Slashdot Mirror


RFID-Reading Passport Scanners Installed

Kozar_The_Malignant writes, "Electronic passport scanners have been installed at SFO. Ten of the scanners were received last week and have now been put in service. Various creative responses have been discussed here before."

151 comments

  1. Faraday Cage Suit by corroncho · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I knew that farady cage suit would come in handy some day!!!
    ___________________________
    Free iPods? Its legit. 5 of my friends got theirs. Get yours here!

    1. Re:Faraday Cage Suit by Plutonite · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dude, are you spamming on slashdot? No offense or anything like that, but we're gonna kill ur azz man. Rip your intestines out and hang them on the server cabling. Don't ever spam again dude. Just don't.

      -A friend.

    2. Re:Faraday Cage Suit by michaelaiello · · Score: 1

      I started up a little venture selling RFID Blocking passport cases http://www.difrwear.com/ Give it a look if you are interested =)

  2. Do passports already have RFID's in them? by chroot_james · · Score: 1

    Do they? I haven't exactly kept track of this...

    --
    Reality is nothing but a collective hunch.
    1. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by in2mind · · Score: 4, Informative
      from the prev Slashdot article :

      State Department spokeswoman Janelle Hironimus said existing passports will remain valid until they expire but, eventually, all U.S. passports -- about 13 million will be issued in 2006 -- will contain such chips
    2. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This makes me happy that I got my passport renewed last year. No RFID until 2015 baby!

    3. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by malsdavis · · Score: 3, Informative

      My mate got a new British passport a couple of weeks ago. The 2nd last page or so has a chip and a large rectangular loop of wire shaped in it. From what I remember, the rectangular loop of wire measured about 8cm long by 2cm high or so.

      Here's a smallish picture of what the RFID bit looks like: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2005/11/1 8/npassport18.jpg

    4. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      The 2nd last page or so has a chip and a large rectangular loop of wire shaped in it. From what I remember, the rectangular loop of wire measured about 8cm long by 2cm high or so.
      Is that something that can be resolved using a hammer?

      Even though I'm normally a fan of Opt-In systems, I'll mute my complaints if a hammer allows me to Opt-Out.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    5. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Yeah until you try to go somewhere and they take your address location down and send you a new passport voiding your old one. It'll come in the form of a convenient service to you.

    6. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by 955301 · · Score: 1

      No, a rock won't do, nor will paper. Scissors wins!

      --
      You are checking your backups, aren't you?
    7. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by Firehed · · Score: 1

      You own a microwave, right? Obviously you didn't want the thing to get cold during those long winters in wherever you're headed, so you decided to warm it up for a few seconds first. Draw your own conclusions about what will happen, since me posting them is probably a violation of the DMCA or something.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    8. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by lcsjk · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did some initial design for an RFID system last year. The credit card size unit has a microchip with memory and a coil of wire around the edge of the card (about 7cm x 5cm). THe coil is the secondary side of an air-core transformer and the reader (receiver) has the primary side. Note that it is not RF as in radio or telephone. It is a magnetic field. The reader has to send enough AC power through the air to the RFID coil so that a capacitor can be charged to give an operating voltage. When the voltage is high enough (milliseconds) the microchip will turn on and send its data to the receiver. My operating distance was small (less than 3 inches) because of limited reader power. However, if the reader had been transmitting more power from a longer distance (a few feet) I think it would have been able to read the data. The theory is easy, but the signal strength would have been smaller. We have equipment to read extremely small signals from space. Reading from a few feet away is most likely easy.

    9. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "This makes me happy that I got my passport renewed last year. No RFID until 2015 baby!"

      Well, like most people in the US, I don't see I'll need to get a passport for any reason...at least not for the foreseeable future.

      Plenty for me to see here in this country, and the current atmosphere in much of the world doesn't seem to be too friendly towards Americans....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    10. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by Znork · · Score: 1

      "I don't see I'll need to get a passport for any reason"

      With the rate things are deteriorating, you'll probably need it to avoid spending a week or two on ice when the goons go 'papieren bitte! schnell!'...

    11. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would your average household microwave do to one of these babies?

    12. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Even though I'm normally a fan of Opt-In systems, I'll mute my complaints if a hammer allows me to Opt-Out.

