Slashdot Mirror


And They Shall Know You By Your Books

Val42K writes "People have been concerned about provisions of the Patriot Act that would grant law enforcement access to your library records. Now libraries are considering placing RFID tags into books instead of barcodes. The RFID tags will (supposedly) be turned off when you check out of the library, but could they be turned back on? What about the possibility of you being located and tracked by the books that you carry?"

18 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. RFID is inevitable by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I didn't realize RFID tags could be turned off. Are they not basically passive "reflectors", powered by the scanner's signal?

    Anyway - from a privacy perspective there is much to fear about how RFID will be misued. However, as a geek I can not overlook the incredible myriad of practical uses for them. To be pragmatic about it, I'm quite sure that such uses will override the privacy concerns in the long run, just as credit cards have done to cash, for example. The best we can do, I think, is to push for sane privacy legislation like we don't have for banking.

    I mean, how cool would it be if you ran a restaurant, for example, and you never had to keep track of what food to order? Your garbage can would just detect that your chef had thrown a tomato can, and add a new can of tomatoes to the next delivery. I can think of a thousand practical uses for RFID and I suggest that any geek with foresight should be thinking not about how to stop RFID, but how to protect our privacy in a world which will inevitably be filled with billions of the little things.

    1. Re:RFID is inevitable by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Exactly the way I look at it; RFID tags are just *so* cool from a practical standpoint they are simply inevitable. You say that you could think of a thousand practical uses for RFID, and while I know that's a figure of speech, if push came to shove you probably *could* think of a thousand uses. Maybe not a million though. ;)

      These things get their power through inductance, do they not? So what's wrong with, say, using a small amount of inducted power to read the data they contain, but a larget amount will induce enough power to pop an incorporated fuse? I'm sure the tinfoil hat brigade will have their doubts, but for these things to be useful, they've got to be able to transmit, and that means they can be detected.

      Trying to get the things banned outright seems a bit like trying to prevent the sun from rising in the morning. Lobbying for a requirement that the things contain a permanent off switch however might stand a chance of success, and then we get the best of both worlds for a change.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:RFID is inevitable by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'm not against the existence of RFID. I am against the widespread unannounced distribution of RFID, without education of consumers as to what it could mean. I don't feel the government necessarily has a responsibility to tell everyone just what data they are collecting, but I do feel that if they don't do that, they have a responsibility to explain to all of us what they could be doing. After all, they're our government, right? Either tell us everything, or at least make the game fair :)

      Our own government will use and abuse any technology possible to try to control us, label us, track us, and put us in boxes. Obviously all of us have different levels of control we're comfortable with. Some people are okay with the government running every aspect of their lives, and some people would really prefer to have no government whatsoever, and I think it's important that we make a world for as much of the spectrum as possible. (People who want total government control are always welcome to join the military.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Depends on how they code them... by jmorse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The library here in San Francisco is considering doing just that. The point was made that privacy really depends on how they do the RFID tags: do they contain only the ISBN code or do they contain a serial number? Of course, any library could switch from the ISBN system to a serial number system at the bequest of Ashcroft and his thugs.

    --

    "You done taken a wrong turn."
    -Bill McKinney, in Deliverance
    1. Re:Depends on how they code them... by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seems to me that a serial number would actually be better in terms of securing your privacy. If the RFID sends back an ISBN, any knucklehead with a scanner can tell what books you've got in your bag. If it sends back a serial number, then they need access to the library's database in order to map serial numbers to titles. At least with serial numbers, you have some chance at privacy so long as the libary does the right thing in terms of protecting the database.

    2. Re:Depends on how they code them... by bratgrrl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You mean Amerika.

      --

      ---

      SCO is weenies
      Gator is Spyware
      Microsoft is thugs

    3. Re:Depends on how they code them... by Klaruz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still like my country and work to change it. (I'm even a gov contractor.) So I try to avoid using words and phrases that may be considered disrespectful to it. I find it helps to give my arguments more credibility when trying to talk some sense into people.

