Slashdot Mirror
Innovative Uses of RFID Tags
Roland Piquepaille writes "When your newspapers write something about RFID tags, it's almost always about Wal-Mart or how these tags are threatening our privacy. But they often miss the important innovations brought by this technology. For example, in Florida, RFID drives highway traffic reports on more than 200 miles of toll roads. Or take DHL, which is tracking fashion with RFID tags on more than 70 million garments in its French distribution center. Elsewhere, in Texas, 28,000 students test an e-tagging system which promises better security for them. And what about RFID tags which could prevent surgical errors and have just been approved in the U.S last week? So, what do you think? Are these innovations promising a better future for us or not? For your convenience, this overview contains the essential details from the different articles mentioned above."
Last month at the local open source group's installfest, I was talking to one of the compsci teachers from a university. He had recently attended some sort of college fair or something, and someone (MIT?) had set up a nifty display using RFID chips.
You see, they had disguised an rfid reader as a tablet, and embedded rfid things into little plastic discs. On the discs were images representing english, math, etc. Someone tosses a chip on the reader, and a load of information is displayed on the screen about that course. Nifty, nifty...
The Yasashii Syndicate ||
RFID tags *could* promise a better future. But, like anything that provides potentially personal information to anyone with the right scanning device, RFID tags could be abused on a scale never seen before.
Have you seen anywhere at all that mentions anything about the ability to turn *off* an RFID switch?
Not to mention the possible side effects of having a radio transmitting from inside a human body for long periods of time.
Abuse by car insurance companies able to read your car's performance?
The chance of abuse is too great...
Julie Moult is an idiot.
- P2P - ooh it has legitimate uses (tho you have to look hard to find them in actual usage), you cant ban it
- RFID - ooh it can be used for bad things (but hasnt yet), ban it
I welcome this article, as it points out the many positive uses of RFID technology, so heres hoping it might change some slashdotters minds. Personally, I see RFID as a hugely positive thing, with a great potential in front of it (for good or bad, but thats the same for P2P).How about putting RFID tags in the end of footballs so that we can finally put an end to that oh-so-exact science of taking a timeout for a measurement?
Seriously! They just toss the ball wherever the ref thinks it should be, and those chains aren't exactly placed perfectly either. How about something that can actually work for once?
Did you know that you can use nuclear bombs to terraform mars? Or use snake venom to make antidote? Or use P2P networks for legit purposes? Everything has good uses and bad, it's just that the bad far outweigh the good for RFIDs. Or rather, they're so powerful that people WILL abuse them. Just like nuclear bombs, P2P networks and, err, snake venom.
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
I work at a medical device company, and we're implanting RFID tags into the bases of our optical catheters so they aren't used for more than 72 hours. It's a liability thing, but it's just another instance of RFID. We track the product id of the catheter and the base station records the number and records how long it's been used in the body.
I know I'm going to be modded up on this
So...how much d'ya figure he paid for this one?
Cheers,
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
When your newspapers write something about RFID tags, it's almost always about Wal-Mart or how these tags are threatening our privacy.
/. thing.
t nG=Search+News
I don't know if newspapers signficantly differ from online news, but the Wal-Mart and privacy issues seem to be more of a
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=rfid&b
Can anyone point to technology that religion embraced in its infancy? I really would be interested.
The Printing press
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
It cuts both ways. Back in the 70s and 80s, I recall seeing tons of conspiracy theories about how bar codes could be misused to observe whatever we did in our purchases.
Additionally, there's the whole so-called conspiracy about how "shopping club" members who bought a frequent shopper club card was having vast and horrible statistics collected about how much Mountain Dew, et al, they were purchasing.
Frankly, yes, it can all be used for wrong, but that depends on your definition of wrong. Do you spend sleepless nights wondering if your store is telling evil corporations how much Mountain Dew you drink?
Chances are it's just the caffeine.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Technology embraced in it's infancy? Other than the printing press?
Anything having to do with construction (building churches, etc), communication (radio, tv, the internet) and transportation (bussing those seniors in for Sunday Mass).
Julie Moult is an idiot.
My job is with a company that times races (i.e. runners) using RFID technology. We use ChampionChip products, but there are a couple of similar, up-and-coming solutions (AMB, DAG).
The whole system is really impressive and versatile. We time marathons with tens of thousands of participants (Boston, Twin Cities, Grandma's, Columbus, Indianapolis Mini) and the systems catch 99.99% of the runners. The chips are waterproof (for triathlons) and quite rugged.
Using RFID technology is TONS better than the old methods (tags and/or popsicle sticks, and lots of watching). If any of you has ever had to line up in chutes after a hard race, you'd know what kind of chaos can ensue when someone falls or gets out of line. Anyway, RFID means that runners only have to cross the finish line... then they can pass out as they please.
