Slashdot Mirror


American Passports to Have RFID Chips

pr1000 writes "Wired is reporting that the State Department is planned on adding RFID chips to new American passports, starting with diplomat's passports in January. Those worried about the privacy concerns of RFID should take notice, as this rollout could set a precedent."

39 of 668 comments (clear)

  1. Bruce Schneier by Ann+Elk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bruce Schneier has made some interesting observations on the RFID passport plans. Somehow, I do not see how this could possibly make us "safer".

    1. Re:Bruce Schneier by stoney27 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ok you wait in line to have your passport checked. I will happily go threw the reader with my passport safely on my person. With a little green light that says it is OK for me to enter the US or even other countries.


      Of course nothing stopping me from walking up to the reader and opening my shielded case and walking through.

      But while you walk around with a non shield RFID the CIA will know exactly who you are and able to add notes to your passport with out your knowledge.
      -S

      --

      It is said that a child learns wisdom from the parent,
      but the truly wise parent learns joy from the child
  2. As a precedent to? by joelethan · · Score: 4, Funny
    October 2005: The State Department announced it was going to add RFID chips to all new Americans.

    And you thought it was just a Vitamin K shot.

    /joelethan

  3. Tracking... by spagetti_code · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm a frequent US visitor who has been fingerprinted and photographed. It didn't feel good, but its not like we have a choice.

    This new step is another step towards control - remember, that is what this is all about. Bad guys get around the system - the 9/11 guys were all bona-fide visitors. Good guys, which is everyone else, gets tracked and watched.

    I'm glad I'm outside the country 8+ months of the year.

    1. Re:Tracking... by Simon+Lyngshede · · Score: 4, Informative

      Omnipresent video security? In shops? Or have you been to England? Agreed, the UK have taken video security to the extreme. There are however still nations where the individuals still has rights. Im not always to happy about being Danish, but at least we (still) have some privacy. Tapping phones, forget it, the police really have to have a good case to be allowed to tap you phone. Video cameras? There must be a clear sign saying that you're being taped. Cameras may not be pointed at public spaces.

      When talking about protecting the individuals privacy, the US has a long way to go, and you're moving in the wrong direction, but so Europe. Sure I have a CPR number (Central Person Register) which identify me, but who cares, it doesn't mean that the government can track my every move.

      I personally think that there is a greater chance of the US government and not the Danish government i spying on me.

    2. Re:Tracking... by c0p0n · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Just because the US went from pretty much nothing to something doesn't mean the europeans have anything to goad over us.

      Are you saying that the parent post of yours is doing some xenophobe afirmations?

      The point is that if you go to US and you're not from the US (I do not say american... cubans are americans too) you have a serious risk of being humiliated by US frontier guards, being the risk proportional to:
      1. Size of your moustach
      2. Darkness of your skin
      My brother went to US last year. He has no moustach, but a aggressively black hair and he has a dark skin. He was locked by the airport guards for 3 hours. They even assured that he was on a black list (!!!) only to scare him to see his reaction.

      Well, if that is what you call freedom ... FIGHT AGAINST THAT, BY GOD'S SAKE!!!. There will not be another opportunity.
      --

      Your head a splode
    3. Re:Tracking... by isorox · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I dont mind the Yanks fingerprinting us. I just think that we should return the favour. Arrive by plane (to the UK), three queues:EU citizens (10-20 minute queue, quick glance), World Citizens (few more questions), Americans (5 hour interrogation, lock you up as a potential terrorist if you have a cowboy hat on overnight and send you back)

      Do as to others etc. Not that Blair would ever upset Bush though, I wonder what will happen if Kerry gets in...

