Gillette Pulls RFID Tags In UK Amid Protests

akb writes "Indymedia UK is reporting that after protests against the trial of RFID tags by Gillette at a Tesco store in Cambridge, increasing press coverage, a boycott, and the growing mobilisation of campaigners against the intrusive use of the technology, Gillette have withdrawn their trial. RFID (Radio Frequency ID) tags are small tags containing a microchip which can be 'read' by radio sensors over short distances (for background see SchNEWS Feature / 2 part Guardian Article)."

Comments

Are there any good uses?

[dj_whitebread]

We keep hearing about the bad uses for RFID technology, but do people know of any good uses that don't invade on our privacy?

Re:Are there any good uses?

[cliffy2000]

When used correctly, and in the right hands (if such a thing exists), it's a relatively non-intrusive technology. Yeah, it's a moderate violation of civil liberties -- but there's always freedom of choice. And honestly, having RFID tags is less invasive than a bag checker at the door, don't you think?

Re:Are there any good uses?

[dj_whitebread]

As annoying as the bag checker is, (think Fry's) he doesn't come home with me.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Anonymous Coward]

Try fluttering your eyelashes at him.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[taustin]

RFID tags are more about controlling inventory than anything else. To the extent that they are about security, they are about stopping shoplifting by customers.

The bag nazi at the door is there to look for employee theft, not shoplifting. And they don't accomplish that, either.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Ziviyr]

And that is one more job for us humans too. Like the economy isn't bad enough. Might as well replace the whole workforce with a small shell script while you're at it...

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Oxygen99]

Definitely, think in terms of distribution. The ability to track packages through a system or warehouse without needing any manual intervention improves efficiency exponentially. Using RFID in this context means no more barcodes, removing concerns around the ripped or unreadable labels that increase delays in getting the package to its destination.

I've also heard it used to track railway carriages at high speed as they pass through freight yards, so that freight companies can track which containers are on what train in what order. These uses don't infringe any civil liberties, and are very useful for companies in either of these fields. RFID tech can be misused, but like most things it can be used in a socially responsible and beneficial way too.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[DarkZero]

We keep hearing about the bad uses for RFID technology, but do people know of any good uses that don't invade on our privacy?

Yeah. Embedding it into the tag on my pants, rather than the pants themselves, for inventory management and anti-theft purposes. However, if we allowed that, and there wasn't a law against doing anything more invasive with it, you know that the RFID tag would slip from the tag on the pants to the inside of the fabric in the space of five years. And after that, if surveillance cameras are any indication, the government would find some invasive use for it and it would be protected under the usual argument: "Private businesses do it, so why not the government?"

That's the real problem. There are a lot of great, useful applications for RFID that aid both businesses and consumers, but there are also a lot of malicious/greedy uses for it. Since average citizens usually can't litigate multinational corporations into submission in the same way that the RIAA can sue Kazaa, Grokster, and their users, /. readers suddenly "blame the tool".

Re:Are there any good uses?

[phthisic]

At least I know about the bag checker.

And not being a sheep, I just walk right by them, don't even look at them.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[radja]

and as for the bag nazi: no, you can not look into my bag. are you accusing me of theft? then get the cops. the cops can look into my bag. and then I'll sue for defanation.

shops are not allowed to invade your privacy by going through your bag and pockets.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[sonicattack]

Well, at least in Sweden, some libraries use this to allow complete self-service.

To borrow some books, I simply enter my library card into a terminal, enter a PIN, and scan the barcodes on the back of the books. When I walk out, receivers (similar to anti-theft thingies in use in stores) at the exit notice that the books leaving the premises (and now in my bag) have been correctly checked-out. Of course, if I should forget to properly check out the books, helpful personnel at the service desk would be automatically notified when I try to leave.

Now that's what I call a good use of the technology!

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Library Spoff]

I work in a library and we spend ages every week looking for mis-shelved, lost books. This technology would allow us to find them a lot easier.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[chrismear]

I want a bunch of these RFID tags, and a handheld scanner to keep at home. I'd put one on my wallet, one on my cellphone, one on my glasses, one on every remote control, etc.

Then, when I can't find one of the above items (which happens, like, every 15 minutes), I can just whip out my scanner and track the blighter down. No more hunting for keys when you're going out! No more losing remote controls in the couch!

Okay, so I actually have no idea if RFID scanners are capable of this or not. But it's a neat idea, no?

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Simon X.]

Yes, many! See, for example: http://www.identitrack.co.uk/usesofrfid.htm

Re:Are there any good uses?

[klaasvakie]

We keep hearing about the bad uses for RFID technology, but do people know of any good uses that don't invade on our privacy?

Yes. When I was a student I did some vac. work for a company that manufactures RFID tags. They aren't the like the very small tags used by gillette, but are bigger and have much more range (30m). Some of the things we used them for:

1. Automitic Lap and split timing at motorcycle races and off-road rally's.
2. Embedding them into conveyor belts (with some modification). If the belt breaks or tears, the tag stops responding and the conveyor shuts down.
3. Tagging ostriches. Males and females need different types of food, if a female approaches the food bowl, one side opens, if a male approaches the food bowl, the other side does.
4. Tagging cattle. Weighing each cow as they come in at night, coupled to the tag in it's ear. Weight loss is an early indication of disease and other aspects of cattle farming that I do not fully understand.
5. Tagging gas canisters used for welding. When the truck leaves the company knows exactly what bottles are leaving and where they are going so they can get them back. (These canisters are often stolen)

There are hundreds of ways to use tags in a good way, you can tag the product, but do not make a link between the product and the person that buys it.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[seldolivaw]

The London Underground (the subway system in London) has recently launched a new ticketing system based on RFID. Instead of buying the usual paper tickets with magnetic strips to run through the readers, you instead get a credit-card sized "Oystercard" which has been loaded with info on the ticket you've paid for. As you approach the barriers, instead of having to dig your card out of your wallet and feed it through, you just wave your whole wallet at the reader, and it checks your ticket and opens up to let you through.

This reduces wear and tear on tickets (and hence makes good sense environmentally -- no more millions of paper tickets daily) and is also a hell of a lot quicker. Plus, if you lose the card, they simply invalidate that card and give you a new one with the same virtual ticket on it. Since an annual ticket can be worth nearly 1000 (about US$1500) a way to avoid losing your travelcard is great!

I love this use of RFID; my oystercard gets delivered today :-)

Re:Are there any good uses?

[overunderunderdone]

We keep hearing about the bad uses for RFID technology, but do people know of any good uses that don't invade on our privacy?

This is a silly question, not your fault you're just the victim of hysterical FUD. Do you know of any actual uses that ARE used to invade anyones privacy? Sure there is potential there and it is something that needs to be watched but it's not what these things are *for* nor has anyone anounced any plans to use these in any way that invades anyones privacy.