      Feel free to keep using it yourself though. I'm fine with using whatever methods for change people think work best.

  3. What's that I hear? by cscx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh yeah, black helicopters!

    Seriously, Slashdot seems to have no problem stifling technology when it gives rise to insane, improbable conspiracy theories.

    1. Re:What's that I hear? by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, on the other hand we do have a strong libertarian minded audience. The Patriot Act gives the government power to strip citizenship based on the Attourney General's whims, and hold secret trials where one can't face the accuser. Honestly, a healthy bit of skepticism is important, and if the government signs a law that sucks, I at least am concerned with any kind of technology that can be used in scary ways given the fact that this kind of McCarthyism actually is going on.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
  4. A book to read: by JessLeah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury.

  5. I fail to see by nuclear305 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the big deal behind these things. What exactly are people doing that they are so paranoid that people are watching/tracking them? If you're just another regular Joe who is going to take the time to abuse this technology and use it against you?

    If you've attracted enough attention to yourself that someone is trying to track/stalk/gather information about you...chances are they'll do it any way they can and not say "Oh poo, I wish I could use RFID tags against this person!" and give up.

  6. Re:Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    quaaaaaaaaaaaaid staaaaaaaaaaaart the reaaaaaaaaaaaaactor!

  7. The big question: whose tag is it? by Tau+Zero · · Score: 3, Insightful
    These things get their power through inductance, do they not? So what's wrong with, say, using a small amount of inducted power to read the data they contain, but a larget amount will induce enough power to pop an incorporated fuse?
    That's fine if the tag is part of something that belongs to you. What do you do if the tag is part of something that belongs to the library? Are you going to "pop" the tag (with what?) before you walk out the door with the book, and then pay the library to re-enter the book in their inventory (which is probably indexed by the tag ID number) when you return it?

    Aye, there's the rub.

    --
    Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
  8. Re:The big question: whose tag is it? by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If it's something you are loaning, a library book, DVD, car or whatever, then no, you wouldn't zap the RFID. Why would you want to when your privacy is far more likely to be compromised by some script kiddie breaking into the computer that stores the loan information than someone getting within a few meters of you with a RFID scanner? The only additional thing that the library gets out of RFID tags is convenience, which to an extent, you share in when you loan the book. They can still have a computer that contains your details and a list of the books you have loaned with the current system if they wanted to.

    Yes, there are potential privacy issues with RFID tags, but with the right combination of legal requirements and *technology* they can be overcome. We're supposed to be good with technology around here, "News for Nerds" and all, and this *is* a technology problem at heart, so instead of just bitching about the issues, why not solve them and have our cake as well as eat it?

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  9. It still scares me. by LiberalApplication · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...because the same way your garbage can could keep track of what you're tossing out, someone else could walk by your place on trash-pick-up-day and discern from all of the RFID tags in your waste that you lare likely elderly (tags present for hearing aid batteries and Metamucil), have a cold (tags present for Tylenol Flu and Cold), have a really severe cold (tags present for four boxes of Kleenex), own decent stereo equipment (tags present from packaging for monster audio patch cables and old issues of Hi-Fi magazines), a small dog (tags present for Purina Small Dog Chow), have a visiting infant (tags present for Pampers), and isn't the fact that this information would be available not only in your trash, but on your own body as you're walking around, isn't that the least bit scary to anyone else?

  10. Re:Complete nonsense by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Most of those things you list are not managed or handled by the federal government at all.

    But most of them receive some federal funding, so it seems to me that they have some say on what is installed where. Or, they are federally regulated; same thing.

    Way too expensive. Tracking you simply by the forms you fill out is cheaper and eaiser.

    That is much slower than realtime. At least it involves some lag behind you.

    You clearly have no clue about how this works. Even if the transmitter was made more powerful, it does you no good, because the tag itself isn't powerful enough to send the reply that distance. Remember that radio is a two way street. Just because one end can talk to the other doesn't mean the other end can talk back. And making a self-powered amplifier small enough to talk back that distance would be nearly impossible.