I'm in a university society called the Assassins' Guild, which is a cross between roleplay and live-action Quake Deathmatch. The game we play involves hunting down other people playing the same game until only one is standing, and is cooler than it sounds (hey, we have girls playing!). The thing that's interesting with respect to this discussion is the excellent testing ground this gives for new technologies vis-a-vis the tracking of indivisuals.
Number one on the list is, surprisingly, static IP addresses on home-user machines. If you know your target's IP address, it is trivial in many cases to check whether he/she is in his/her room, and secondary information like lecture times (and hence the target's course) can be inferred.
On a more sophisticated level, it is possible to examine the movement patterns of a target by the public workstations he/she uses (they have to be regulars on the #assassins IRC channel for this to apply), although this is more easily maskable using screen/irssi off a unix server. The holy grail would be to scan the mobile phone command frequency band - one would only need to know one's target's phone number to triangulate his/her position. I don't know of anyone who's done this, but I'll be attempting it myself over the holidays.
RFID tags present an issue at a similar level, albeit with far greater possibilities for abuse due to their small size. If I were to have access to a reader (of the sort that, if this technology were to become widespread, would be available with no hardware hackery required), I would wait til the target were dumb enough to leave something outside his/her door and drop a suitably crafted tag in it. This would enable me to trail and ambush the target fairly easily when they didn't have any means of defense to hand.
This would be a slightly overworked solution for the purposes of the guild (albeit an excellent way of dealing with one of the more skilled assassins) but would come into its own in the hands of an actual stalker. Imagine someone you can't flee, can't hide from. Imagine what could happen if this technology were abused.
Imagine tags in designer clothes. An excellent way for criminals to know that yes, that coat is genuinely worth a hell of a lot. Imagine tags in young children. Do you really want paedophiles to know exactly when kids have run away from mummy's care? Imagine tags in students. Your grades are fine but you skipped too many lectures - you're out. Imagine tags in employees. Now your fundamentalist boss knows about your trip to the sex toys shop a block over from the office.
Imagine tags in you. Imagine anyone who wanted to being able to track your motions. How secure does that make you feel?
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
I hate, err... 'just cannot stand' to get technical... ok, maybe I don't. But let's step back a bit and read what 'the mark of the beast' really is, at the core.
;-)
A unique identifier of a person, used to control behavior (in this case, commerce), and those who refuse the identifier, ergo, the control, are "retired"
The "mark of the beast", in this example, the RFID, is no more evil than the social security number. It is the USE of the number by a larger entity which has been 'evil'. The tattoos on people in Nazi concentration camps were not evil, but the uses of those number were.
It is the question of "good use" versus "bad use" that this forum was discussing.
Secondly, this "mark" has been feared since Nero put his face on a coin and demanded that 'it only' be used to commerce in the Roman Empire. LONG before the SSN. IMHO, the 'mark of the beast' describes a massive database, implying unique ID of all items and all customers, as well as POS communication with the database. Think Walmart on a global scale, gone bad. SSN, bar-codes, customer courtesy cards, RFID and even biometrics all are technologies which would make the envisioned database (and thus the consequences described) more readily implimented. Given the nature of humans, there ***IS*** has a percedent upon which to draw for concern... even fear. If there were not, we wouldn't be discussing 'the good uses' of RFID. They would ALL be good uses.
<sarcasm>But look at the bright side... since you "just cannot stand" people like that, be comforted in the knowledge that if/when that day comes, they will be the first with their heads on the chopping block.</sarcasm>
StarGlider29a
"Gavon's Oxymoron: World Government"
http://www.af2k.com/gavonslaw.asp
RFIDs are a robot sense. They tell robots where and what things are, where to look for them, and what to do when they find them. if find(rfid) and ! if find(rfid) are very convenient directors of robot behaviour.
Not, of course, that robots can run around wholly unsupervised; but with automation to hand for filtering and first-level logistics, all sorts of responsible people like cops, nurses and safety staff can shrug off their robotic chores and get on with making decisions.
We all ought to be playing with this stuff; but the app I really want to see is, nuclear power plants and fuel recycling plants, with every fuel and waste element and every component accounted for. This is one area with universal support for absolute security. We've held off development of civilian breeders for fear of terrorists getting access at some stage of the fuel processing cycle, among other reasons. But turning, say, a 99% safe cycle with 20 critical inspection points into a 99.9% safe cycle with 200 points, 180 automated, is surely not beyond out current means.
Of course, by "no laws", I don't mean the usual blend of common law and a few odd state laws that protect everything from letters to phone calls to internet, etc. What I mean is that the only "privacy protection" you now have on the internet is that there is no feasible way to track each packet from users of interest. In other words, you have some privacy because your traffic gets lost in a sea of user traffic, and there's no easy way to fish out just yours across sessions.
If P-III ID tags were enabled, the enormous processing power and computational state it would otherwise would require to track individuals would be eliminated. Transactions would be tracked across sessions. Now, that's a key term: "across sessions". Just what do I mean by it? And why is that so important?