The idea behind these things is to allow physical objects to be identified by computers for all sorts of uses. To bring the kind of efficiencies and automation that computers are currently able to apply to binary information to bear on the physical objects in the real world. They were invented by researchers at MIT that were involved in robotics to solve the old problem of robots being able to sense what was around them... instead of a visual & touch based system with pattern matching far beyond our capabilities just have RFID tags tell the robot what the object is. Of course having computers able to identify physical objects in the real world has uses other than their physical manipulation by robots. The first and most obvious uses are to manage inventory to know exactly how many and exactly where every item in your warehouse or store is and even your entire supply chain is. That use alone could revolutionize the supply chain making it spectacularly more efficient. Of course at the retail end the part you could see (but by no means the most important) you could get rid of cashiers, just walk through an RFID reader without unloading your cart and swipe your card - done! And that is only the immediately obvious use, like the internet this is a foundational technology which will enable all sorts of other technologies and uses.

The protests over speculative abuses of this new technology are *exactly* the same as if people had protested the internet in the mid 90's when it started to emerge as a popular technology. "Think of all the privacy abuses if we networked all the computers together... Does anyone know of any good uses that don't invade our privacy. No of course not, I'm going down to picket my local ISP they're robbing us of our freedom!" Yes a global network of computers *IS* a threat to our privacy (and in ways even more obvious than RFID tags) and yet I suspect that most /.ers hysterical over RFID tags wouldn't want to abolish the internet though given their rhetoric they might have protested it when it first got started.

This technology has the potential to be as significant and beneficial as the internet. Most corporations that deal with the global supply chain think it will be MORE significant.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[gfxguy]

In the U.S. stores are privately owned and usually have their polices posted. Posted signs that say "we reserve the right to check bags" make it OK for them to check bags. The freedom of choice is shop there or don't shop there. It's not a violation of your rights because you don't have the RIGHT to shop at a particular store, you're doing it with the permission of the owners.

Frankly, that's the way it should be. Most stores don't check bags, feel free to shop there if you disagree.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[thanuk]

In the UK something doesn't become legal because a corporation puts up a sign saying they can do it. I'd say that's the way it should be.

It's this difference in attitude which makes it much harder to introduce things like RFID tags in Europe than it does in the US.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[onion2k]

They'd notice if you stole an employee.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Pig Hogger]

As annoying as the bag checker is, (think Fry's) he doesn't come home with me.

Whenever I'm ask to check my bag, I make a big, loud fuss (to make sure other customers hear it well) about "so you assume that all your customers are going to steal from you? Then, I can assume that you're going to screw me. And if you don't trust me with my bag in your store, why would I entrust you with my bag??? Congrats, you just lost a suctomer". Then, of course, I walk-out. Just did it yesterday again. And, a month ago, a store I've been patronizing for 20 years stopped doing it after I did my little stunt.

It can be pretty effective; here, we have many street festivals where the organizers search bags to make sure that we don't bring our food/beer in order to sell us their overpriced shit. But there are often stores that sell the same thing in the festival area.
Well, last year, I managed to slip past security with my knapsack - I was heading to a convenience store to buy some water and snacks for a bus trip (the bus terminal is nearby) - and one of the goons started running after me and caught up with me when I entered the store and demanded that I show him my bag.
Of course, I told him to screw himself. He then summonned at least 10 other goons by radio and they ganged up on me, demanding to inspect my bag. I loudly refused, with lots of obscene profanity as I did my shoping (and taking my sweet fucking time). When I finally lined up (there was at least 15 people in line), they demanded that I pass in front of the line.
- No way, you fucking assholes, I'm gonna wait for my turn. So I waited 5 minutes with the 10 goons staring at me (and me having snide remarks once in a while). Then it was my turn, I paid for my stuff (water, a sandwich, a bag of chips and a chocolate bar) then left, and was escorted by the goon squad to the festival entrance.

Tis year, the same festival had the fence arranged so to let people access the convenience store without entering the festival site... No doubt my little shouting match had produced some results!!!

Loudly protesting can be effective!

Re:Are there any good uses?

[gfxguy]

A store is private property, plain a simple. I know it's an unpopular opinion around here, but companies do have rights - they have a right to run their businesses, you have a right not to shop there. You have a right to be secure in your person, and you give up that right by agreeing to give it up - by entering private property where you are warned that you are giving up that right.

It's no more a violation of privacy than when someone asks you if they can record your phone call and you say it's OK.

Just because the government has been sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong (like smoking bans - if I run a store where I think people should be able to smoke, that should be MY choice) doesn't mean that total regulation is here, yet.

I've seen plenty of stores with "we reserve the right to search bags" signs, and I haven't heard of a case yet where the government stepped in and told them they couldn't do it.

Now, maybe someday there will be laws passed that outlaw the practice. Personally, I dread when the goverment micromanages businesses against the business owner's wishes. YMMV. Don't talk to me about losing rights when no one forces you to shop at a store whose policies you disagree with.

Re:Are there any good uses?

[Oliver Wendell Jones]

Don't ever judge the security competence of the world based on BestBuy's loss prevention policies.

I worked part time at a BestBuy many years ago for some extra Christmas money. I discovered that one of the new employees was ripping the company off - severely. You know those boxes of laser printer paper that have the plastic belt/band around the box? He would very carefully slide the band off of a box, put the reams of paper for sale on the shelves, and then stash the boxes. You know those rollable ladders they keep in the IT area so they can get items from inventory up above the normal shopping shelves? Climb up one some time and take a look at how much room there is up there - more than you might think. Also take a look around for security cameras and see if any of them can see what goes on up there...

Anyways, back to the story. This guy was taking items he wanted from the 'upstairs' inventory, unpacking them and putting just the contents inside one of those empty printer paper boxes and then leaving the empty software/hardware boxes laying around 'upstairs'. After he would fill a box with whatever items he wanted, he'd close it up, put the belt/band back around the box and then carry it down the ladder and place it at the back of the shelf where the boxed paper was kept. Then, the next day, he'd come back into the store, push a shopping cart back to the IT area and load the box of 'paper' into the cart and then go check out, paying $20 for a box full of hard drives, sound cards, Windows CDs, etc.

I found out about it because the guy happened to be a friend of my brother, and apparently he didn't make the connection that since I worked at the store, it probably wasn't a great idea to detail his entire operation to my brother - in front of me.

I told my manager, then repeated the story to the store manager, and then again to the loss prevention manager. They eventually confronted the guy and told them that they knew what he'd been doing, they found the empty boxes 'upstairs, customers had returned boxes that were empty, etc. and that if he didn't immediately confess and return all the items, they would have to call the police. His response, "do whatever you have to do" and then he went back to work. One week later, he quit. No action was ever brought against him, the police were never involved. He took the store for well over $3000 in merchandise and they did nothing.