    Using a high-gain antenna will amplify the received signal. Doing a little processing on the received signal, and amplifying that signal, can result in a useful signal in cases where the ordinarily specified reception equipment would not be adequate. In addition, using a highly focussed directional antenna can minimize noise and further improve gain. Filtering at both analog and digital levels can be used to further clean the signal. There are many things you can do to improve the quality of your signal which will not be commonly used in commercial RFID applications because they are simply unnecessary, which will be done in order to do both legitimate and illicit tracking of RFID tags.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. I've Quit Worrying (some) by annielaurie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use something called an EZ-Pass, a device that lets me drive on toll roads in the Middle Atlantic, debiting a pre-paid account. It's cheap, convenient, and I don't have to experience panic each time I approach an exact-change lane. I had the interesting experience a year ago of using it to drive all the way from Maryland to the Peace Bridge between Buffalo and Canada; never had to shell out a dime, and each toll was about half the posted price. Most places have dedicated lanes, too.

    Yeah. I know they could use it to track me. They could somehow link it back to my bank account. They could probably even watch and bust me for speeding.

    My brother in law thinks I'm crazy to allow one of these devices of the Devil into my automobile. He no longer uses his home computer because he's convinced that his ISP (Verizon) has nothing better to do than to track his every move online. He pays cash for all but the largest purchases, won't use an affinity card for his groceries, and doesn't visit ATM's (jeeze, remember standing in line at the bank to get a check cashed?). He has no spare or leisure time because the very housekeeping of life takes him twice or three times as long as it does the rest of us. He makes my particular life miserable on every visit because I merrily use credit cards, ATM's, discount cards, an EZ-Pass, and my computer.

    Yeah, I could probably have lots more privacy than I do. But you know what? Life's short. There are big things to worry about and there are little things. Worry about too many of the little things and you become as miserable as my brother in law. For some reason, I place sneaky library books squarely in the "don't sweat this" category. At least for now.

    Anne

    --
    DUCT TAPE: The Election Supervisors' Secret Weapon
    1. Re:I've Quit Worrying (some) by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Freedom to read is an essential element for democracy. To ensure that everyone has this freedom, we have public libraries to help ensure that everyone, no matter how poor, can learn on their own. To really have freedom to read, you need freedom to read anonymously. If you're afraid of the ramifications of reading something, you are effectively censoring it. Another wave of McCarthyism might drum up another irrational wave of hatred of communism. Suddenly a list of who has checked out and read Karl Marx's books would be very useful for tracking down people deemed to be unamerican. Perhaps the list was gained from library records (a reason many libraries do not maintain records longer than necessary), or through hidden RFID monitors on the sidewalk by the library scanning your books and your RFID library card (or one of the many other RFID items purchased on your credit card). As a friend pointed out, "Once you've burned the books, you have to track down everyone who read the books and burn them too."

      A lot of this paranoia is based on the belief that law enforcement does not have much easier methods to discover what we are reading than to standardize RFID tags across thousands of library systems and place sensors at convenient locations. Linking a book to you through RIFD would require having the complete library catalog plus access to your purchases as well. Why go through this when a basic subpoena will do the trick most of the time?

      The basic problem with this handwringing is that it treats privacy as a technical problem rather than a social problem. If the black hats want to know that you are reading, they can find out now. Mitnick and Schneier have both pointed out that the weakest link in any form of security and privacy is social and psychological rather than technical. Social engineering has always been the most powerful tool of law enforcement and spies, and is likely to continue to be for the forseeable future.

      Meanwhile, RFID tags have the pontential to solve problems that cost a heck of a lot in terms of time, money and energy. I can't count how much time I've wasted (and the library has wasted on me) in looking for materials that have been misshevlved, stolen, or lost between departments.

      What you said in your conclusion is the answer to the problem. The government must be held to the highest standards. Privacy is not going to be won by a kneejerk reaction against new technology by the tinfoil hat sect of the EFF. It will be won in the courts by demanding that law enforcement be held to the highest standards of probable cause before access to library databases become useful to them.