    4. Re:Tracking... by arivanov · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Russians tried it. They have it as a law. Any visa or entrance measure is strictly bi-lateral. If a country enforces additional checks on Russian citizens, the Russian government has no other choice, but to implement the same checks reciprocally within 1 year. So watch for Russians taking american fingerprints till the end of the year. That will be fun. Almost as fun as around the end of the Clinton administration when the americans introduced an additional 100$ processing fee for Russians. Russians immediately replied. Americans retalliated by raising it to 300$. Russians replied. IIRC Americans raised it to 500$ for a few weeks before waiving it completely. I had to travel to the US (visa payed by my american employer) at the time. The dept director was close to "having kittens" after getting the demand for 300$. I think it reached as far as the company writing a letter to some congresscritters and the State Department to get a grip on reality and stop the pissing match.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  4. Failure by ttys00 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What happens when these chips fail? Do you get locked up for tampering with a Federal document, or some crap like that?

    1. Re:Failure by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Funny

      Exactly! I mean, I've been known to toss my passport in the microwave with my easy mac from time to time - if that RFID tag gets toasted, it's not my fault!

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
  5. Simple solution by polysylabic+psudonym · · Score: 5, Informative

    Turn your bag into a faraday cage, keep your passport in your bag.

    1. Re:Simple solution by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or just carry your passport in your tinfoil hat.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  6. Or, on the other hand for target selection by kentmartin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let me get this straight. Assume I am a bad guy. If I want to find an American overseas - particularly in a country where carrying a passport is mandatory, how am I going to go about it?

    To take it one step further, if I am wifi'd into a database somehow, I can even do a few smarts and identify a "better" target (wealthier, public figure etc).

    I carry an Australian passport and it will not shock me when "the Clever Country" bends over and does what the Americans do - yet again!

    1. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by polysylabic+psudonym · · Score: 5, Funny

      Come on! Like you need RFID to spot the American tourist!

    2. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 5, Funny

      DISCLIAMER: I do like Americans in general, and i have a lot of american frineds, who are friendly, respectful, and people who i would hold dear.

      The "worst" American tourist, is the oil rich, no brain texan with the loud hat, louder belly, and even louder mouth.

      I had a particularly intresting time a couple of months ago, with a particular specimen of Texan "mouth power". I was on the London underground heading to work, and there was a loud texan onboard, and he was ranting abotu how things were a lot "bigger" back home, to the absolute annoyance of all the other passengers on board (including his poor wife, who seemed a nice lady).

      anyway, he comes up to me and asks me:
      "Son, tell me now, what "tube" do i have to catch to go to Manchester"

      now, here is a few facts for those not from UK/London.
      - the Tube is our nickname for the London Underground, our subway/metro/transit.
      - It covers ONLY london. nowhere else.
      -Manchester is another city altogether.. like New York and Los Angeles
      - there is a big ass advert in the train that he was looking at, which talks about day trips to manchester, and HOW to do it!?!?

      most of the people on board were like, WTF? is this guy real...

      I simply told him, "Stay on this train for about 4 hours, and it will reach manchester!"

      What i didnt tell him, was the train in concern is the "Circle Line" which simply runs around london in a loop!!!!! {EVIL GRIN}

      The smiles on the rest of the passengers were certainly a picture.. as was the way he was thanking me for my "advise", and was the last thing i saw... as i got off at the next station!

      --
      Have a nice day!
    3. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by forii · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I simply told him, "Stay on this train for about 4 hours, and it will reach manchester!"

      What i didnt tell him, was the train in concern is the "Circle Line" which simply runs around london in a loop!!!!! {EVIL GRIN}


      So rather than inform an obvious newcomer to your country of this fact, you instead took the chance to be an asshole. And your country is better...how?

    4. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I call BS. I can certify as a long-time resident of Texas that this has all the marks of "I totally made this shit up based on some Texas stereotypes I saw on TV" with (perhaps) a little, "I hate Bush and he's from Texas" thrown in.

      I grew up in Texas and continue to live there (in an oil-rich area, no less), and though I occasionally see people wearing cowboy hats and big belt buckles, I don't know any one personally who would.

