Texas Considers Putting RFID Tags in All Cars

An anonymous reader submits "In section 601.507 of Texas HB 2893, the Texas Legislature is considering replacing all vehicle inspection stickers with RFID tags. The legislation also makes provision for the government to use the devices for insurance enforcement. The bill contains limited privacy provisions, but does not seem to exclude other law enforcement usage."

Comments

Remember...

[daveschroeder]

...RFID works only at a very close range. The tags themselves are powered by the radio transceivers that in turn detect them, making their range, by nature, very limited. This isn't a global universal tracking mechanism.

It's a unique vehicle identifier that can be deciphered using the electromagnetic spectrum, similar to the way human eyes or a tollbooth camera might use visible light to view a license plate, another unique vehicle identifier.

Texas is planning on using it for automated vehicle registration and toll booths (relevant bill excerpt below).

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable use of technology to me. Are we to now fear any new legislation that doesn't specifically and explicitly "exclude [...] law enforcement usage", even if utterly irrelevant?

This may sound trite, but:

RFID != bad

Anything - including a license plate or an old fashioned inspection sticker - can be abused for illegitimate purposes or to abridge someone's privacy. And keep in mind that "illegitimate purposes" is awfully subjective. But trampling - or spreading FUD about - technology is not the answer.

Relevant section:

Sec. 601.507. SPECIAL INSPECTION CERTIFICATES.
(a) Commencing not later than January 1, 2006, the department shall
issue or contract for the issuance of special inspection
certificates to be affixed to motor vehicles that are inspected and
found to be in proper and safe condition under Chapter 548.
(b) An inspection certificate under this section must
contain a tamper-resistant transponder, and at a minimum, be
capable of storing:
(1) the transponder's unique identification number;
and
(2) the make, model, and vehicle identification number
of the vehicle to which the certificate is affixed.
(c) In addition, the transponder must be compatible with:
(1) the automated vehicle registration and
certificate of title system established by the Texas Department of
Transportation; and
(2) interoperability standards established by the
Texas Department of Transportation and other entities for use of
the system of toll roads and toll facilities in this state.

Re:Remember...

[NanoGator]

"The privacy implications are mind boggling...."

I wonder what Slashdot would have said if it had been around for the invention of the license plate.

You've already got "RFID"

[Sheetrock]

Your license plate.

This takes very little away, but think about what it might add: the ability to pay for tolls, gas, or parking meters without swiping a card. You have to admit that'd be pretty cool.

A few points that need clarification:

[Pig Hogger]

• Driving is NOT a right, but a PRIVILEGE.
• Privileges can be revoked if you abuse them.
• People driving on PUBLIC roads have absolutely, positively NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.
• The thousand of lifes lost to careless and/or stupid drivers most definitely warrant that public authorities to the utmost to increase road safety.
• Rules of the road are implemented to maximize road safety. Including a 50 km/h speed limit on a 10 lane-wide ultrastraight strip mall at two in the morning on a clear night with no other traffic.
• Police find ticketing drivers a demeaning task, so they will only do it when pushed or shoved.
• Therefore, it is only logical that the State implements automatic means of enforcing road rules, such as red-light cameras, radar cameras; tracking vehicle position can also be used to punish speeding.
• The next logical step would be a black-box that also records what the driver has seen.
• That black box can be used to exactly determine the blame for road accidents, thus darwinizing bad drivers out of the roads.
• With all the above said, there is nothing wrong, illegal, immoral and unethical to have the black boxes used to automatically ticket bad drivers. Aircraft have been thusly monitored for generations; if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.

Re:A few points that need clarification:

[Kingstrum]

Hmmm, where to begin...

* Driving, per say, isn't a right; however, freedom to travel without producing papers is. Read up on the actual law for a "driver's license"...it's not as bad as the conspiracy nuts make it out to be, but it's not what you think it is either. Much like the "opt-out Social Security System" that seems to be pretty darn mandatory.

* Driving on public roads doesn't automagically negate your rights...especially when "We the People" are "The Public" and paid for those roads.

* We apparently have different definitions of "public safety". Preserving such safety does not warranty *ANY ONE* to violate said rights. Hence, the cops not being able to roust you on the road just because you're on it ("Sir, we pulled you over because we don't like your face."). Personally, I'm all for such things as "Kill someone while DUI, get a bullet on the spot", but I'm a capricious bastard that way.

* Rules of the road are implemented as any other civil rule of law: by whomever is in power at the time for whatever gain they may get from it (including, but not limited to, personal sexual gratification from knowing they can make others do what they want.) We had 55MPH held over from the '70s to appease the MADD loonies instead of something based on actual science and current socio-political circumstances.

* Some police find it a demeaning task; others fall into the above catagory of power-trippers.

* So basically you'll be all for writing automatic tickets when you pass a given 1/4 mile stretch randomly chosen by the state? No appeal, no ability to explain that you were going 8MPH over the posted limit to get around a dangerous driver? These days Big Brother gets just as much of a whacking as Nazis, but it really does push to a very scary future, don't you think?

* Under no legal standard that I'm aware of is anyone required to be a mobile snitch for the law. For other victims of American Education who didn't bother to get better informed later: our system of law is *POSTSCRIPTIVE* not *PRESCRIPTIVE*. "Innocent until proven guilty" means "do whatever you like, but if we catch you, your ass is grass". Much like the Ten Commandments, you're free to be an asshole, but you can't whine later that you didn't know there was a punishment for getting caught.

* Planes are a lot different from cars. My car can't wind up in your living room unless there's a road nearby. My plane can destroy your remote log cabin and you'd never know it until someone contacted you. The ability to cause harm is much more limited and requirements for operation are way lower for a car. Applying a blanket standard for wildly different things is rather silly and, well, unsafe for the public, eh?

Time to stop pandering to the narrow-minded nimrod special interests and actually excercise some Freedom for a change.

Kingstrum

"He had that rare weird electricity about him -- that extremely wild and heavy presence that you only see in a person who has abandon all hope of ever behaving 'normally.'"
-- Hunter S. Thompson, "Fear and Loathing '72"