Slashdot Mirror
RFID Injection Required for Datacenter Access
user24 writes "Security focus reports that RFID injections are now required for access to the datacenter of a Cincinnati company. From the article 'In the past, employees accessed the room with an RFID tag which hung from their keychains, however under the new regulations an implantable, glass encapsulated RFID tag from VeriChip must be injected into the bicep to gain access ... although the company does not require the microchips be implanted to maintain employment.'"
...and the Comrades marched rank and file into their working facility, while the Big Brother telescreen carefully scanned each implanted chip...
At least, it doesn't need to be cut out to be used by a sufficiently motivated attacker.
Isn't this what the Christians have been saying was going to happen for the past 20 years now? Of course, it's not the governing that's forcing the chips on people, but it's only a matter of time.
But now they want to chip us like dogs too?
What's next, kibble in the break room vending machines?
I'm not understanding the point here. If you inject the RFID chip, you can theoretically track your users wherever they go. But you can't ensure that access isn't being granted to someone who has an RFID chip in their wallet. You are making it slightly harder to steal the data, but you're not making it any harder to clone the chip.
What's the security benefit to injected RFID?
BTW, this is the original article.
The ______ Agenda
Could someone object on the basis of religious discrimination if they believe that RFID implants constitute the "Mark of the Beast"?
CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
Is this the first time civilians have been required to do thing type of thing?
Lots of stuff has been done to monitor civilian employees: Drug testing, email snooping, time card punching, video monitoring, background/credit checks, etc.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
This will only last about as long as the Sony rootkit-like DRM lasted. It now has public attention, and when it is pointed out that the scheme has enough security holes in it to act as a noodle strainer, the number of people who will actually allow the implant will be zero, meaning there will be no one to do any maintenance in the datacenter, and thus the rules will have to be changed.
For less than they paid for the RFID system, they could have hired someone to log people in and out of the data center. Additionally, I question the validity of a system that restricts access to only those with an implant during disaster situations (fire, flood, and worse) where access rights and needs are rather different than in normal situations.
Good security costs a lot of money, and you cannot replace the human element in the security chain. The RFID schemes won't prevent anyone following an authorized person into the data center, unless there is physical restrictions that would make working in the data center dangerous during emergencies. In this case, the $10/hour guard is more flexible and cheaper than the high-tech answer, and more respectful of humans in general... or at least I think so
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
To me this sounds more like a marketing ploy. So that they could go to potential clients and say, "Look we are so secure and futuristic that we need embedded chips in humans to access our critical datacenter!". Client is left stunned.
IANA American, but I hope that the goverment would do something if this was forced on the employees working in the datacenter. After all, what can this achieve which cannot be done with a retinal scan, RFID tag combo? If the criminal can pass the retinal scan, can't he also pluck the RFID from the employee and stick into his arm?
Huh..... I would hate it if someone said they are gonna put a chip inside my body. Wait till someone gets hurt and the company gets sued for a million dollars.
Life is just a conviction.
Well, there were those number tattoos in the Nazi slave labor camps...
This space available.
And anyone who requires access to the datacenter to do their job, such as operators and sysadmins, cannot DO their job unless they get the implant. And if they cannot do the job, how are they expected to maintain employment?
I suppose the official reason for termination would be "uncooperative attitude." Certainly not "he refused to get chipped." Or maybe the company will concentrate on ways to make the employee so miserable, he just quits. Problem solved.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
We all know that this won't increase security, but now this surveillance company can use this in all their advertising and PR. "Sure, you can go with the other company but they arent half as serious as we are. We put bloody implants into our employess! That's serious!"
Its harmless except for Joe and Jane Datacenter who have to go in for some minor surgery on the weekend to keep their jobs. I hope this "Golden Casino" mentality stops right here after these people get exposed for the dumbasses that they are. Hell, even in the article they did not know the weaknesses of RFID authentication.
I woulndt doubt if this was 100% publicity stunt. I wonder how many people even have to access the datacenter. Depending on the company size it could just be one or two people. Of course all the executives, security, etc will have the old keycards that will work just fine.