      That bit about everything being bigger in Texas was a nice touch. Everyone who's been THROUGH Texas probably believes we all think that. All the gas station/gift shop places lining the interstates are filled with merchandise supporting that conclusion. But, again, I've never met anyone who actually cares. It's just tourist bologna.

    5. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It does sound made up but there are certainly tourists like that. I have met quite a few. But certainly the US don't hold the monopoly on annoying tourists. One that springs to mind. I was at CeBit years ago and I am waiting for a Tram to get to the conference. Beside me is an American couple. The husband is loud and going on as the previous poster mentioned how "Everything is better where we live". He is complaining about tickets for the tram. I mention to him it is a prepay system and he needs to buy a ticket from a shop. He complains loudly about how backward that is. I have a book of tickets for the week so I give him two. They cost about 50c each (at that time). He says thanks and then gives me $20. I tell him that is way too much money and I really don't want any money for them but he goes on about how its not that much money in his country and how worthless European money is. Felt a bit insulted after that.

    6. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 5, Funny

      The "worst" American tourist, is the oil rich, no brain texan with the loud hat, louder belly, and even louder mouth.

      I'll thank you not to refer to our President as a "tourist."

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    7. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by dubious9 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ah, a *much* more believable story (than GP) ;). I love stupid turist stories. Anyway, in my travels its always Americans who are the stupid turists. I've hung with Aussies in Norway that would out drunk everybody (an expensive task when a pint will run you like $8) then still be curtious enough on the way home. Asians, well mostly Japanese in my experience, plan well, are quiet and know what to ask for, and almost as fun to drink with. Americans, are, well, loud. Here's some tips.

      1. Like I said, Americans are loud. If you don't want to stick out, shut up.
      2. Don't wear jewelery, especially in countries where it would be an obnoxious display of wealth, not to mention it automatically makes you a target.
      3. If you still want to blend in, don't wear shorts, plaid, flannel, sneakers, or baseball caps. In some countries jeans too, but especially in Europe bluejeans are a fashion statement so your cut up old Levi's won't cut it ;). You'll still stick out, but not as much. Really. In some countries you can pick out Americans from a hundred yards away.
      4. Say you're from Canada if you get into a sticky situation. Most anti-Americanism is directed at the government, but alot is not. It may sound funny, but seriously, and especially if you drink (alcohol+antiAmericanism=not good), you can diffuse a potentially explosive situation if you say you're from Canada. Eh?
      5. Ask a travel agent. I know they're quickly becoming a thing of the past (with on-line booking), but they know what they're talking about. They'll have a lot better tips then I'll ever have.
      6. Learn metric. You automatically sound much smarter. If you frequent pubs as much as I like to do (ok I'm a lush), people will ask you were you are from and then how far it is away from a major city. Pittsburgh? Oh maybe 500km west of Philadelphia. Don't know philly? 200km southwest on NYC. Just ballpark it. And when getting directions be prepared to hear meters.
      7. Be careful of colloquialisms, people won't understand you. Use plain language.

      --
      Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
    8. Re:Or, on the other hand for target selection by xtal · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Say you're from Canada if you get into a sticky situation. Most anti-Americanism is directed at the government, but alot is not. It may sound funny, but seriously, and especially if you drink (alcohol+antiAmericanism=not good), you can diffuse a potentially explosive situation if you say you're from Canada. Eh?


      I'm a Canadian. Please don't do this.

      What does it say about your great and proud country that you might feel the need to LIE about being one of it's citizens?

      *sigh*

      --
      ..don't panic
  7. Re:Law Enforcement by polysylabic+psudonym · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunately RFID tags don't have much range. You'd have to be practically on top of your stuff to find it - that or have the whole town you're in set up to track RFID tags as they move through doorways etc. I think I'd rather lose my passport, cash and credit cards than have that, though.

  8. Nudity by JNighthawk · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's funny. Nudist colonies say they have nothing to hide, but now they'll be the only place *to* hide.