      Don't be surprised if doing that may opt you into a special gated community in Guantanamo Bay.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    13. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by Fusen · · Score: 1

      Except if you do this in the UK, you then need to buy a new passport which costs around $110, as if your passport's RFID chip isn't working, the passport is void

    14. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by sarabiz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, they began putting them in as of at least Summer 2005. I know this because I got married and needed to change my name on my passport. This used to require a simple addendum to the back and was free. However, since I had the old non-RFID passport, I was required to pay ~$70 for a new one. Suck.

    15. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 1
      No. That isn't how it works.

      This type of situation always works on a carrot and stick approach. Individuals with RFID passports will breeze through Customs and Border Protection (CBP) while everyone else waits in line. As increasing numbers of people have RFID passports, more resources will be dedicated to them. Unless authorization is granted to increase staffing levels, processing officers will be increasingly assigned to the RFID passport reading stations. This means the wait times will begin to get very long for non-RFID passport clearances.

      At some point, due to new passport acquisition and general inconvenience, almost everyone will have RFID passports. At that point, individuals will either be mandated to get new passports or be so frustrated by the bureaucracy that will surround processing a non-standard passport:

      ("Hey, why doesn't this thing work? You don't have an RFID? Why not?"

      aside - "Ya, think he is a terrorist, Bob? He doesn't fit the current profile"

      "Naw... but we have to double check it 'cuz of HQ mandates, pull him aside.")

      that they will simply stop traveling or buckle under and get "with the program".

    16. Re:Do passports already have RFID's in them? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Not Guantanamo Bay, but otherwise not too far from the truth: When the compulsory combined ID card and passport is introduced, it will be a criminal offence to not report a damaged or defective card, punishable by up to 51 weeks in prison ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_national_iden tity_card ).

  3. This is only an interim measure... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

    ...until they can implant the RFID chips in your head.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    1. Re:This is only an interim measure... by garcia · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't put it past them and I'm sure no one would care...

      I just recently took a trip to Winnipeg so that I could get around any passport requirements they might put up in the near future. I *refuse* to travel abroad with a passport that has RFID technology inside. Just like I will not give my SSN out to anyone, I will not allow my passport to be read via RFID.

      The individuals I was with on this trip told me I was paranoid and shouldn't let something as little as an RFID tag stop me from traveling where I want to go.

      I tried to explain to them the privacy implications of this but they refused to listen.

    2. Re:This is only an interim measure... by jimmichie · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're just itching for an excuse to wear your tinfoil hat, aren't you?

    3. Re:This is only an interim measure... by hcob$ · · Score: 1

      Well, lets go through the usual arguments...

      RFID tag is stored in the passport(which is a faraday cage when closed.

      The data is a hash value that is used to look up information to verify that you are who you say you are.

      And yes, you are paranoid about it.

      --
      Cliff Claven
      K.E.G. Party Chairman
      Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
    4. Re:This is only an interim measure... by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Your friends were right. You are in fact paranoid. The overwhelming majority of people will suffer no ill consequences from having their passports read by an RFID reader.

      The burden is on you to show what bad things will happen.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    5. Re:This is only an interim measure... by twistedsymphony · · Score: 1

      well, tinfoil hats are soooo much cooler then tinfoil passport protectors.

    6. Re:This is only an interim measure... by gomadtroll · · Score: 1

      Paranoia, fun exercise wh=hen bored with reality :-) Living in Alaska you have to go through Canada to get from one part of the state to another. The closer to the border the more people socialize, regardless of nationalities. So I am in the market for a US passport. I have looked online at firstgov.org. The info provided on the E-passport is the passort has to be opened to expose the chip to any scanner. On the other hand all my dogs have chips installed for ID, in case they are lost, never even put on my tin foil hat for that decision. There is a possible? $500 fee by the IRS if you feel like not giving you SSN. It is an illusion if you think you have any privacy, not neccessarily a good thing, just the way, at least, the US government operates.

  4. can they be opened with a Diebold key or bar key? by speculatrix · · Score: 2, Funny

    anyone tried to open them their hotel mini-bar key?

  5. Various Creative Responses by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Interesting
    > New U.S. e-Passports contain a 64 kbit RFID chip with personal information about the passport holder.

    After reading last night's thread, I suppose encoding ~250 copies of the string "Kip Hawley is an idiot. Michael Chertoff is also an idiot" into an off-the-shelf 64kbit chip, putting the chip in a small wad of gum, and then swallowing the gum, is no longer an option.

    Well, so much for my weekend.

    1. Re:Various Creative Responses by in2mind · · Score: 1
      After reading last night's [slashdot.org] thread, I suppose encoding ~250 copies of the string "Kip Hawley is an idiot. Michael Chertoff is also an idiot" into an off-the-shelf 64kbit chip, putting the chip in a small wad of gum, and then swallowing the gum, is no longer an option.

