Slashdot Mirror


Passport Chip Could Attract High-Tech Muggers

Orangez writes "Wired.com reports that 'business travel groups, security experts and privacy advocates are looking to derail a government plan to insert remotely readable chips in American passports, calling the chips homing devices for high-tech muggers, identity thieves and even terrorists.' and that 'The 64-KB chips will include the information from the photo page of the passport, including name, date of birth and a digitized form of the passport picture.'"

42 of 348 comments (clear)

  1. Tin foil wrapper by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 5, Funny

    Someone is going to need a faraday cage.

    --
    Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
  2. When will people realise that remotely readable... by tquinlan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...means just that?

    If they government can read it for legitimate purposes, other people can read it for illegitimate purposes.

    --
    DBA? Software Engineer? My company is hiring! Click
  3. why are travellers worried? by drunken+dash · · Score: 3, Funny

    If they're not terrorists, and have nothing to hide, why are they so worried about being tracked? If anything, if your passport is stolen, wouldn't you rather have the chip in there to track it?

    --
    Enjoy an e-piphany
    1. Re:why are travellers worried? by Kineticabstract · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You've missed the point. The concern isn't that "big brother" is going to be watching our every move (after all, that's inevitable, and why worry about the inevitable?) the concern is that a terrorist could get your passport information simply by walking close to you with an RFID reader. It's a security nightmare to have your information freely available to anyone with the hardware to read it.

    2. Re:why are travellers worried? by Ironsides · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they're not terrorists, and have nothing to hide, why are they so worried about being tracked? If anything, if your passport is stolen, wouldn't you rather have the chip in there to track it?

      Because terrorists/kidnappers can set up a remote reader to look specifically for people carrying this type or passport. Kidnapers can use it to find people from specific other contries that they think are richer than they are and ransom them off for big bucks. Terrorists can use it to find people from specific nationalities. Bin Laden said to kill all americans everywhere, not just americans in the US. This gives them a leg up in finding people carrying around their passports when overseas.

      That said, if they go through with this, they definitely need to build in a faraday cage into the passport case.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    3. Re:why are travellers worried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Human beings are funny like that. We're members of the animal kingdom and animals, for whatever natural reason, just don't like being followed or tracked unless it's by their children and/or mate or they're traveling in a coordinated herd. Attempting to rationalize a violation of basic natural psychology by invoking security isn't going to invalidate primal instincts. If mother nature has instilled us with an instinct that dislikes being tracked or followed there's probably a very good reason for it. It's probably because, whatever the rationalization is, the truth is that animals track and follow prey. Very rarely is the stranger following you interested solely in your welfare for no selfish reason of their own.

      Stalking is illegal for a reason. Even if no physical contact is ever made it constitutes harassment. Harassment leads to a degradation of the quality of life, poor performance at work, and after extended periods of time can lead to a psychological breakdown. Creating a population of paranoid schizophrenics isn't all bad. Once they come apart at the seams we can lock them in a cell with a bicycle and use them to produce energy, thus breaking our dependence on oil and negating the need for nuclear fuel. It'll also solve the overpopulation problem if we keep the sexes separated. In the end it'll allow some members of the population, who aren't being harassed or seem to be immune to natural instincts (are they even human then?), to live a life of leisure using the energy of those we have harassed and then locked up.

    4. Re:why are travellers worried? by tomcio.s · · Score: 3, Informative

      The government would be forcing me to do what they want with my private property.

      Any passport issued in any country is not your property. It's the property of the issueing government.

      In Canada, even our health cards carry that infomation on the back. It says 'card is property of Minitsty of Health, issued to be used by:' and your name + address.

      Sorry no 'property rights violations' here. Whatever those are.

    5. Re:why are travellers worried? by cosmo7 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I had thought this was alarmist, that the information would be a set of MD5s or in the case of client-side data, public-key encrypted, but that turns out to not be the case. It's all naked data.

    6. Re:why are travellers worried? by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Insightful
      a terrorist could get your passport information simply by walking close to you

      Why would a terrorist want your passport information? They have perfectly reliable ways to get entirely legitimate papers of their own. If they want to kill you, they will, and pick up your passport from your body later as a souvenir, whether it has RFID or not. On the other hand, thieves, swindlers, identity thieves could very well take an interest in your vital statistics. Why do TERRORISTS!!!! have to be part of every security discussion?

  4. security by zerkon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the article states having a barcode or some other form of security that must actually be read, how about encrypting the data on the rfid and putting the key on the barcode?

    just a thought

  5. hmm... by catbertscousin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now they don't even have to steal my passport before they can use all my info. That's an improvement. If I get a new passport, I think I'll carry it in an aluminum foil pouch.