    --
    Wheel in the sky keeps on turnin'.
  9. Re:ID... by Tjebbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The difference is that with current passports, you have to show it, which has to be asked, and which you can refuse, so you have the ability to choose to accept the consequences of not showing your passport. With rfid tags it can be done without you even knowing it, and thus without you agreeing to.

  10. Re:ID... by gowen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But you get to choose who to show your passport to. Anyone can read RFID information, as long as they can get reasonably close to you.

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  11. No enyryption of the data by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:
    Security experts said the U.S. government decided not to encrypt the data because of the risks involved in sharing the method of decryption with other countries.

    And those very same security "experts" obviously don't know that there are methods for secure encryption known throughout the world even now? You don't need to be an expert to know that!

    And no, I can't see any other explanation. It cannot be the possibility of unallowed reading of the data: That's even easier if the data isn't encrypted at all. And it cannot be the possibility of making forged passports: Having data not encrypted makes this not any harder than having it encrypted with a known encryption.

    Even in the worst case scenario, when the decryption key was made public by some other state, the situation couldn't get worse than without any encryption at all. Of course, the USA could just decide not to give the key (or any specification at all) to countries they don't trust. Those countries would then just have to do what they do now: Rely on the non-RFID portion of the passport (which is currently all that is in a passport).

    So there is really no excuse to store unencrypted data on the RFID chip.
    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  12. Re:RFID Worries... by frdmfghtr · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article:

    New U.S. passports will soon be read remotely at borders around the world, thanks to embedded chips that will broadcast on command an individual's name, address and digital photo to a computerized reader.

    Any questions?

    --
    Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
  13. The Terrorist Bomber's Dream! by newt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    RFID chips can be read from up to 50 feet away. Sure, most readers only work from a few inches, but there is off-the-shelf equipment available for a moderate number of dollars with a much, much greater range.

    So, lets assume that the RFID chips in US Passports will be readable from "a long way away". Doesn't matter if it's 10 feet, 20 feet or 50 feet. Lets just say it's more than a few inches.

    What does this mean? It means that a bomber with a moderate budget could build a detonator for an explosive device which goes off when it can detect the presence of an RFID chip.

    It doesn't need to actually read the chip (lets assume the passport data is encrypted), it just needs to know it's there.

    Furthermore, it could count the number of unique RFIDs which are currently in range, and only detonate the explosive when enough of them are seen at the same time.

    It could be planted days, weeks or months in advance, and it'd sit there until its batteries ran down waiting for the right moment to go off.

    The result is a bomb which only goes off when a sufficiently large density of American citizens is present.

    - mark

    --

    -----
    I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked.

  14. There's money in this... by RotHorseKid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone else smell a business opportunity for Radio-shielded passport sleeves?

    --
    Nobody writes jokes in base 13. - DNA
  15. Re:RFID co-channel interference? by bentcd · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes. They have protocols specifically to allow for this.
    It might be more of a problem if there are RFID _readers_ all over the place. They might interfere with eachother's attempt at scanning for RFID chips. I have no idea whether the protocols allow for this.

    --
    sigs are hazardous to your health
  16. Scanning butts for cash by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting
    You want to walk around broadcasting data who you are to anyone with a hidden RFID reader?

    This reminds me of a comment along similar lines.

    When the U.S. mint added the shiny metallic strips to the bills, a friend of mine claimed quite seriously that it was so that it would be possible to "scan your butt" (or wherever you carry your wallet) to see if you were carrying loads of cash. My response at the time was sceptical, especially since the comment came from someone very non-tech, but wonder if it is even technically possible.

    If the material is conductive, it should respond/reflect/absorb a specific frequency much like chaff does. Would it be possible to build a cash scanner? And if so ... "where can I get me one?" ;)

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  17. It's all in the mind by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Whereas I think the addition of RFID chips to passports is simply another incremental step, and passports are in fact there to identify you anyway, if you take a step back and read your last paragraph
    If you want privacy, pay cash only, stay home, don't use phones, and don't do anything that requires identifying yourself.
    What part of that is 'freedom' ? When did the USA go from 'the land of the free' to the 'spy on me any which way you want' ?