Don't worry, nobody is going to take your arm (it's too large to carry.) The chip is not that deep, so a small incision with a sharp boxcutter will allow the attacker to pull the capsule out. He only may need to explore a bit (with that knife) around the needle scar :-( Chances are very good that you will survive, especially if the attacker knows how to avoid major blood vessels, and if the knife is clean, and if you don't need that arm that much. Just choose your attackers carefully and check their medical diplomas before they do it to you.
Okay, but what's the metric here? "Unsafeness?" How "unsafe" is getting an RFID implant? Is it then safe to assume that if something was sufficiently risk-free, that a potential employer could get away with making the employee submit to their wishes? How far might that go? And most importantly, who's deciding what's unsafe, and where's their money come from?
I don't think the CIA is going to want thier agents permanantly broacasting a message that says 'hey I work for the CIA' to anybody that has the desire and technology to listen.
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
Ironically, the extra security sought may be offset by a recent discovery of Jonathan Westhues, where the security researcher showed the VeriChip can be skimmed and cloned, duplicating an implant's authentication. When contacted, those at CityWatcher were unaware of the chip's security issue, according to the spychips.com release.
So before I needed to get close to an object (whatever had the rfid tag) which under normal circumstances an employee would not be carried around (say they were going home or something) or could have it in a reader blocking case. Now, I simply need to get close to an employ anywhere at any time to copy their data.
Fucking brilliant, now I can steal their tag without anyone ever knowing, whereas before they'd know it was gone in a reasonable amount of time (I'd have to steal the physical object most likely).
It's a video surveillance company. You work in the data center, you become Big Brother.
Now people are required to inject glass capsules into their arms to enter a facility?
Now we know asbestos kills.
What will be said of placing RFID tags into our bodies 50 years from now.
Some risks are worth taking, there is no question. For me, this is not one of them.
Taking the "frog in water" tack a step further, let's assume that the RFID chip is currently the same size as the one I just put in my dog. (About the size of a grain of rice, they tell me.) This is probably far too large/intrusive to put in the hand(for Revelations to come to fruition). With the advent on nanotechnology, there is no doubt that these can be made not only smaller in the future, but they also can be made of a 'non-rejectable' material so that the body wouldn't force it out thru the skin. Now let's take it out of the bicep, which has relatively little range of movement. If it were restricted to the upper arm, the reader/receiver would have to be at a certain height, relative to the "average" bicep height. This wouldn't last for long. It needs to be given a more full range of motion, so that employers/sellers/buyers/governments could put the receiver anywhere. What's a place on the body with a great range of motion, could reach either side of a door, capable of going high/low/everywhere? The hand, you say? What a novel concept! This is not a great leap to tie the necessity of having a chip implanted for work to requiring permanent identification for the conduct of everyday life, and as a side note, coming close enough to a 2000 year old prophecy(that I believe, BTW) to allow 'him who has understanding' to 'reckon'.
But RFID doesn not require the participation of the owner. That stranger who just jostled you in the subway now has your RFID code (You can make RFID readers *small*) Now a)You don't know the code has been stolen (vs having your passcard lost or stolen) and b)When you do discover the code as been stolen, changing your own code is a *lot* more hassle than issuing a new passcard.
These things could be negated by RFID chips with rolling codes or read/write ability but these are not commonly available in the glass capsule RFID chips. I'd give good odds that this company is not pushing the boudaries either and has the standard one-id versions.
Bear in mind that RFID devices are operating on the limits of what power can be obtained from a fairly weak power source in the first place. Any extra complexity has a real impact on the operational range.
Rich
WTF? Who moderated this "troll"?
...
I almost didn't read it when I noticed the -1.
Maybe the meta-mods will catch it, or maybe not.
Actually, using a second breast as a control for the other may not be all that great an idea. Usually they are slightly different in size and shape, as are most men's testes. And both breasts get exposed to anything in the blood stream.
What you obviously want is a second woman who is a match for the first in as many ways as possible. Then you compare all four breasts.
Lessee what sort of mod this gets
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.