags become omnipresent then so will RFID tag readers. As such an RFID tag reader should be small, simple to use, portable, and dirt cheap.
In fact the RFID Journal has a story about just such a reader being developed.
I guess I'll be buying one as soon as they come to market.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt:
It's about tracking things and the people that own them after purchase. RFID tags in tires could track everywhere you drive. RFID in clothes or shoes can track where you go.
Maybe you don't care because you don't do anything important to participate in the democratic process, but for anyone even involved with it to the basic level of civil duty, there will always be groups that don't agree with you that wield some power, and who are willing to use any means necessary to discredit or get you thrown in jail.
Everyone does some things that are illegal, because we have way too many laws that are very broadly written. I'm willing to bet you have committed several felonies in the past. We don't have enough resources to put everyone in jail, but we do have enough resources for a group in power to jail those with dissenting viewpoints.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
However, business from WalMart on down will unite to fight any restriction or product labeling requirements.
Remember, there are people who want a Minority Report style future. There are others who simply see it as a way to make money... there are people who see "You wear adult diapers? We have Depends on sale" as simply an opportunity to make money.
It is the job of your Congressperson to make sure that his consituents are served. His constituents are the people who send him checks and only those people.
And if your RFID tag gets missed at checkout, it'll be your word against the store's that it's their fault. Enjoy your stay in jail.
Tech Public Policy stuff
>> Wal-Mart doesn't exactly higher the "brightest bulbs in the chandelier" if you know what I mean...
"higher"???
Yeah, we know what you mean.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
You know, this is actually a good idea to combat the problem before it begins.
Think about it, if nothing is done to restrict the use of RFID information, corporations/government will become happy with their presence. If you try to take these RFID data that is collected away from them, they will use their money to lobby against it.
Why do we have to use our social security numbers for everything these days? They were only invented for tax purposes, but because this is a juicy bit of information corperations want, they have lobbied, and won, the rights to ask for this info for say, signing up for your cell phone.
Moral is, if you don't get $100 you will not miss it as much as you will when someone takes it back after giving it to you. The same thing will happen with RFID tags and the information databases that will be associated with them.
Once companies have this data and ways to track it, they will NEVER want to give it back. And little guys usually have trouble fighting the big guys with even bigger wallets.
Those are tiny little radios - find out the frequency they use, rig up $10 worth of Radio Shack parts, hook it up to a 9v battery, and go for a walk in the offending store.
If you feed them an order of magnitude more energy than they're designed to take in exactly the band they're using
Yes, you can know the operating frequency without a fancy spectrum analyzer - the data sheets on those things are pretty much public knowledge
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
I buy a shirt at Wal-Mart and wear it a week later to my friendly supermarket. Since the RFID tags broadcast, the supermarket counter realizes that the person at the counter has RFID #123456789. Once I swipe my debit card, they can combine my name, debit card, and an RFID. Each time my debit card is swiped at the store, a new RFID may be logged along with it. The next time that I pay with cash, the device at the counter may still be able to track what I buy because it knows that RFID 123456789 is John Doe and he just bought some . Broadcasting IDs is a VERY bad thing because it allows passive devices to pick it up. I don't want to be able for my local store to be able to identify me based on the shirt I'm wearing.
If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Setting out enough transponders to ensure that, for example, a given person couldn't move from one block to another without being tracked would be a piece of piss by comparison.
First, there is perhaps .01% of the population who even know what these RFID devices are, never mind the alleged societal dangers that lurk within them. Very few politicians are going to fight very hard to pass a piece of legislation that has so little public spotlight. Most politicians, especially the powerful ones who can sway votes, are media whores. No one is going to get on a network Sunday morning political program talking about RFID tags.
Second, the political winds are blowing gale force in the anti-regulation direction. Any piece of legislation that isn't privatizing workers or loosening government oversight is pretty much dead in the water without some kind of immediate crisis (like the recent corporate scandals). The best that could be hoped for is that congressional folks would say, "let's see what the free market does with these devices first and then regulate them if need be."
Third, Wal-Mart & Co., if there was a miraculous surge in support for this legislation, would easily lobby to defeat the bill or get it placed into committee for further study which would effectively kill the bill. A grassroots campaign would be too disorganized, too broke, and too unsophisticated to ever hope to win such a battle.
I'm not recommending whoever is sponsoring this bill to give up. I'm a firm believer that even losing battles are important to fight because they do raise awareness and keep alive the chance for change sometime in the future.
<a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>
CASPIAN also has some pretty far out claims when it comes to rfid technology. Among my favorites is this page which claims These tiny tags, predicted by some to cost less than 1 cent each by 2004, are "somewhere between the size of a grain of sand and a speck of dust." They are to be built directly into food, clothes, drugs, or auto-parts during the manufacturing process. Directly into food!?!? Seriously folks, I work for a major food manufacturer and we would never dream of putting these things directly into food.
Although labs might be able to produce microscopic tags, the ones we currently use in the industry are around 1 inch square (ever open a new book to find a funny sticker with metal in it?). The tags are also relatively extremely expensive. The two vendors I talked to within the last two weeks both quoted me a price of around $0.50 per tag for an order of 50 million tags, nowhere near the price we'd require for a realistic rollout.
In short, yes the tags will come and there will be some potential for abuse. And yes, it should be illegal for a stalker (or merchant) to sit in a mall and see what you're walking around with. But the hype is is way overblown.
--I really don't want to write this but I sorta have to. Please don't take this personal, I just need to rant on this stuff and in general, it's not addressed to you just it fits as a reply here, k? It's IMPORTANT. This is WAY more important than any video game, music track, latest CPU chip, latest cellphone-any of that stuff. That stuff is FUN, it's not IMPORTANT.