Consider, for example, that the police can observe your car on the street, and by consulting a computer, the cop will know it's your car, where you live, etc. But there's no way for the police to also know that 2 weeks ago, you were at the same intersection making a left. And that 34% of the time, you instead make a right. And that you usually blow through the light at 30MPH, even if it's raining. Your driving sessions are not tracked and correlated across sessions. The cop can see you just this instance, but we don't expect that we live in an old East German state where every little action gets recorded and reported to some authority.
Similarly, on the internet you can visit a web page and (if you remember to flush your cookies and use DHCP), there's no easy way for the site to tell that it's you again.
The key idea is that in accumulation small pieces of information add up, and infringe on a piece of liberty that we all hold dear: privacy. We reasonably expect that our actions, although observed and perhaps inspected in a given instance, are not tracked and correlated with all our previous actions.
So, while you think the P-III unique ID was a cool technical idea, it in fact was:
Consider that if a corporation tracks every piece of individual information you "leak" throughout the day, it's called market research. But if an individual did this to another individual, it's called stalking .
So, be thankful for us "privacy types". We and others see these social problems not as black and white, and perhaps a little grey, but as the complex hues they really are.
* * * If you or other readers appreciated my explanation, I'd be happy to write more, and submit a short piece for consideration by the editors (such as they are) of Slashdot.
I can be known by this key fingerprint: 2D57 1CCA 24C8 9AFE E35D F3B1 3665 B3F3 0E35 F221
*RING*
Mister Jacobsen: Hello?
Voice: Hello, Mr Jacobsen.
Mr. J: Who are you?
V: Mr. Jacobsen, our records indicate that you checked into the Inn 'n' Out motel last night with your wife.
Mr. J: So? What's this all about?
V: We verified that your charcoal suit indeed proceeded from your office to that hotel, but Mrs. Jacobsen's housedress moved around your home all evening.
Mr. J: All right, who the hell is this?
V: It's your cleaners, Mr. Jacobsen. Don't you think you really should have that suit cleaned? We'd hate to have to call Mrs. Jacobsen and ask her about it.
Mr. J: No, no...that's okay...
V: We have a full clean and press special going on today only. May we pick up the suit?
Mr. J: *sigh* Yeah, it's at my office, corner of...
V: That's ok, Mr. Jacobsen. We'll have someone there in a few minutes. Thank you for your business!
*RING*
Mr. J: Hello?
Voice #2: Hi, Mr. Jacobsen! This is Eddie, from Lingerie Etc. We have a great special going on right now on black lace teddies.
Mr. J: What the hell? So what?
V2: Our records indicate that your last four mistresses all wore them. We just thought you'd be interested in our special pricing, in light of your recent...activities.
Mr. J: Argggghhhhhhhh
Yes, I'm scared of what the government *could* do with this technology. However, I'm even more scared of what the fucking marketeers will do. 1984? Hardly. More like $19.95.
http://xkcd.com/386/
I used to believe the PIII serial number was a good idea. It would have made network management a lot easier as tracking by computer name or ip address is not real reliable on some networks.
That was then...
I spend about half my time cleaning up spyware off of peoples computers. The people that write this crud would have looooved to get serial numbers. And they would have. Even with the systems that required a reboot to 'activate' the serial number. Most people don't even think twice about a random crash. Make the config change (bios or os), make it look like something bad happened and reboot (or just be patient and wait for it). Presto, on your way to a hugely correlated database. Yuck!
I have the same problem with rfid. It's wonderful technology and if the rfid tags get burned out when you're done, great. But the *same* problem exits:
People with a clue will Own the People without a clue.
I keep on seeing all this neat stuff and then i ask the question: how can this be mis-used?
Here is a wonderful example: There is a goal of putting rfids on bulk bottles of medicine (in the caps? which could end up on the wrong bottle? did it matter which cap went before?). ok, I see the advantage for inventory and quality control, as you really do want people the get the proper medicine. What about the dark side? If I'm am understanding this correctly, you can use sensitive scanners that allow for greater distances. Does your pharmicist want anyone to know when the next 1000ct bottle of Oxycontin gets there? (any maybe where in the store to look for it?) Does this mean rf shielded storage?
If the problem people have with being phished is any indicator, RFID is just going to be a disaster.
eric
If I remember right, they were afraid that the printing press would disseminate crap (they were right) and corrupt peoples' minds.
Don't assume that all religous people are of this opinion toward science/technology, though. I'm a fairly fundamentalist Christian and cautiously pro-technology. I hold to Neil Postman's philosophy on technology: it's all in how you use it; it changes peoples' lives for good and ill, so neither fear nor hate it.
Religious technophobia is a shame; I don't really understand it. In spite of its prevalence, I can't find it in the Bible. The principle of man's inherent wickedness is probably a factor, but people will be wicked with or without technology.