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.'"

Comments

Comrades...

[Bananatree3]

...and the Comrades marched rank and file into their working facility, while the Big Brother telescreen carefully scanned each implanted chip...

Maybe they're right

[HeavensBlade23]

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.

Re:Maybe they're right

[symbolset]

It's a Visa card?

Well, it's Slashdot

[1310nm]

It might actually double the victim's bicep circumference.

Why?

[cgenman]

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.

Re:Why?

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>What's the security benefit to injected RFID?

If your threat model is someone walking into the data center with a lost/stolen/borrowed badge then requiring them to be injected does address the threat. But then so would issuing tokens in the form factor of a ring, except for the "borrowed" token problem.

So, if you don't know that RFID chips can be cloned, if you don't know that they transmit the same number every time they're pinged, if you don't know that they can be read remotely and cloned at leisure, and if you have contempt for your employees and are oblivious to human rights, you might come up with a requirement for injected RFID.

I sincerely hope that whoever came up with this isn't one of my colleagues in security consulting.

Religious Objection

[Shky]

Could someone object on the basis of religious discrimination if they believe that RFID implants constitute the "Mark of the Beast"?

Re:I especially like...

[broller]

So are you entering passwords or making phone calls with your mouse? I wasn't clear on that point.

Re:A milestone

[JabberWokky]

Godwin's Law does not apply when there is a legitimate historical reference to Nazis. I'd say this one actually is a proper and on-topic reference, as there aren't many other cases of forced permanent identification or serialization. I can think of plenty of "mode of dress" and uniform enforcements, but no other examples of permanent body modifications that mark specific individuals.

--
Evan

Wait, isn't this worse security?

[Rakishi]

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).

Re:Yeah that was ironical.

[Linker3000]

• Employees were fed up of being charged for an extra 'phantom' tube of tomato puree every time they went grocery shopping