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    1. Re:hmm... by cosmo7 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Here's the schema they're using:

      255 bytes: First name
      1 byte: Middle initial
      255 bytes: Surname
      1 bit: Boolean true if user checked the 'Member of Terrorist Group' checkbox
      7 bits: CIA National Boxcutter Purchase Monitoring flags
      16KB: ASCII-art depiction of tubgirl courtesy of frustrated intern
      16KB: Excerpts from Book of Revelation
      1 byte: Flags for previous visits to Iran / Cuba / North Korea / Syria / Lebanon / Pakistan / Libya / Yavin
      30KB: XML representation of above flags

  6. Aus Passe by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Opponents also argue that the lack of encryption, which Moss said would slow down the processing of passports, adds another vulnerability.

    I don't get it. I mean, they State Dept. could easily have a reader connected to a network which passes along some hash which is stored on the card, to a server which would verify what passport they should be looking at. Slow? Wtf kind of technology are they using where 64K of stuff would take any time?

    "Only contractors who sign up to our foreign policy will be allowed to bid -- We welcome your bid, Halliburton Vacuum Tube Company!"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Aus Passe by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Because 64K of memory should be enough for anybody"

      Thank you...I'm here all week! (mostly due to pesky bosses)


      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
  7. Another problem by nizo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Burglar goes down to airport and watches family get on a plane to Europe. He grabs your name, and from that gets your home address. Then he can go rob your house while you and family are out of town. Certainly makes scoping out houses much easier; your house could be cleaned out before you even reach your destination.

    1. Re:Another problem by Xzzy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except for the fact that, at least in the US, no one without a plane ticket is allowed to pass through the security gates.

      They could run their scanners in the ticketing area but they couldn't do it for long periods without looking suspicious. Guys standing around in bulky coats to hide the equipment will probably draw some notice.

      Since these passport chips are claimed to have a very short range (inches) to be read, guys in bulky coats dry humping tourists trying to get a scan would draw even more notice. ;)

  8. Sounds like the next big thing... by Uptown+Joe · · Score: 3, Funny

    From the folks that brought us the hacked SideKicks of Fred Durst and Paris Hilton...

    Not that I have any naked pictures on my passport chip... yet.

  9. Blame the terrorists. by Mr2cents · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How comes that everyone trying to make a point has to include terrorist threat? Am I the only one who thinks it's a bit cheap?

    --
    "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    1. Re:Blame the terrorists. by __int64 · · Score: 3, Funny

      YES! Because terrorist are everywhere! They are outside your house, they are in the mall, they are living next door to you, and their going to GET You. Unless you give your mind and soul to the only one who can help, Big Government. Big Government can help you; He'll save you from all these nasty nasty terrorists. You just have to unquestionably follow him, do as he says blindly, and never fall out of line, because then you'll be one.

      Because remember, they're everywhere. They're anyone, anyone who doesn't really believe in Big Government, anyone who is or thinks different than you, and especially anyone who is critical of Big Government!

      And remember to do your part citizens in stopping these nasties! If you ever see anyone exhibiting these actions, don't forget to notify the police or the FBI so Big Government can help them.

    2. Re:Blame the terrorists. by Metapsyborg · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Because fear has become an excellent tool that can be used to control the populace. Just look at the PATRIOT act, Iraq war, New McCarthyism etc all supported by fear.

      While I'm not a big Michael Moore fan, one thing Bowling for Columbine drove home was the "media of fear" idea. He certainly beat it to death, but there's no denying the prevalence of vague fear in todays (U.S.) media and government.

      --
      (\(\
      (^.^) INFECTED
      (")")
  10. That word by chris_eineke · · Score: 5, Insightful
    homing devices for high-tech muggers, identity thieves and even terrorists.
    There is that word again. I'm getting tired of it. :(
    --
    "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
  11. Identity by netrage_is_bad · · Score: 5, Funny

    like someone would benefit from stealing my Identity. They would just inherit my debt.

    I guess that's one more reason to get a passport

  12. Re:When will people realise that remotely readable by HMA2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It should be combined with a biometric measurement. I understand the privacy people don't like it but identity is becoming increasingly important and a "peice of paper" just isn't going to cut it for much longer.

  13. Why biometrics are bad: by Ironsides · · Score: 4, Informative

    Posted today at the BBC

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  14. RFID for passports - succumbing to a fad! by syrinje · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There's really no earthly reason for using RFID chips in passports. RFID has a number of legitimate uses - and the use of this technology in those applications makes life easier for many. Nearly all legitimate applications of RFID benefit from the automation of collecting small bits of data from large numbers of entities using non-human readers.
    However, all of the legitimate uses of the passport involve a human being handling the passport anyway - and using a non-RFID smart chip will suffice.