A few years earlier at that same BestBuy store, a young, male, asian customer was trying to purchase 3 laptops. Nothing too strange about that, except there had been a series of crimes in the general area consisting of asians with stolen credit cards making large purchases. The credit card was denied and when the sales clerk called the credit card 1-800 number, he was told he was dealing with a stolen card. He smiled, acted natural and asked the customer for a photo ID. The customer panicked, grabbed a laptop box and ran. The sales clerk hurdled the counter and pursued the 'customer' and caught him in the parking lot and restrained him until the police arrived and arrested him, which allowed the police to find the other gang members and bring the entire gang up on charges and take them off the street.

Pretty heroic act - too bad he got fired for it. BestBuy policy is that if you're involved in a 'robbery' you are to not resist. No weapons were involved, it wasn't a stick up, but apparently the managers felt it was in their best interest to not employ a bunch of 'John Waynes' and so he was let go. It made the front page of the local paper and created a huge public outcry and eventually the store manager reconsidered and re-hired the young man. That store manager left that store shortly thereafter.

Generally speaking, the LP guys at BestBuy are pretty good people, but the company's policies need a lot of work.

protest

[corgicorgi]

RFID tags have the potential problem of a thief scanning my house to see what I have inside.

Re:protest

[cliffy2000]

Eyes have the potential problem of a thief scanning your house to see what you have inside. Slashdotters unite! We must band together to ban optic nerves!

Re:protest

[mcrbids]

Eyes have the potential problem of a thief scanning your house to see what you have inside. Slashdotters unite! We must band together to ban optic nerves!

While funny, and apparently a good analogy, it fails for a very simple reason...

When people need to see what it would take to prevent unathorized scanning by optic nerves [sic], they can do so simply by looking around.

To prevent scanning by RFID tag sensors, one must first

A) Get a suitable detector
B) Configure it to read each and every of the potential wavelengths for all RFID tags,
C) Configure it to understand the protocol(s) and protocol variations for all RFID tags in the area
D) Then, without being able to actually see limits of the area being scanned, one must scan the entire area.

The issue isn't really the RFID tags, it's the relatively indefensible position they leave you in against somebody with more techology/money than you have.

Re:protest

[H310iSe]

Range. I've been looking into using RFID tags, the range is horrible. With a -=large=- (1-2cm) ID tag, in good conditions (metal, in particular, seems to reduce the range), a $2,000 reader can read an RFID tag at 1 meter.

Now if you presume that readers range will increase dramatically and the costs will plummet then it's an issue. I'm not sure that's going to happen, though... from what I understand getting an RFID reader that could read a tiny tag on your stereo through your walls is, at this moment, more science-fiction than the space elevator.

Re:protest

[archeopterix]

So for a thief to scan your home for equipment, they must.

A) Get a suitable detector
B) Configure it to read each and every of the potential wavelengths for all RFID tags,
C) Configure it to understand the protocol(s) and protocol variations for all RFID tags in the area
D) Then, without being able to actually see limits of the area being scanned, one must scan the entire area.

E) Profit.

The cost of the RFID equipment probably gets back to the thief after the first house robbed. The potential victim has to spend the money just not to get robbed. Pretty unfair, in my view.

RFIDs are Meaningless

[jgardn]

Why are people so upset with RFIDs? The only possible reason I can see is that they are afraid of being tracked all the way home with them. That is a simple matter of removing the tag when you leave the store.

Using RFIDs will save billions of dollars a year. Those savings will translate to lower prices for you. What can possibly be wrong about that?

I think this is just another case of Luddites without anything better to do.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[jgardn]

No, I haven't. Personally, if people want to watch me walk all the way home, they are welcome to.

You have to see that with trillions of these devices implanted in everyone, no one will be able to distinguish you from the noise. If they are able to, then they would've been able to visually follow you anyway. What's the big deal about that?

Again, if you really don't like them, remove them. But this feels like a whole "tinfoil cap" thing.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[YouTalkinToMe]

In the article, they mention that the new EU copyright directive could make it illegal to deactivate RFID tags after you leave the store.

If they just included these tags on _packaging_, I would have no problem with it. But to include them in the product and then criminalize removal or deactivation is just wrong.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[Ziviyr]

Those savings will translate to lower prices for you. What can possibly be wrong about that?

Umm, the market bears the current prices, why should they go lower?

Replace "you" with "the store" and you have a point, from the perspective of "the store". Maybe thats why they leapt on this now that I think about it... :-)

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[kfg]

Not all RFID tags are removable. Those in clothing can actually be incorporated into the clothing itself.

In the case of manufacturer applied RFID tags to packaged items the tags may be inside the packaging (to prevent instore removal) and the entire package must be disposed of to "remove" the tags. This could be an issue for "Malling."

On the flip side they're pretty easy to disable, don't last long, and put out a pretty weak signal to begin with.

KFG

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[zalle]

There's just a bit of a problem with removing them. From the article: "The proposed EU Intellectual Property Enforcement Directive (see FIPR analysis) would specifically forbid Europeans from removing or deactivating Radio Frequency (RFID) tags embedded in clothing and other consumer devices!"

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[jgardn]

True, true. If the market bears the current prices, and a drop in costs does not change the fact that profits are maximized at that price, then you are correct.

Consider this. You are selling 300 units of an item at $3.00 everyday, at a cost of about $2.50 a pop. Every bit of research says that that is the price that you are maximizing profits. If you lowered the price, you sell more units, but not enough to actually increase profits. If you raise the price, the number of customers drops so much that profits are reduced.

All of a sudden, you find a way to sell the exact same item at a cost of $2.00! While your profits will double at the current price, who's to say they won't increase even more if you lower the price a tad?

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[glassesmonkey]

It's not just a UPC symbol. A RFID circuit could potentially have it's 'id' read when you move a box from the shelf. As you walk around the store, more readers could read in real-time where the box is and generate a profile of where you stopped and for how long. This could be linked to the final purchase and your credit history and past purchasing habits. They could then sell this information to other stores. Grocery stores would die for this capability and it is also coming soon to your shopping cart (and/or optical systems in the aisles).

This isn't conspiracy theory non-sense (necessarily). And it isn't sci-fi. You could implement this system TODAY with enough readers and a few linux boxes.. (I suppose you'd need a hardware interface, a database and an IT guy with a few lackeys.. probably need to make a web friendly front end.. interface with corporate database..)

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[Ziviyr]

While your profits will double at the current price, who's to say they won't increase even more if you lower the price a tad?