      First of all,why would you want to do that?
      Two,the passport RFID reader needs to be within 10 cms from the chip to be able to read. So sont worry.You can swallow whatver you want to. :p

    2. Re:Various Creative Responses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      After reading last night's thread, I suppose encoding ~250 copies of the string "Kip Hawley is an idiot. Michael Chertoff is also an idiot" into an off-the-shelf 64kbit chip, putting the chip in a small wad of gum, and then swallowing the gum, is no longer an option.
      Okay...
      Well, so much for my weekend.
      Given the detailed procedure, I take it you already swallowed such a chip and need the weekend to pass it out of your body.
      * /me runs and hides (Slashdotters are scary)
  6. Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by Yahma · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is the ever present theory that wrapping something in tinfoil will prevent RFID communications from working. Does anyone know if this is true or has been tested? If it works, just wrap your passports in tinfoil.

    Yahma -- BLASTProxy.com - A public anonymous proxy server that allows you to bypass firewall restrictions at home and work and surf safely.

    1. Re:Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by kdawgud · · Score: 1

      It definitely works. Simply try it with your cell phone. Instant reception of zero.

    2. Re:Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2, Informative
      Look up "Faraday Shield". It works, but I can think of some approaches to get through it, although I doubt that any current RFID device uses them. Testing is always a good idea. And aluminum foil is not the most attenuating material, just the cheapest and by far the most easily available one.

      Bruce

    3. Re:Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      It used to work, but ALCAN is now part of the US Military Industrial complex, and their foil now allows all government generated radio signals through.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by hcob$ · · Score: 1

      There is the ever present theory that wrapping something in tinfoil will prevent RFID communications from working. Does anyone know if this is true or has been tested? If it works, just wrap your passports in tinfoil. I guess I'm going to be saying this often today. All you have to do is close the passport, there is a faraday cage in the cover that is completed when the cover is closed.

      --
      Cliff Claven
      K.E.G. Party Chairman
      Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
    5. Re:Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by It'sYerMam · · Score: 1

      Everyone knows that tinfoil AMPLIFIES the signals, not reduces them!

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    6. Re:Wrapping your passport in Tinfoil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if you make your hat with the shiny side facing inwards...

  7. Why? by Lauritz · · Score: 1

    Are there any arguments in favor of RFID as opposed to chip-cards? I mean, conventional chip-cards that need physical contact with the reader would be safer in that the can not be wirelessly read and could contain processors to do crypto-calculations on card (since they have better power supply). The extra time it perhaps would take to read the card shouldn't be a bottleneck since airport checks are plenty slow as they are.

    1. Re:Why? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Are there any arguments in favor of RFID as opposed to chip-cards? Yes, it makes (some group) (rich/powerful).

    2. Re:Why? by twistedsymphony · · Score: 1

      but... but... RFID is a buzzword!!!

    3. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. RFID is pretty fast. Furthermore, there is no need for a physical specification for machine readable travel documents. Otherwise, all passports would have to have the exact same thickness, and the exact same placement of the chip. And remember there are other forms of travel documents than normal sized passports, such as credit card sized identity cards in the Netherlands. Most countries put the chip in the cover, some use a poly-carbon data page. There is talk about adding chips for Visa's as well, or the possability to add data to the chip.

      Obviously, most of slashdot seems to favour some kind of plot instead, but I'm pretty sure that there isn't one. Note that other methods of storage were also considered (see the ICAO specifications). RF was just the most convenient.

    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) As the grand parent mentioned speed shouldn't be an issue. 2) Of cause there will be a need for specifications and standards for the systems to interoperate, so some limitations on the physical layouts will be the least of the worries. 3) I disagree that all passports would need to bee of the exact same size for this to work. If only the chip was specified to be at a certain placement relative to one of the corners, it would be feasible to create a reader that could read passports of a variety of thicknesses (ei. a slot, with a 90 degree corner in the bottom, that would tighten when a passpord was inserted).

    5. Re:Why? by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 1

      1. Airport checking is still abominably slow, so saving ten seconds when you've just queued for two hours isn't going to make much difference to anyone.

      2. We're already agreeing on frequency and cryptography standards. What makes a "hardware" standard any more onerous? Especially if, as a previous poster pointed out, you just ensured the chip was a set distance from a specific corner of the medium.