    Tinfoil hats aside, the primary response of the RFID proponents to the question of why RFID tags are needed is "Why not?". This is a preposterous approach to implementing a system that handles sensitive personal data that could cause severe distress to the owners of that data, if compromised. Sensitive data belonging to thousands or even millions of people! Assuming the government still considers an individual as the rightful owner of their own personal data.

    Some of the conspiracy theories regarding RFID in passports are a little over the top. But there is no denying the fact that the potential for abuse is definitely enhanced by using this technology in this way. Today the scope is for Americans to be targeted using this - either by their own government, or by criminals, or by other governments, or by terrorists. Tomorrow, when more countries follow suit, that scope expands, giving birth to a rich and varied mix of uses - all of which with the legitimate exception of border control are extra-legal or downright criminal. I hate to sound like a troll but the RFID chip in your little blue book could well become the new star of david sewn into your shirt.

    --
    See that long UID - that's what you get for lurking too long
  15. Re:When will people realise that remotely readable by EvilSporkMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can you imagine debating with foreign officials whether your CD is fake or it's just scratched?

    --
    -insert a witty something-
  16. disabling chip? by LM741N · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What are the implications of disabling the chip? A huge dose of ESD would probably do the job without harming paper and ink. You could just claim ignorance.

    1. Re:disabling chip? by chrispl · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well I should have RTFA about the RFID. They DID suggest RF blocking fibers in the cover.

      --
      What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
  17. Re:When will people realise that remotely readable by shaitand · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because it would be illegal to export encryption of that strength. It does not matter if the other nation already has the technology.

  18. Re:When will people realise that remotely readable by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Keeping people from stealing your identity is important. The governments of the world being able to track you and being able to verify your identity is not as important as your right to not be tracked or identified.

    There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not want people to be able to identify you. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to circumvent the system as well.

    At what point did the unwilling martyrs at the twin towers win the balance against the millions of lives willing sacrificed so that we could taste freedom? It wouldn't matter if planes were crashed into building every day, it is no reason to take away freedom.

  19. Okay, I might as well post it... by feloneous+cat · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't get it. I mean, they State Dept. could easily have a reader connected to a network which passes along some hash which is stored on the card, to a server which would verify what passport they should be looking at. Slow? Wtf kind of technology are they using where 64K of stuff would take any time?

    Think "Windows ME".

    Remember, this is the U.S. Gov.

    --
    IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
  20. Re:When will people realise that remotely readable by legojenn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Don't you mean:

    If the government can read it for legitimate purposes, then the government and other people can read it for illegitimate purposes.

    --
    I make a reasonable middle-class wage by going to work and not spamming blogs with scams.
  21. Actually that might be part of the plan by overunderunderdone · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the article:
    State Department contractors are looking to include some shielding, such as metal fibers in the passport cover, to keep the chips from being read when the passport is closed.
    They are also, supposedly "designed only to be readable from 8 centimeters (about 3 inches) away when the passport is open."

    My question at that point is: why not use another technology? The whole point of RFID is that it is readable from a distance without jumping through any hoops. If TFA is correct they are negating the whole point of RFID and fighting it's inherent nature to do so. It seems that some kind of optical technology would be perfectly suited to do exactly what they want to do with RFID.
    1. Re:Actually that might be part of the plan by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They are also, supposedly "designed only to be readable from 8 centimeters (about 3 inches) away when the passport is open."

      My question at that point is: why not use another technology?


      Because they want to be able to read them from more then 8cm. They know perfectly well that, with the right equipment, these 8cm devices can be read up to 10m away and they intend to use that feature themselves - they even talk about the ease of tracking people in airports and such as part of the justification for this implementation.

      So, you have what basically amounts to spin control. Enough of the general public has latched onto the meme that RFID is a danger to their privacy. So instead of working to eliminate the entirely valid risks that RFID brings to this particular application, they are just trying to cover them up - literally and figuratively.

      Your tax dollar at work...

    2. Re:Actually that might be part of the plan by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How is RFID cheaper than a mag stripe? Large RFID tags (with more than a few bytes of storage) are more expensive than the ones Wal-Mart blows in for a penny apiece. A mag stripe is almost free. Mag card readers are also almost free. A mag stripe can't (reasonably) be read surreptitiously from a distance, so it's safer, too.

      I know, a mag stripe can have its data changed. But wait! So can an RFID tag! So you're going to end up doing public key crypto signing of the data anyway. Why not use technology that is proven to be cheap, safe, and reliable instead of something that is potentially expensive, dangerous, and has no real history of reliability that requires additional expensive hacks to prevent abuse?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  22. the system is secure, stop the FUD by lordholm · · Score: 3, Informative

    According to the ICAO standard states can chose to add an authentication scheme to the RFID-tag. This is what Sweden is dong, this is probably what the US is doing.