That sort of theory works well for candy bars (to the detriment of public health mind you).

I'd consider razors a somewhat fixed market. Consumers aren't going to start shaving all day because a pack is a buck cheaper, in fact a buck today for something you don't get horribly often could be seen as negligible.

You're throwing generic theory at me, we do have a specific subject here.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[slashnik]

It is not a simple case of removing the tag when you leave the store. These tags will be sewn behind labels and in seams.

Some of the tags are read-write. What is written to the tag at the point of purchase is up to the retailer. Date sold, price paid, customer number (linked to credit records).

In addition it is possible to not only identify the product number but also configure a serial number.

So as you walk through the door of the store, You can be identified by your shoes and jacket. The store now that you only ever buy during the sale, you have a bad credit payment history and that you wareing your wife's underware.

slashnik

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[jgardn]

Yes, I do stop shaving if I can't afford it.

If razors cost more, I am going to buy less. I'll probably use one for an entire week (like I did in High School when I could barely afford my school clothes).

If razors are cheaper, I might even use two or three in one day. I like sharp razors and I notice that by the time I hit the left side of my face, the razor has already begun to dull. So I would love to be able to use two or three in a day without worry of the cost.

Compare the number of people who shave today to the number of people who shaved 100 years ago. It was actually fashionably to grow a beard back then. Many people did so, but not because they were fashion conscience, but because shaving was too expensive for them. Either razors were prohibitively expensive, and difficult to maintain, or the barber shop was too far away and cost too much.

Razors are not a "fixed market" as you call it. If they are cheaper, people buy and use more. If not, they won't. The cost of the razor is more than the price, of course. It includes things like how much pain the razor induces, how long it takes to shave with it, and whether or not it has RFID.

Is that specific enough for you?

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[ozbon]

The issue with them is that they don't turn off - it's not just tracking you 'til you get home, but then every time you wear the item of clothing with the RFID. Washing them doesn't kill them, nor (if memory serves) do magnets.

As an example, say you've bought a pair of trousers that have RFID in them. You pay by credit card (thus providing personal info on who owns that particular RFID) and walk home. If you go into another store that also has RFID readers, you can be tracked (I know this is slightly Big Brother for now, but this is what people are worried about) and because of the personal info that's already listed against that RFID, a profile can start to be built up.

Also, if you wear those trousers and go back into the store you bought them in, then you're a repeat customer - the RFID reader in the store will pick it up, and can begin to form a customer profile based on what you look at in-store.

And that's an example with just one item of clothing. The more things with RFID in, the more trackable you are. And that's why people worry about it.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[pubjames]

There's just a bit of a problem with removing them. From the article: "The proposed EU Intellectual Property Enforcement Directive (see FIPR analysis) would specifically forbid Europeans from removing or deactivating Radio Frequency (RFID) tags embedded in clothing and other consumer devices!"

Note that the law does not "specifically forbid Europeans from removing or deactivating Radio Frequency (RFID) tags embedded in clothing and other consumer devices", that the just their interpretation of the law. I believe it is a bad interpretation, rather like saying something like "because the law says under 18s can't drink alcohol in public places, parents could be sent to jail for giving their children certain medicines in public places!" It's just a bad interpretation of a proposed law - it's the interpretation that's stupid, not the proposed law (although I don't agree with it).

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[talldark]

The only problem being whether we arent happy about this stuff or not, they will get introduced anyway whether we like it or not.

I think there will be a market for a doorframe airline style gate for homes that will fry rfid's as you walk through the door.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[Joseph Vigneau]

Please remove your tinfoil hat. Companies already do this online. They know when you look at an item. When you put it in your "cart", if you take it out, etc. They do this to make sure there is no money "left on the table". In other words, if they see you looking at product A a lot, it can offer product B, which complements A, and offer a discount on the bundle. This benefits you (by getting a better price), and the retailer (by getting more cash).

Extending this to the real world, if you go to a store and grab product A off of the shelf, there can be a screen on the shelf that offers a discount. Even further, if the system knows who you are (say an RFID-based loyalty card), if can tailor the offer to you.

Re:RFIDs are Meaningless

[Joseph Vigneau]

American translation:

Those savings will translate to higher stock value for shareholders

Become a shareholder, then.

Good on the Poms

[Anonymous Coward]

What an Englishman does in the privacy of his own Castle, is his own concern.

So, basically...

[nacturation]

Gillette is going to know where you shave in the morning?

Acronym misrepresented

[Anonymous Coward]

RFID (Radio Frequency ID) tags

Please stop expanding the acronym in this manner. RFID actually stands for "Really Fucking Intrusive Dongle." :)

--
Rate Naked People at Fuck Meter! (not work-safe)

Mark of the Beast, Part 2!

[cliffy2000]

Yeah... if you think Luddite ultra-right-wing militia men are paranoid right now, wait until RFID becomes widespread. UPC codes will become a relic of the past in their conspiracy theories.

Yup

[Anonymous Coward]

Back then a riot was a far more civalised afair. A crowd could assemble to riot, but before the authorities could move in and start busting heads, they had to have the local sheriff come to the riot amd actually read them the riot act. This gave the crowd the option of dispersing peacefully without charge, or staying where they were and getting into a fight with the sheriff and his men.

Far better than todays arrangment, where riot police in full body army can gas a crowd, or shoot into an assembly with rubber bullets, without fair warning or even reason.

Disposable plastic circuits are coming..

[glassesmonkey]

Conductive ink on bendable material including printable, disposable antennas seem to be right around the corner. Here's a pdf from Rochester with all the chemistry that goes into making the substrates. And an article from Business 2.0 on Plastic transistors (Google cache) and how they will change UPS tracking and WalMart's forever.

The most interesting aspect for me is that these sensors (or even on-chip flash) will be powered and read in the presence of an RF field, like how most RFID tags work. We might one day have tons of passive sensors 'waiting' to be read with an active energy source.

camera

[shakeittotheright]

the issue with this trial though was the fact it was linked to a CCTV camera which took pictures of your face when you picked up some razors, and then compared the image with your face at the checkout. that's taking things too far too soon surely? if they introduced the tags for stock-taking and basic security first, and then introduced cctv use later on etc, perhaps people would be more willing.

I can think of one - access control

[Motherfucking Shit]

I work for a contractor of FedEx. FedEx owns or rents hundreds of buildings around town, and all of them are protected in some manner or another. Most of the properties are linked up via an electronic access control system which makes use of RFID-enabled cards. The cards are called "proximity cards," or "proxy cards" for short.

The system consists of two components, a proxy card and a card reader. The readers are mounted at the doors of many FedEx buildings, and the proxy card itself is worn or held by employees. Each employee has a unique proxy card. The cards are manufactured by a GE subsidiary, Casi-Rusco.