      3. RF is the most covenient, but also the most insecure. Unless you wrap your passport in multiple layers of tinfoil, you might as well wander about the place screaming "I'm an american citizen! I'm an american citizen!"[1], since anyone who wants to know can buy a cheap RFID reader, jack up its signal-strength and pick you out of a crowd.

      [1] Obviously, given the current state of world affairs, this is not recommended behaviour. But now we're being mandated to carry a passport that does it for us?

      --
      Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
  8. Passport Cases Now Become Important by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I have a passport case and will be sure to line it with mu-metal (not just aluminum foil) when I get a new passport in a few years. I'm sure that similar things will be up for sale. Indeed, if there's a manufacturer out there who wants to work on this, and knows sewing better than technology, write to bruce at perens dot com.

    Bruce

    1. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by in2mind · · Score: 1
      I have a passport case and will be sure to line it with mu-metal (not just aluminum foil) when I get a new passport in a few years.

      I think thats dumb thing to do.When the security guys at the airport read your mu-metal'ed passport with their reader,it wont work & they would think its not a valid passport & you will be in trouble.

    2. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I guess this is something that not everybody understands yet. Of course you'd take the passport out of the case when there's a legitimate occassion to read it, like going through immigration security at some country (which I do a few times a month). The problem is that people can read it while it's in your pocket, with the right equipment, wherever you go, all the time, hundreds of times per day. And having it in a mu-metal case when you do not expect it to be read would be a good security practice. Is that more clear?

      Thanks

      Bruce

    3. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by kevin_conaway · · Score: 4, Informative

      It already has a cover

      Metallic anti-skimming material incorporated into the front cover and spine of the e-passport book prevents the chip from being skimmed, or read, when the book is fully closed;
    4. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by Raistlin77 · · Score: 1

      And you trust Government-supplied security?

    5. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by hcob$ · · Score: 2, Informative
      The problem is that people can read it while it's in your pocket, with the right equipment, wherever you go, all the time, hundreds of times per day. And having it in a mu-metal case when you do not expect it to be read would be a good security practice. Is that more clear?
      I guess I'm going to be saying this often today. All you have to do is close the passport, there is a faraday cage in the cover that is completed when the cover is closed.
      --
      Cliff Claven
      K.E.G. Party Chairman
      Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
    6. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1
      Uh-huh.

      I think I am going to trust the cover that I provide.

      Bruce

    7. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by flanksteak · · Score: 1

      Why use RFID if it only works when the passport is open? What makes it better than barcodes?

    8. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by houghi · · Score: 1

      I can imagine how that went:

      This Passport has a RFID.
      - Wouldn't a barcode work?
      Yeah, but this one has a RFID.
      - But there is no read advatage. You need to open it, so you can easily use a barcode.
      Yeah, but this one has a wonderfull RFID.
      - But it will cost more and it won't make things safer then just using the cheaper barcode.
      Yeah, but this one has a frikkin' RFID.
      - ...
      It has a RFID.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by jaycemil · · Score: 1

      A barcode big enough to contain all the biometric info the chip can contain would be huge.

    10. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by owlstead · · Score: 1

      Where on the data page would you place a 64KB bar-code? This thing is used to store (biometric) data, not just a number. Barcodes are easy to fake as well. If the chip uses Active Authentication, it will be pretty hard to fake the chip. Besides that, 14443 communication is well understood and widely used. If it is well protected, there is little against it.

    11. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 1

      I think I am going to trust the cover that I provide.

      It's already been reported here on slashdot that the cover has to be tightly closed in order to make a functional faraday cage. I believe that the experimental results were that leaving it open just 5-10mm was enough to negate the shielding effects.

      So, make sure whatever cover you go with has a clasp.

    12. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by solitas · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but this one has a frikkin' RFID.

      Um, I _think_ that last line is gonne be more like:
      Will you please come quietly with us, Sir?

      --
      "It's time to take life by the cans." ~ Bender ("Bendin' in the Wind", ep. 3-13)
    13. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, it is enough to read the RFID when the cover is only slightly open. What prevents reading the data from 10 metres while the imigration officer is looking at the open passport?

    14. Re:Passport Cases Now Become Important by nacturation · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, it is enough to read the RFID when the cover is only slightly open. What prevents reading the data from 10 metres while the imigration officer is looking at the open passport?

      Hopefully all countries around the world will erect large walls and ban binoculars around immigration facilities.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  9. Moo by Chacham · · Score: 1

    I wonder if all they read will be one's passport.

