Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Passports To Recieve RFID Chips

Posted by Zonk on from the like-it-or-not-here-they-come dept.

connah0047 writes "The Washington Post reports that US passports will be getting RFID chips by October of 2006. Despite security concerns, the U.S. has now committed to putting RFID chips in the passports of all U.S. citizens. The new regulations will mean that all new and renewing U.S. passports will contain RFID chips by October 2006. While some believe this is a step forward, there are major privacy and security issues with the wireless technology."

8 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. If only they listened... by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From TFA:

    But in a federal filing, the [State] department said that 98.5 percent of the 2,335 comments it received since it issued proposed rules last spring opposed the program.

    Abraham Lincoln once said "that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

    I don't know about you all, but I think that Abe was a pretty wise man with a great idea. I sure wish that our government was like that...

    I can't help but wonder what would happen if everyone started "accidentally" microwaving their passports.

    1. Re:If only they listened... by glesga_kiss · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Of course:
      According to a classified document, "Special Operations and Joint Forces in Countering Terrorism" prepared for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld by his Defense Science Board, a new organization has been created to thwart potential terrorist attacks on the United States. This counter-terror operations group-- the "Proactive Preemptive Operations Group" (P2OG) will require 100 people and at least $100 million a year. The team of covert counter-intelligence agents will be responsible for secret missions designed to target terrorist leaders. The secret missions are designed to "stimulate reactions" among terrorist groups, provoking them into committing violent acts which would then expose them to "counterattack" by U.S. forces.

      Not covered in US media at all, apart from the LA Times where it apparently first appeared. The article seems to have disappeared down the memory hole; it's not on their website anymore.

      A google for "Special Operations and Joint Forces in Countering Terrorism" throws back lots of info on this story.

    2. Re:If only they listened... by bentcd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Blah blah. RFID has it's place, but it's a terrible idea in this context. Does anyone want a passport than can be read without your knowledge, by a random stranger?

      Or by a random wayside bomb. The time is past when only the anti-terrorists could do surgical strikes . . .

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    3. Re:If only they listened... by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Meh. Every letter I wrote about this elicited a BS reply that was clearly ignorant on the subject.

      Here is the way it works....

      Congressmen hire staffers to do some basic work regarding writing these boilerplate letters. Many do read their email personally, but some hire staffers to do it. In any event, here is how I have had the most effect.

      1) Write quick respectful summary letters to your congressmen to initiate contact on a topic. Wait for the boilerplate form letter to come back.

      2) Reply to the boilerplate form letter. Include your name, street address, and phone number at the top of the body of the email. Reply in some depth to the points and *cite your sources.* Show your congressmen that you care about the topic and know something about it. You will almost never get a direct reply from this second letter.

      However, you will likely get more attention.

      During the debate over the authorization to use military force in Iraq, I sent my senators a letter urging them to vote no on the basis that Lebannon was using the determination to go to war in Iraq to undermine Israeli water rights among other things (Sharon was threatening to go to war with Lebannon over the water issue, and everyone knew Bush couldn't let that happen if he really wanted to invade Iraq). I got a form letter back from Maria Cantwell. I replied to this, citing my concerns in more depth, providing links to articles in Al Ahram, Ha'aretz, and other Middle Eastern news papers about the effects on the region politically of the threat to war.

      While I didn't get any reply to this second email, I thought it was interesting that when Cantwell spoke on the floor of the senate, she offered a clear (if incorrect and overly simplistic) rebuttle point-by-point to my letter. It was clear to me that she had personally read it and had thought about the issues I had raised, even if she disagreed with me. If nothing else, it was clear to me that I had been heard. (She supported the war in the name of removing a tyrant from power, but I question whether it was wise to replace the tyrant with the sort of anarchy in which international terrorism thrives.)

      What I am trying to say is that each of us is one voice out of many. It is up to us to provide clear and concise communication with our congressmen about any and all issues that concern us. If only a few or even a couple of hundred people write about these issues, it is easy to disregard us as a political fringe. Congress is a marketplace of ideas and we have to participate in it in order to shape public policy.

      A second point I would make is that it is often worth initiating contact before the item becomes big public news because it is more likely that the congressman has not made up his/her mind yet, and you are less likely to get a form letter.

      In essence communication with one's congressmen should be the bread and butter of political involvement. One's vote is where one's political involvement ends, not begins. One's vote is simply a form of legitimating one's contact with one's elected officers.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  2. Don't like it. by conJunk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Earlier this year, I was sitting at a travel agent's office in Japan. There was a message prominately displayed on the desk in both English and Japanese informing travelers that they needed to have special machine-readable passports to enter the U.S. The rest of the world already thinks of us as loonies. This new nonsense won't help. Especially since we're requiring *other countries* to do this as well if their citizens want to enter the U.S.

    What's the point of RFID in a passport? Is it somehow magically impossible to forge or duplicate? Can't we agree that the people who are willing to go through the effort to make counterfeit documents like this will also have the resources to handle RFID? Aren't there ways we can spend this money that might do something a little more rational towards increasing security? Like what? I dunno. But there are probably better ways to spend the millions (billions?) this will cost to implement.

  3. Robustness by sjhwilkes · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How big is this RFID chip? Small enough to be undetectable in the cover of the passport? How well will it function after being hit with a hammer?

  4. Papers please! by isotope23 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IMO this country is going down the tubes in a big way.

    Remember history or civics class in school? The inevitable lessons about how free the US was compared to Hitler's germany or the soviet union. Back then they used to point out how free we were because we did not need papers (internal passports) to travel.

    How fricking free are we when we need a driver's license to board a plane? Or when our KIDS need ID to board a plane? Or to visit a national park, or federal building? Not to mention the citizens are going to EAT the costs.

    More and more it seems the only alternative is to go gulching until the country regains its "mind your own business" mentality.

    Today's USA, The Anti-federalists worst nightmare coming true.

    --
    Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
  5. Slashdot editors take note: NOT RFID! by John+Harrison · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is not RFID. The term does not occur in the article. These are 14443 contactless smart cards. I can state with certainty that the chips being used are not RFID. I will admit that there is some arguement over what the term RFID should cover, but these really fall outside of the scope. These are much more complex chip that do not simply broadcast a unique id number. I've posted on this on previous articles and /. has retracted the erroneous language. I hope that they will do so again. It really muddies the debate when "technical" sites such as this can't be bothered to use proper terminology.

    --
    Lasers Controlled Games!