OK, generic rant time
Range on these tiny chips started out a few millimeters. Then quickly got to a few inches, then a few feet, and some are much farther than that now. They started out not holding much data, now they can hold a lot. They started out saying microchips would never be small enough to implant, now it's common in pets and some special forces and some prisoners have them. This is a geek board, let's get real on tech advances. "They" , they being these high powered international goons and orgs and whatnot- started out saying your social security number was not an ID, and that it would only be used to track your social security info. They started out with no licenses, then paper licenses (I had one, no picture on it either), then picture licenses, now licenses that have your biometrics, retina scan, finger print and who knows what, DNA patterns, no idea what they got planned.. They started out with "only" a few firearms restrictions,(I remember much less crime, far fewer restrictive laws, funny how that worked out) then they added more and more and more, then they took more and more classes away and now you need a permit to get a permit to think about getting a permit, and a lot of places they just tell ya to go pound sand. Same with something as simple as owning your own property and building a regula small home, now it's a mnightmare of inspectors and bribed off councilmen and restrictions and who knows, and NO, it's just not all that much safer, it's roughly the same amount of fires and "houses collapsing", in fact, new homes are mostly built a lot crappier than they used to be in most aspects. They started out with individual repsonsibility and only elected sheriffs that everyone local knew and you could go talk to them, and if you didn't like them, you could vote the bum out and with the vote you could LOOK into the ballot box and see yes/no if it was stuffed or not.. Now they have mostly non elected helmeted black ski masked anonymous darth vader clones kicking in peoples doors and throwing in "humane grenades",no matter what ya get popped for it's gona cost you your house almost to even think about fighting it in court, juries have been castrated to nothinghood, and when you go vote some machine announces who won with absolutely zero way to check and see if you are being lied to. They started out with real money made of precious metals that couldn't be dorked with, now they have funny money *they* can re valuate up or down without asking you at the issuance of some commands on a screen.
On and on. This is one of those deals you either get it or ya don't get it. It's just one more step towards full bore dictatorial police state. I'm older than most here so I'll just say it out loud, because my frame of reference is long enough to SEE the changes and the directions, and there's NO WAY to avoid what it is, it's obvious as all get out.
YO, the government is taking over ya young guys! No %^&^&**( %%^^t!! Wake UP! It's a freeking police state heading your way, it's half way here now! It ain't NOTHING like it used to be not that long ago and it's clear as day what they are doing!! They will MAKE YOU get chipped, even if they have to run a scam "terrorist" attack or six, eventually-and soon-or you'll be a criminal if you aren't chipped or "tagged". They WILL BE telling you where to work. The laws are written and on the books, you can READ the dang things, they PLAN on using them laws, they don't write that crap for giggles. You WON'T have any say in it. This government is right at the point it kills people, it's building more "camps" now, I mean, please pick up on what "camps" means. They WILL BE tracking y
The majority of the RFID tags in use are the read only type that repsond with an identification number. This number is useless without a database to cross reference the number to some item, person, whatever. If anything should be feared it is the database not the tag. There are many other methods of tracking besides RFID, i.e. finger prints, retinal scans, your face! Any of these distinct features can also be cross referenced to a database. So attacking some simple technology like RFID tags is pretty stupid. Instead there should be concerns, attacks, legislation, etc. against the data that goes into a database and how it is used. burnin
Wal-Mart will use the technology to eliminate all their check-out people. You just walk up to a thing and scan your credit card and it figures out the crap you got. Every corporation's dream is to have 1 employee and still be able to rake in ungodly amounts of cash.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Yes, I am sure the opposite sex will make a point of scanning your clothing for RFIDs before introducing themselves.
The unofficial
I'm as concerned about privacy as the next /.er, but count me in on the "what's the big deal?" side. These tags are meant for inventory control up to the point of retail sale. They'll most likely be attached to the packaging which gets thrown away, not the product itself. If you walked through a mall in clothes full of active RFID tags, you'd be setting off all kinds of inventory scanners, cash register scanners, shoplifting sensors, etc. Assuming they didn't zap the tags at the cash register when you paid, there would be some small privacy leak between the time you bought the stuff and threw away the packaging at home if someone wanted to stalk you at short range with an RFID scanner to see what you bought. Someone could also theoretically dumpster dive through your garbage without getting their hands dirty if they wanted to find out your shopping habits.
I can see this going down in walmart's stock room:
1. Take individual products out of main container.
2. Replace products with bricks and RFID tags.
3. Place main container in inventory.
4. PROFIT!
Seriously, if they are going to do inventory without actually opening boxes and COUNTING individual pieces then they are going to have alot of shrink and no one will know about it until the main carton is cracked open to stock the shelves.
-ted
Why is it that people always inherently love assuming the worst about technology? I was in the annual meeting for the australian packaging group, and i know their main concern was to get RFID implemented to prevent situations of poisonings and extortion - ie, once an item is sold, the RFID is set as sold. Alarm bells can start to ring if this already purchased item is returned to the shelf - automatically.
How do these things with a passive range of a few feet compare to say a mobile phone's tracking ability. ah well.
Why does metal arc in a microwave oven?
A microwave oven creates an electrical field within the oven cavity. Metal in the field creates a low resistance "preferred path", which channels the current to a point. When the electron potential is high enough, it can break permitivity of air, and arc to another metal contact point. Moving electrons is current, with losses as heat, which can melt the metal & other objects in the microwave.
So yes, the RFID will spark, but not for the reason you thought it would.
As for using RFIDs to begin with, I think Albrecht is a little too luddite for my taste, and doesn't have the foresight to see the benefits. I would rather see regulations on what kind of personal information can be tracked, rather than outright banning. But then again, a collection transparency policy should apply to all companies and governments, not just those that opt to use RFIDs...