    Hell, it's your country, your politics, your ideals, and your decision; I don't really care - it's mainly a curiosity for me that sociological values can change so rapidly.

    I've just obtained a visa for the US, and had to give my fingerprints - I was curiously antagonistic towards this, and again it's nothing more than another incremental step. After thinking about it for a while I realised it's nothing to do with privacy, it's that I mentally associate being fingerprinted with being a criminal.

    I felt I'd been judged and summarily convicted of something (what, I don't know, being an alien perhaps). As a reasonably law-abiding citizen (ok, I admit I sometimes exceed the speed limit on a motorway :-) it offended me at some deep level mainly because of that association - you *never* have to give fingerprints in the UK unless you've been caught breaking the law... Of course if "Stalin" Blunkett gets his way, that will all change...

    Simon.
    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  18. Re:Bring It On. by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I'm fed up with having to produce many bits of paper just to prove who I am"

    They you should be opposing the 'identity' culture, not supporting it.

    These chips will do nothing to make people safer (they'll be no harder to forge than current passports), but will certainly make some people less safe by broadcasting their information to anyone with an RFID reader.

  19. Block the tag w/ a foil bag (source cited) by Ingolfke · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wrapping a tag in aluminum foil blocks the radio waves and prevents a tag from being identified. -
    RFID Hack Could Allow Retail Fraud

    Most of the concern seems to be around unauthorized person reading the RFID chip. According to this article blocking RFID chips is very easy to do if you have physical posession of the chip. Just wrap it in tinfoil. It would seem that someone would make a bag/box/pouch that would store your passport and protect it from being read w/o authorization. When you were in an area that required that you show your passport, the airport for example, you would just take the passport out of the bag. Sounds like a $19.95 solution to me.

    I guess if you took your passport out at the hotel or some other place like that you could be "vulnerable". Maybe this solution from RSA woul help?

    It does seem like the solution here is not to say "no RFIDs in the passports", but actually to ensure that there is a way to easily control when the tag is read. And there seem to be several solutions available.

  20. Re:ID... by Xoro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you refuse to show it, you're detained. Then, they open up your wallet/purse and look. All you did was delay everyone somewhat and create trouble for yourself with no real difference between they're waving you over or pointing a device.

    Oh really? If you refuse to show it at the hotel? In the cab? In a restaurant? At the movie theater? There is no technical reason anyone can't set up a reader anywhere they want to snoop.

    When I travel, my passport never leaves me. It's such a comfort to know it will be singing out my name, age, photo and home address to anyone who's curious. I feel safer already.

    --
    Kill, Tux, kill!
  21. Re:What's the fuss about? by phoenix321 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is not easier to show, but it is a *lot* harder to hide. That's the point why everyone is making such a fuss around this issue, I think.

    Today, you carry some form of ID, be it driver's license in the US, a national ID in Europe or whatever. You are most of the time obliged to show this piece of ID to law enforcement officers if they ask for.

    Either the officer authenticates him/herself with his badge, a similar ID item or just the entire appearance along with police equipment and police car. So in 99% of all cases, I know when my ID is checked and by whom and I'm sure it was read by real officers on duty or someone is going to jail for posing as one.

    With RFID, none of us can ever know if we were checked, let alone by whom. If that person was really authorized by law and duty to check us, we can only pray for. We want to hide our ID from anyone's eyes who has not identified himself as a lawful officer on duty. With RFID it is hardly possible.

    If the regular police cannot or does not perform simple duties in plain sight, with proper uniform, without hiding the officers identity behind something, having the officers armed only with the law and a baton, our society as a whole is in trouble. Riot shields, handcuffs and a low power hand gun may be necessary at times, but cable ties, fully automatic rifles, masks are certainly unacceptable for me. Special units can have them, but regular policemen and -women should not. Hidden and unnoticed checks for unsuspecting passer-bys performed by guess-who are totally out of question.