  10. To the conspiracy wonks - entertain me by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh, please do try and foil (pun intended) the RFID readers. Please. And bring a friend with a video camera so we can watch the resulting hilarity on YouTube.

    1. Re:To the conspiracy wonks - entertain me by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      "Hilarity" and "YouTube" do not belong in the same sentence.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    2. Re:To the conspiracy wonks - entertain me by ultracool · · Score: 1

      I think not. They don't allow taking photographs in customs, so I doubt they will allow a video camera. It would have to be hidden.

  11. Range can be increased by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Informative
    There is a time-honored tradition of making RF signals go as far as possible. It's the first thing any kid tries with a walkie-talkie: how far can it go? It's possible to make RFID devices read from farther than designed by using higher power to energize the RFID and a higher-gain antenna to read its response. Certainly it will be practical to read these things as people walk through a door frame, with the proper equipment.

    Bruce

    1. Re:Range can be increased by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      The antenna part is obvious to me...I remember a while back an article about some people snooping those RFID gas cards using a high gain antenna, and it only makes sense that you're going to be able to pick up a radio signal with a sensitive antenna, once that signal is in the open.

      I'm not as clear on the "energizing" process. I understand that you get a stronger signal based on the amount of energy imparted to the chip, same as you would with any other radio transmitter. But what kind of upper limit exists on the process? Obviously the transmitter must have a physical limit, beyond which more power just burns it out. And since the transmission medium for the charge is air, I'd think your range there would also be pretty limited. I know you can jack the power on those RFID door card readers so that you can wave the card within a couple of feet of the door for it to trip.

      Is there any way to energize an unshielded card from more than, say, 5 feet away, or is the danger primarily from people with readers brushing up against you for a reading?

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    2. Re:Range can be increased by hcob$ · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Is there any way to energize an unshielded card from more than, say, 5 feet away, or is the danger primarily from people with readers brushing up against you for a reading?
      Sure, all that possible. If you leave your passport open(closing it completes the faraday cage in the cover). Of course, people can also read all the data on your passport whenever they open it using this ancient technology called "eyes". And if you want to extend their range, you just have to get a few "lenses" and you can see it a good ways away!
      --
      Cliff Claven
      K.E.G. Party Chairman
      Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
    3. Re:Range can be increased by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Is there any way to energize an unshielded card from more than, say, 5 feet away, or is the danger primarily from people with readers brushing up against you for a reading?

      The issues seem to be the following:
      1) RFID chips are activated by the EM energy delivered from the reader.
      2) When closed, the passports in question are contained in a complete farraday cage, blocking any EM radiation from passing between the inside and outside of the passport.
      3) When open, the regular rules of electromagnetic radiation hold true (inverse square law?). You need exponentially more radiation to power the passport each time you double the distance away you are.
      4) Devices with a 3V, 1A power supply are designed to read the cards at a distance of 3" (numbers pulled from my head; might not be 100% accurate). Using napkin mathematics, assuming a similar sized antenna, at 6", you would need 9V, and at 1' you would need 81V. At 2' you would need roughly 6.5kV. At 4' you would need roughly 43mV. This is to activate the chip, not to read it.
      5) Reading an already activated chip with a passively receiving device would be much simpler; it could easily be done from 10' away with a 3V power supply and a larger antenna.

      So, according to my flawed calculations: nobody is going to be reading a closed passport, only people with a pretty large generator are going to be activating and reading a passport from anywhere further away than a few inches, and anyone in line of sight (and some not in line of sight) could be reading your passport as it is simultaneously being read by official readers.

    4. Re:Range can be increased by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Sorry; in my parent post, mV should be MV - mega, not milli. That shows what not hitting the preview button can do. Oh well. It should be obvious from context.

    5. Re:Range can be increased by torako · · Score: 1

      It's not an inverse square law, E and B are proportional to 1/r. I agree with the rest, though :)

    6. Re:Range can be increased by swillden · · Score: 1

      Certainly it will be practical to read these things as people walk through a door frame, with the proper equipment.

      Hasn't been so far, not even given considerable commercial application for ISO 14443 chips that can be read at that distance. I'm not saying it's impossible, but smart people (i.e. the sort who design these things for a living) have been trying for the better part of a decade, without much success. That argues, at least, that it's not easy. The long-range reading that has been successfully demonstrated has been done by placing a small, powered "booster" transciever in close proximity to the chip.