It's an amazing system. When you walk near the door of a FedEx building, you simply wave your proxy card near (..within the "proximity" of..) the reader. The reader, which emits a signal, activates the RFID chip within your proxy card, and your card sends back its unique ID which in turn is tied to your employee/vendor code. Instantly - within a fraction of a second - the database is checked to determine whether or not you're allowed to open that door. If so, the door unlocks momentarily; if not, it remains locked.

As much as I hate "consumer-grade" RFID, it really is incredibly powerful (and, I imagine, rather convenient) in terms of access control.

Re:I can think of one - access control

[Bertie]

Yep., same system where I work. The really clever and handy thing about it is that your one card works for every single one of the company's buildings anywhere in the country (of which there are hundreds), so you don't have to faff about when trying to get access to buildings you might only have to go to once. And once you're in that building, you're still denied access to the juicy bits that you shouldn't be allowed into.

Of course, the downside is that they can track all your comings (but not goings, interestingly - generally you only use your card to get in, and press a button to release the door on your way out, so they've no idea when you're leaving...). But they've shown no inclination to make use of this information, and I don't see what they could use it for besides checking for security breaches anyway, so I'm happy enough.

Re:I can think of one - access control

[AftanGustur]

It's an amazing system. When you walk near the door of a FedEx building, you simply wave your proxy card near (..within the "proximity" of..) the reader.

Sorry, but this is not a RFID card as people are talking about. The problem with RFID cards is that they can be modified after they are put in place. For example, the store can update the chip the moment you walk out of the store, to contain the excat time, location and idendity of the buyer. That information can then be extracted later by recycling companies, and sold back to whoever wants to pay for it.

Your card has just a pair of capacitors that respond the the frequency sent out by the "red eye in the wall" you swipe your card in front of. Just like the anti-theft systems in use everywhere.

Re:I can think of one - access control

[Lumpy]

It's a really old system. We've had that in the Cable TV industry for at least 6 years now.

Oh and I can read your card easily without you knowing it with a simple homebrew setup with a pic and a reader panel set up to have a much larger zone

I never chased it further than reading, but I am sure that I could with enough time emulate a card by simply playing back what I recieved on the right RF frequency.

RFID doomed to failure.

[Matrix2110]

This RFID thing is a dead horse. Shoot it and get over it. Until large companies start getting the idea that most people prefer control over their privacy, these sorts of technology will be regulated to the military and the police.

And boy, will they embrace it bigtime.

And looking at the other side of the coin, how long before somebody creates a RFID zapper gun?

*cough* Tesla *cough*

Just my two cents.

Re:RFID doomed to failure.

[DarkZero]

Until large companies start getting the idea that most people prefer control over their privacy, these sorts of technology will be regulated to the military and the police.

Yes, most people prefer control over their privacy to pathetic incentives to give it up. This is why the people of the United States, for instance, boldly boycotted a supermarket program to artificially inflate prices and only lower them back down through the use of "shopper cards" with customers' personal information attached that would not only be sold to other companies, but also used to send them tons of junk mail. This ended the junk mail problem in the United States and we are all now blissfully unaware of the scourge of junk mail flyers.

Oh, wait... no.

Deactivating tags

[jeti]

I dont get this:

Because RFID tags contain intellectual property in the form of a computer chip, deactivating the tag would count as circumventing an intellectual property control measure, and so would be illegal under the IP Enforcement Directive.

Isn't that like saying that breaking a CD in half is illegal because it also disables the copy protection?

RFIDs can be read+write devices ...

[no_mayl]

from Rafsec's web http://www.rafsec.com/products/pallet_set.htm

"Because Rafsec is a multi-protocol, multi-frequency supplier of RFID transponders, the Wooden Pallet Transponder can be used with any RFID technology, from low-cost read-only to higher-cost encrypted read-write memory."

Say yes to RFIDs, but only if they are disabled after initial use. Passing the doors of the store could tell the RFID to stop responding.

Cambridge?

[Zog The Undeniable]

So Tesco decide to run a pilot in probably the most technologically-aware city in England, and are surpised when people protest?

RFID good use examp: Taipei Public transport cards

[martijnd]

The new "stored value" cards used in Taipei's public transport are using RFID. These are used for access to the subway system and by some of the bus companies.

Amazingly convinient; just wave your wallet next to the sensor and you can pass through. Don't need to bother about getting the actual card out; so they get points for cool technology value.

Made out of durable plastic the cards can be "recharged" when they run out of value saving on waste.

Oh, and you buy them by tossing some coins into a machine (no need for a DNA sample)

Still can't use them to buy soda or anything else..

Companies

[corgicorgi]

Who sells these tags?

I read somewhere on the net these tags sell for around $.25 each for 1 billion or $0.05 for 10 billion. This is a huge market.

Any knows any leading companies that sells these? I might consider buying their stocks.

What planet are you living on?

[Moderation abuser]

"Those savings will translate to lower prices for you."

Are you really that naive?

As a businessman, when you lower your cost base you *don't* cut your prices unless you have some cutthroat[1] competition who is already kicking your arse on price.

[1] Pun intended.

In Store Theft

[Kryptic Knight]

My local Boots (UK wide Chemists) has pulled most brands of blades from their shelving because of theft.

At 6 for a pack of 4 or 5 blades you can see why they are trying to introduce tracking. In the meantime, if I want to purchase I have to go across to the perfumery counter (on the other side of the store) and ask for the item.

Then I wander down to the checkout with them. ... hmm does anyone see the obvious glitch in their new security protocol?

Re:In Store Theft

[Zog The Undeniable]

And, according to popular culture, when you go up to a chemist's counter and ask for razor blades, the assistant always assumes you really wanted condoms but you bottled it!

Stop being so anal (Tags are a good idea)

[koniosis]

I totally agree with this idea!!!

See it like this, if it was to work it would work like this. When you go to product X which has a tag on it, there is a sign to tell you. You take the product in the knowledge you will be photographed. You are photographed, you pay for the product, the tag is disabled (by whatever device) and your picture is deleted.

What the hell is wrong with that??!?! If you aren't going to steal the product who cares if your picture is on some database for 30mins while you shop. Personally I'd like to see this scheme, if it means that some twat with a knife will think twice before trying to steal a load of razors or whatever I welcome it.

It's only anal people that can't handle the fact that someone wants to take a picture of them for security purposes, If your not going to steal the damn thing you shouldn't care. Lets face the fact you're on someone else's property therefore they have the right to survalliance and to enfore security where needed. Razor blades are one of the biggest problems as far as criminals are concerned and anything to reduce theft is good.