    Law enforcement should not use mobster tactics. Should not be armed like mobsters, should not act like them. This may give criminals and terrorists an advantage, but it is the only way to make sure we can distinguish between officers and mobsters. If we allow the police to act like the mob, guess how long it takes for these two to merge...

  22. There IS an RFID DOS by LincolnQ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can build an RFID tag that will DOS the system, but you first need to know how RFID works.

    The RFID tag is simply a sequence of bits. You can ask about portions of its tag -- "do you start with sequence X". There is no way to communicate with only one tag; if you send a request, all tags in range hear it and send an affirmative signal if they do start with that sequence (and nothing otherwise).

    When a reader needs to scan many RFID tags at once, it sends a signal saying 'Whose next bit is a 1?' and 'Whose next bit is a 0?' and counts the chirps for each response. When it gets zero chirps, it knows to stop (there are no tags with that ID). If it gets only one chirp, it has found a unique tag and records it. Otherwise, it recurs down both trees.

    If you build a device that always says 'yes' to both questions, the reader will have to recur down both trees 'forever' or give up until you leave range.

    This seems to have the desired effect of preventing RFID scans without your knowledge, and it would certainly be handy to be able to turn it off at will.

    LincolnQ

  23. You are a very, very, very stupid person. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 4, Interesting
    People who still believe in the illusion of 'terrorists' at this point are being willfully blind.

    The 'terrorists' upon whose actions all of this insane police state nonsense is based were funded and manipulated by both the U.S. and Israel specifically because the psychopaths in power want to stay in power so that they can have all the money, power, sex and cocaine. Having to work for a living, or serve in the military, is scary for them, and so they choose instead to trick all the trusting citizens into believing in 'terrorists'.

    Anybody who looks at the details clearly will see the manipulation.

    Remember the 'terrorist' passport they, 'found' on top of the smoking remains of the WTC?

    That is just one of a hundred loose threads, and if it doesn't get your brain ticking, then you are either sleeping or dead, and you richly deserve the hell you are seeing rise around you.

    "Oooh. But Conspiracies don't exist! It's impossible for a large number of people to keep a secret!"

    Yeah? What the heck does that prove? NEWSFLASH: Conspirators do not NEED to keep secrets when the populace has been brainwashed into constantly looking the other way whenever a piece of evidence pops up.

    People would rather fight and yell and argue in favor of the psychopathic manipulator rather than deal with the truly awful possibility that they are being raped. This, in fact, is exactly the reason psychopaths are so dangerous. Normal people are hardwired into certain behavioral traits which make them excellent marks for this sort of manipulation.

    Any 'terrorist' who uses RFID passports to blow up Americans will be doing so with the consent of the military industrial complex, and your spreading of fear is making those jerks giddy with the joy of a mind-job successfully executed.

    I have to live in this world, too, and imbeciles like you are contributing to the misery smart people also have to deal with. Arrogant? Gee, sorry. I'll just quietly go off to a barbed wire camp so you don't have to feel like an idiot.


    -FL

  24. Re:Is the USA still a democratic system? by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So I guess that the US citizens should be able to express their discomfort about RFID tagging in the upcoming elections.

    That isn't an option. We can't tell our representatives what to do, only select from the slate provided and pick one. We may tell them what we would like, but they are not required to do it. So no, we have absolutely no direct say on such topics. And since most Americans care more about whether we will allow use of stem cells for medical research or whether abortion will be a medical proceedure or if the puritanical elements get it relegated back to the alleys, we will never see such issues at the forefront. In fact, any candidate that comes out in opposition of the RFIDs will be branded a traitor to America that is soft on crime and terrorism that will get us all killed if elected. I hope this insight into the American political process helps. RFIDs are here to stay. The businesses like them, and they run the US, not the people that vote.