    The authentication is based on the MRZ (Machine Readable Zone) in the passport (this is text that is read through OCR and not visible unless you open the passports photo page). The MRZ-data is hashed by SHA-1 and the high 32 bits of the hash is taken (this reduce the risk of someone computing the MRZ-data backwards (actually guessing) which MIGHT be possible if you have the hash and the basic structure of the MRZ-data). The hash is sent as an authentication code to the RFID-chip in the passport, if the hash is wrong the RFID responds with a "no valid authentication" message and refuse to send any data.

    A state may decide to ignore such measures in their passports (but this is unlikely for the EU and the US). And such states have the option to include metallic jackets for the passport.

    The range of the RFID transmission will be around 10 cm. IIRC it weakens with the power of 6 to the distance.

    Further, it is not practical to have contact chips in a book-formed passport. It is more practical in ID-cards.

    While I dislike this in general and would prefer a passport free world, try to avoid spreading untrue FUD about the technology being used, the data is secure and no person is going to get within 10 cm from your passport, and try an average of 2^31 different hashes without you noticing it. Of course, if the person manage to "borrow" your passport, he will use the MRZ to obtain the key, but in that case, he can take the passport to a photocopier as well (and that is probably cheaper).

    --
    "Civis Europaeus sum!"
  23. Re:Another problem - don't be simple by victim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The passport sniffer needn't hide the gear under a bulky coat. Any shoulder strap carry on type bag will do. They will blend in perfectly in the air port. They can then stand next to you in line, or perhaps brush past you walking in the hallways.

    In 60 minutes of sniffing they could easily collect a dozen or more candidate "known gone" families, then use that as a short list of houses to check.

    Maybe the regular readers will have a range in inches, and 802.11 has a range of 100ft. With the right antenna 802.11 can be extended by a factor of 50. I would not count on tags being unreadable from 24", a nice polite personal space distance.

    I'm not saying this will ever happen, but it certainly is a lot easier than your deliberately ridiculous example.

    What it really comes down to is...
    If the passport issuing officials want a system that keeps a secondary reference copy of your information in a difficult to forge format, that is only readable with a special reader and is encrypted to prevent unauthorized use, then there is no reason to use a remotely readable device. A high resolution two dimensional barcode of encrypted data will do a nice job of it without exposing people's data to risk additional risk.

  24. Why include the info on the chip at all? by gurps_npc · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Wouldn't it make FAR more sense to just include a Number on the chip.

    Authorized custom agents could then pass a reader over that chip, which would take the number, connect to a US government's computer, input the number which would return photo, fingerprints, etc. etc.

    There seems NO need to put all the sensitive information on a chip, when all you need is a number. Keep the sensitive information on more secure computers, accesible only by valid custom agents.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  25. The nazi's tried the same thing with the jews by DM9290 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In WWII, Nazi's required jews to wear armbands distinctly identifying themselves as jewish at a distance.

    This system worked very well. It insured that second class citizens could properly receive the proper treatment as such. i.e.: forced to walk in the gutter, rather than a side walk etc. Attend at labour and death camps etc.

    Now the american government wants americans to only travel abroad on the condition that they effectively wear electronic armbands identifying them as "AMERICAN" to anyone with a simple detector.

    America is at war, and the American government wants its citizens to be required to advertize their status to all possible enemies.

    At least the NAZI's were fairly transparent about their desire to oppress and harm jews.

    How is electronically broadcasting american citizenship for all to see, going to help americans be safer.

    Why not just make a law requiring all american citizens to wear armbands with the Star of David.

    Would that be obvious enough for the morons in the whitehouse to wake the fuck up!

    --
    No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
  26. CFP2005 sesssion on RFID chipped Passports by SynCrypt · · Score: 3, Informative

    There will be a session about RFID chipped passports at the 2005 Computers, Freedman, and Privacy conference on Wed. April 13th in Seattle, WA. Bruce Schneier, who has spoken frequently on this issue, and Bill Scannell, who is quoted in the article, will both be keynote speakers at the conference. Right after the panel, there will likely be a demo of RFID technology as it relates to passports.

  27. I hate you by Safety+Cap · · Score: 3, Funny
    It wouldn't matter if planes were crashed into building every day, it is no reason to take away freedom.
    Why do you hate America?

    If you really loved America, you would know that only terrorists fear having their freedoms taken away. Real, law-abiding, god-fearing, red state Americans have nothing to hide!!!!!!!!one one

    --
    Yeah, right.