So people you know who you are stop being so up your own ass and help the supermarkets reduce crime and potential risks to yourself. If a crim isn't in a supermarket theres no way they can cause you personally a problem.

I understand the issues of leaving tags on or storing pictures of people for longer than needed, which is why I believe this scheme will be excellent as long as photos get deleted upon purchase and that the tags are disabled after leaving the store. Anyone who thinks theres something wrong with that has issues, serious issues (probably self-image and insecurity isses ;).

rant over

How big?

[fuzzix]

"in March, Benetton was also forced to announce it was not about to insert 15m RFID tags into its Sisley clothing range after an avalanche of consumer complaints"

I think I might notice a 15 metre chip on my T-Shirt...

Traceability

[muirhead]

Can someone explain to me what the hell RFID tags have to do with intellectual property?

The tag can be used to trace the origins of an item and so determine the validity of any license.

Very Interesting....

[TygerFish]

It's interesting to see people in England rejecting these things so quickly and so thoroughly. It leaves one to wonder how we will react to them if they are given a trial in the United States.

After all, part of the mythos of our national character is that we are rugged individualists who only want to be left alone, but we regularly put up with the knowlege that various private and government agencies develop and deploy some of the most sophisticated intrusive security technologies in the world (e.g., public security cameras, biometrics, face recognition, gait recognition, cellular phone location, productivity logging etc, etc, ad nauseum...) and with that often in the pursuit of genuinely base motives.

This raises a question: 'Which of our faces will we in the U.S. turn towards a technology that, for a brief interval at least, simply does away with the privacy inherent in the inability of anyone anywhere to know precisely where you are?'

In one of the messages above, someone asked if there were any good uses for the technology and I think I can see the technology revolutionizing point-of-sale technologies for credit/debit card use; possibly reproducing the scenario in the speculative IBM commercial where someone shops in a supermarket by stuffing items in his coat and walking out of the place, only to be stopped by a security guard who reminds him to take the receipt for his purchases.

Basically, if a system knows you are carrying x items of y value that belong to the store until you walk them past a point where their cost is deducted from your account, you can eliminate cashiers. Of course, what those girls who operate supermarket cash registers do with themselves after you do is anyone's guess.

One more interesting thing is that these are electronic devices that have to send a signal in order to function: they have *got* be vulnerable to something.

Perhaps part of your transaction in your point-of-sale system of the future could be frying the tags one the items to mark them as sold which would also take care of the paranoia problem.

Before anyone mentions it: buying, selling or possessing any of the Russian or Taiwanese tag-zappers that would soon hit the market would be punishable by fine, imprisonment or both.

Have a good one...

RFID in European Banknotes by 2005

[talldark]

I just read an article which states the European Central Bank are quietly planning on introducing RFID in all european bank notes by 2005. Bang goes the anonimity afforded by cash transactions.

Re:RFID in European Banknotes by 2005

[smithmc]

I just read an article which states the European Central Bank are quietly planning on introducing RFID in all european bank notes by 2005. Bang goes the anonimity afforded by cash transactions.

Why? The RFID tag is keyed to the money, not to you. I'd imagine the tag, if scanned, will respond that it's a 10-euro (or whatever), serial number BlahBlahBlah. It can't also respond "Psst! Hey, coppers! I'm being used to buy a dime bag!"...

The subject line is too descriptive, it should be

[Gax]

... Gillette pull RFID tags in UK after several cutting remarks.

Thank you, thank you. I'm here to Monday.

Freedom of choice ?

[o'reor]

Well, yeah -- until it becomes a required standard in shopping malls. After all, WalMart can decide some day that in order to have a standardised shoplifting prevention system, all their providers ar required to fit an RFID chip in their products. Remember barcodes ?

So where will your "freedom of choice" stand when all the shops have adopted this system ? Make no mistake: this is actually what RFID chips providers are puhing for.

Oh, and I could also talk about how genetically engineered food is being forced down our throats as well, but that would be another can of worms (slightly OT by the way).

"Freedom of choice" is there as long as it is compatible with the lobbies' points of view. It IS a basic requirement in an ideal free market, but the main (corporate) actors of the current "free market" are trying to avoid it at all costs. Never take it for granted : we have to fight for it everyday.

Reading Lessons - Ten Bucks only!

[magicianuk]

Er ... read the article, read the link, it ends up with the bit I've copied below.

This is the "don't remove tag from mattress law" all over again! RETAILERS may not tamper with the chip, in the same way they can't remove the "made in China by slave labour" tags or sew on fake "Levi's" labels. CONSUMERS can do what the hell they want with the devices once they have purchased the goods. Sheesh!

The Single Market: the European Union was set up to create a free-trade area, yet its draft Directive will undermine that. Within a few years, products such as clothes will all contain radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags, which will be used as market control devices. Think of them as like DVD region coding, only for blue jeans. Unfortunately the Directive will give them special legal status: any grey importer who tampers with RFID devices will be committing a criminal offence. At present, market control centers on trade-mark law and distribution contracts; the EU has largely managed to hammer down the trade barriers (but not entirely). RFID plus the draft Enforcement Directive will set back the cause of free trade by twenty years. It will enable brand owners to undermine the Single Market and challenge the principal economic benefit of the European Union.

would it be cool if I could rekey the things

[wadiwood]

To signify that I own all the stuff that I buy, so should somebody mistakenly walk off with my stuff I can find it again?

I'd really like one for the car, and the vcr, and the laptop...

Re:"within reason"

[koniosis]

If you're using this system for security why would a hotel need to store what underware you have or which condoms you bought? I think you've missed the point. It's a good idea to deter criminals, not track people, if that what it would be used for, i'd disagree with it.

BTW, hmmm.... your right, i did refer to "anal", oh yeah once, gotta get my fixation under control.

Already illegal in UK

[badzilla]

It's already illegal in the UK to disable or interfere with the operation of any wireless device with a unique ID. This is the by-product of a recent overbroad law designed to eliminate mobile phone cloning.

Consumer backlash and corporate reactions

[mnemonic_]

As alarming as many of the recent seemingly "invasive" technologies are, the response to consumer anger from some of the organizations which employ those technologies has been a bit comforting. Before we have seen the termination of serial numbers on Pentium 3 CPU's, the removal of DRM in TurboTax software and even Microsoft allowing OEM's to omit product activation with WindowsXP.

All of these were the result of massive consumer backlash and lack of benefits for the producer. With Gillette's action added to this, it seems that Palladium/TCPA/etc. might not be in for a very warm reception, and possibly a very quick withdrawal. And it seems that some corporations care more about consumer feelings than it seems at first.

This isn't a privacy issue

[TyrranzzX]

It's a trust issue. We don't trust them to not use the data we give them and they gather against us and in ways we don't like.

RFID, like any other tech, is generally designed to be useful. I actually like the idea of no checker, it saves me time and so long as I can still pay in cash and have a checker if I want, I'm happy. The checkers are replaced by fewer support personell, some of them are kept and the rest are put on either shelf duty or are fired, who can then in theory go and get a better edumication and help to build better systems such as space exploration vehicles or something of the like.

The problem is that corperations are notoriously cheap and they'll do anything to cut costs, including genoside, slavery, extortion, election rigging, forcing workers in different countries to compete for who works for the lowest wages, etc.

Do I want a bunch of criminals in wallmart knowing what I buy, where I live, etc? No. Any information they have is power over me and I don't trust them any more than I trust a mass murderer living next door.

So, if they can earn my trust by not being cheap and BSing us about this, then mabye I wouldn't be up in arms. Although we all know where all this grand automation is going to land us if corperations have their way; the poor house. The IT technician that gets replaced by a foreign worker now works as a bagger at cub foods, who is replaced by a machine. They then goto starbucks, where the people there are replaced by machines that make coffie, they then goto work at burger king, where a fully automated system is setup to make everything. When robots become viable, they'll be stocking shelves for us. Where will all those jobs go and where will the money go? All the jobs go away, the systems are designed to support thousands of people but nobody has any money because there's no work to be had, and the work there is to be had pays so lousy that you can barely make a living.

These people won't just die, they'll protest, violently and otherwise. They'll break into stores, people's houses, buy and steal weaponry and kill and plunder to get what they need. If the goverment does things like increase the vote percentage to get federal funding to %15 when Ralph nader gets %5 of the vote, you'd better believe they'll raise it to %30 when he gets %15, and 50% when he gets %30. What happens when he gets a vast majority? Lets just hope by then the corperations don't have a milita of their own that they can use to kill us all. I don't like how the next 10-20 years are looking at all.

i go to this actual shop every week ...

[panic_smooth]

.. because i live in cambridge. the sainsbury's across town (a competitor, for all you non-UK types) does exactly the same trick to monitor the consumer but doesn't even try to conceal their efforts behind a chip. if you try to buy the same gillette blades there you have to physically explain to an actual person that you want the blades, that you're not going to nick them, that you might want specifically the gillette ones as opposed to some in-house crap, etc etc. so let's not get too excited about an invasion of privacy simply because it involves electronics. (yes i do realise that this is /., and no i don't work for tesco).

Anyone seen my razor?

[dokterneo]

Hmm... now where did I put that razor, OH YEAH! I shoved it up Big Brother's ASS! Thank goodness for RFID, or I would have never tracked it back there.

Not true... most RFIDs are one-way devices

[Goldenhawk]

>the store can update the chip the moment you walk out of the store,
>to contain the excat time, location and idendity of the buyer

Not according to most of the information currently available about RFIDs. Most of them are merely a passive device that can only actively transmit its serial number, and only its serial number. What's done with that serial number is up to the system that queries it, and it could certainly tie together the purchaser's information and the RFID serial numbers of goods purchased, but that's merely database magic, not RFID technology.

Actually it's much more likely that the FedEx card in the parent post has active data storage, than any run-of-the-mill grain-of-sand RFID.

The RFIDs envisioned to be used for tagging goods are as simple as possible, to make them as cheap as possible. At least at this time, nobody's proposing what I'd call "smart" RFIDs for marketable goods.

On the other hand, RFID manufacturers are implementing (at least in some chips) the ability to self-deactivate - something of a self-destruct code. But that does not require any storage memory, just the ability to short out a circuit on command.

So while this is POSSIBLE, nobody is proposing it at this time. This post seems to be a bit hyper-conspiracy-theory oriented.

Re:Not true... most RFIDs are one-way devices

[plover]

About two or three years ago, IBM was indeed working on a "modifiable" RFID tag that would allow us to edit the data on the tag to reflect a few dozen bytes worth of stuff. Price paid, date, etc. But certainly nothing we wouldn't already store on a database tied to that purchase.

I think when they realized we weren't even close to paying the price they were then asking for "static" tags they dropped the idea altogether.

RFID for the people a slippery slope indeed.

[ratfynk]

Just think we can slip rfid into all SSN cards. Great, then have government employees war driving around doing a kind of wild life inventory. Welcome to 1984. Microsoft SECURE computing and total control of the population. Who cares about Charleton Heston, guns and other NRA nonsense. Freedom has become meaningless, if the Government no longer reflects the will of the people, then starts to take measures to monitor all individuals movement. Somehow I cannot see any American government going quite that far without very strict privacy legislation to make this sort of technology sensible. If we do not strictly regulate all usage of this tech there will be abuse. It is too much of a temptation for the control freak bureaucrats who hide behind the sceens and survive changes in polititions (J. Edgar types) to resist!

Re:Tracking your change

[Goldenhawk]

>I can just see the next evolution in this will be to add rfid tags
>to the change they give you to track where you spend it.

You're behind the times. The EU has already proposed adding RFIDs to large banknotes.
http://www.silicon.com/news/500018/1/4 316.html
A quote from the article: "RFID [radio frequency identification] tags also have the ability of recording information such as details of the transactions the paper note has been involved in. It would, therefore, also prevent money-laundering, make it possible to track illegal transactions and even prevent kidnappers demanding unmarked bills..."

You can bet that disabling THOSE tags would be a criminal offense.

Fun with RFIDs

[Goldenhawk]

Imagine the fun...

Walk into a department store someday soon, with a small foil pouch full of RFID tags stripped from popular and expensive items that you own and kept the receipts... maybe a few expensive watches, a couple fancy consumer electronics, etc... wander around the store for a half hour, hanging out near those shelves... being certain to handle some of those items suspiciously and having your picture taken by closed-caption cameras... take the tags out of the pouch... then walk out without going thru the registers.

WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP the alarm sounds... you get arrested and searched for shoplifting... and upon proving that the tags are from objects you own and purchased, and with the help of the ACLJ or ACLU, you sue the store for false arrest and negligent use of their new fancy technology...

*Smirk*...

Even if you don't win any money, such tactics would certainly help push the careful use of RFID deactivation. Civil disobedience is likely to be a big problem for RFID promoters and marketers.

Over-the-top

[AlecC]

This protest seems to me rather over the top, tinfoil helmet to me.

Of course, if nobody does anything, RFIDs could be used to infring liberty.

But what ills are not overcome by requiring that RFIDs should be clearly marked, and removable without damaging the goods to which they are attached. On items with packaging, such as the razors, they should be in the packaging. On items without packaging such as clothes, attache them with thos little plastic tags they already use for prices and useless information about the manufacturer.

To police it, ensure that an inexpensive scanner is available which allows a domestic user to detect any RFIDs thay have not removed. The fine on the company in the event of infringing the above rules (i.e. putting hidden RFIDs im) to include an element of reward to the finder of the hidden ID of at least the cost of such a scanner.

If you then remove all IDs when you get home - no more onerous than unpacking and removing those tags, then the only time the shop knows about them is as you leave for the first time. If you paid for them, they know that from the checkout. If you didn't, then presumably you are stealing them and deserve what happens to you.

This doesn't require wholesale observance to make it destroy the effective use to infringe privacy impossible. If more people than not remove the RFIDs (as they would) the residual information becomes effectively useless.

Of course, the CIA could always attach an RFID to your backside and track you wherever - but no law or consumer protest is going to stop that.

If it works, it could allow shops to cut losses by (say) 5%. If the marketplace works, this should cut end user prices by (say) 4.95%. Which may not sound be much, but if I got a 5% pay rise today (which is the same thing), I would go home happy.

Please explain the problem to me

[gerardrj]

This is now the severalth (sure, that's a word, isn't it)story about RFID tags used in general consumer merchandise. Most all reactions I've seen are negativbe toward this use. Most seem to cite a fear of being tracked or having their purchased remembered by the retailer.

Let me start by laying out what I know about RFID chips/tags:
1. they have a transmission range measured in inches, to a maximum of a few feet
2. they require a specialized unit to send out the RF pulse that "activates" and reads the tag
3. the information stored in them is generally programmed at manufacture. (there are r/w tags, but they seem about as useful as putting the bar-code or price on a label with a pencil)
4. reading the RFIDs in bulk is a tenuous affair at best and certainly expensive.

Specifically regarding #1, I can't locate any exact numbers for range, all the companies just say "short, medium or long" range. But the examples they give seem to represent that even "long range" is highly relative and still means only 2 to 4 feet, perhaps as much as 10 feet. In a retail situation the range would probably need to be two feet or less.

So given that information, I can't begin to figure out what everyone is so upset about regarding the use of RFIDs in retail items. They don't enable anything you can't do already, they just make it faster and more reliable. They don't store any personal information, they can't be read in bulk from any significant distance.

What do these tags represent that is so heinous that public demonstrations are called for to prevent their use?

This will be the third (I recall) time I've tried to have a reasonable discussion about this, and am hoping this time I'll get something more than FUD back. Please state your reasons in a clear, legible hand. I promise to read them all . The winner wil go back to K-PAX with me.

Hooray!

[El Camino SS]

I can see where all of this is going. This truly is heading to the mall scene in Minority Report.

BUT IT JUST GETS EVEN WORSE...

So you walk past a sensor in the mall wearing a pair of jeans with a RFID so small that you can't find it and never will, and all of the sudden you have an ad popping up for whatever market they sell your jeans to.

Better yet, when someone commits a heinous crime in that mall, a lot of sensors will have a record of the type of jeans and shirt anyone, including a criminal was wearing leaving a crime scene. HOW WONDERFUL! Imagine what happens when you are in the neighborhood wearing the same or similar tennis shoes and jeans combo! Regardless of who you are, the cops are going to come and question you! Probably take you downtown for a little questioning. Screw with your life for a bit. Shake you around. INSTANT PROBABLE CAUSE... after all "he was in the same area a few days later wearing the same type of jeans and shoes, your honor. And we have a homicide that is unsolved in the area."

Suddenly, you get busted for a crime you didn't commit!

You may call me a paranoiac but remember all of those people that have been in prison all of those years that have DNA evidence that conclusively proves that they weren't rapists. Trust me, there is nothing out of bounds that a cop will use to solve a murder case. NOTHING. That is not what a cop does. A cop hunts out crime. If he slaps cuffs on the wrong man, well, that is the court's responsibility to make sure it was the wrong guy, not the cop's responsibility. Also, cops do a little game called "courting you to death," like if you piss them off giving you a court summons (costing you hundreds of dollars) for a parking ticket, and messing with your life in a court appearance. You really don't want to defend yourself in a 'you vs. the cop' situation. It never, ever works. Most are good, but jerks are the ones that give me the willies.

Remember when cops were using thermal imaging guns to look into people's houses and checking electric bills to see if they were creating illegal grow operations? Think about it. THIS IS PROFILING HEAVEN. MORE DATA MEANS MORE PROFILING. The best part, you can't find out that they are profiling you. The cops pull you over for a bad turn signal, when all the while they are looking for a couple of key things, like the perfectly legal ammo you just bought at the gun store to take back to your ranch. Argue with them? GO TO JAIL. OR GO TO COURT AND PAY COSTS AND WASTE YOUR TIME.

It is not a matter of if this technology will be abused, it is simply a matter of when. You should look at history to see that. Evidence of it is everywhere even in the most polite societies.

How soon will it be after this stuff that some corporation starts walking people through your neighborhood with directional transmitters and antennas, and when you buy a Papa John's pizza, the next two days a Pizza Hut coupon is pinned to your front door or comes in your mailbox? Corporations are are not going to worry about the ethics of what they are doing. They are simply going to do them to sell you more pizza near their store to cut costs and sell more. It is now just going to make this world full of PHYSICAL SPAM.

Trust me, when the person in the mall with the clipboard seeks you out and says that she has a product that is better than the one you just purchased and is sitting in your bag, YOU'LL HATE IT. Either way, they'll be grifting your data... and you'll be paying for it.

If you hate it when Radio Shack asks you your fucking address when you buy a coax cable, then you'll really, really love what is around the corner.

Blocking RFID

[JustKidding]

I'm kinda surprised nobody (that i'm aware of, anyway) has started a little project to counter RFID. I don't think it would be very difficult.

I don't know how many of you know how RFID works, so i'll try to explain (yes, IAAEE, I Am An Electrical Engineer).
Basicly a RFID scanner works by transmitting a certain frequency (125Khz is very common). The tag has a L/C (coil-capacitor) ciruit tuned to this frequency. It uses energy from the circuit to power a tiny circuit (that's how it can work without a battery), which will then send it's stored code. It sends the information back to the scanner by effectively shorting out it's receiver circuit. Doing so drains more energy from the transmitter circuit on the scanner, which can be measured and so the code that the tag send can be decoded.

Now a couple of ideas on how to block it:

- block the scanner by transmitting the same frequency at a highly varying output level. This makes it effectively impossible to measure the tag shorting out it's receiver circuit, because of the heavy fluctuation in the field strength.

- use a microcontroller to send random codes. If enough people do this, the database will get stuffed with false information and will eventually be useless.

- fry the tags in your stuff, EMP-style. I think it would be possible to break the little circuit by placing the tag inside the transmitter coil of a powerfull (but very simple) oscillator running at 125kHz.