      In this particular case there's also the issue of the shielding the US State Dept. has added to the passport covers, which essentially places the chip inside a Faraday cage when the passport is closed, and then the cryptographic authentication the chip requires before communicating with the reader. The crypto in question is a properly-designed protocol using AES as the base cipher and information printed on the inside cover to generate the authentication key (actual communication is encrypted and MACed with session keys derived from random data, obviously).

      If somehow your passport does come open (inside a purse, for example), it is possible for an unauthorized attacker to detect its presence and perhaps even to detect the nationality of the passport (based on differences in the power-on response). Even a legitimate, government-issued reader would have to have some way of identifying which passport is being scanned before it could retrieve any data from the chip. The normal way this is done is by opening the passport and placing it on an optical scanner which reads the data needed to generate the auth key. It's not clear to me how surrepetitious reading could be done, by anyone. To be really sure, put a rubber band around your passport so it can't fall open accidentally.

      The State Department's initial proposal omitted the ICAO-specified encryption and had no notion of shielding. Based on public outcry, the government revisited the design, deciding to add the encryption and even to go beyond ICAO recommendations to add the shielded covers.

      Honestly, though there is plenty of stupid security in the world, this isn't an example. These passports have been done right. They provide much more information to authorized users, faster, and more securely, and pose negligible risk to the holder.

      BTW, I have no relationship with the ICAO, any member organization, the US State Dept. or any company that makes these chips. I am, however, something of an expert in smart card technology, including ISO 14443 contactless cards, which these passports are. I have worked as a contractor on a couple of projects assisting (non-US) companies who were developing ICAO-compliant passport chips. My role was in optimizing performance, since initial implementations using the crypto protocol were a bit slow.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:Range can be increased by swillden · · Score: 1

      When open, the regular rules of electromagnetic radiation hold true (inverse square law?)

      In this case, the power delivered to the chip drops off according to an inverse cube law. The strength of the return signal attenuates by the inverse square of distance. Both effects come into play in limiting range. You'd think that the inverse cube side would dominate, but the attacker has the option of boosting the power almost without limit (though the result may be very unhealthy to anyone in the path). The chip's transmission strength, however, will not increase as the attacker boosts the input power. There's also the issue that delivering too much power to the chip will burn it out.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  12. TravelTags by EssTiDee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This really isn't all that horribly different from the TollTags, EasyPasses, and basically every other scannable devices that identifies the device-holder. Your passport is the property of the government -- has been, and will continue to be. If they want to make it easier to check / scan / whatever, so be it. While I worry about the security of their online database, it's not really any less secure than it has been in the past. I say there's no real change taking place here, except maybe if not too many of the people in front of me in line have lined their passport holder with tin foil, rig their chips with some hate-message, and/or any other potentially disturbing thing, perhaps the line might move a little faster and I'll make my connecting flight once in awhile...

    1. Re:TravelTags by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      This really isn't all that horribly different from the TollTags, EasyPasses, and basically every other scannable devices that identifies the device-holder.
      Ummm... The Government doesn't require me to have a "TollTags, EasyPasses" if I want to leave the country.

      Until "basically every other scannable devices that identifies the device-holder" is required by the gov't, then it really is horribly different.

      If you haven't gotten/renewed your passport, I told you so. Mine is good for another 10 years and doesn't come with a RFID chip.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:TravelTags by hcob$ · · Score: 1
      This really isn't all that horribly different from the TollTags, EasyPasses, and basically every other scannable devices that identifies the device-holder.
      Yeah, but those dont' have built in faraday cages...
      --
      Cliff Claven
      K.E.G. Party Chairman
      Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
    3. Re:TravelTags by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      " This really isn't all that horribly different from the TollTags, EasyPasses, and basically every other scannable devices..."

      And I don't use those either!!

      As another poster said, the govt. doesn't require you to have one for travel either...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    4. Re:TravelTags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "except maybe if not too many of the people in front of me in line have lined their passport holder with tin foil, rig their chips with some hate-message, and/or any other potentially disturbing thing, perhaps the line might move a little faster and I'll make my connecting flight once in awhile..."

      Those sons of bitches, forcing the government to strip-search us all. It's a crying shame. They should be thanking the officers for shipping them off to Gitmo. I mean, really, inconveniencing the government like that! I'll bet they won't even pay for their own prison costs after they're found innocent! Those ungrateful pampered children.

      And how dare they consider their own security... even worse, how dare they criticize our noble guardians and owners to their faces? Why can't they just line up nicely for the chopping block? Sheesh, even dumb cattle can do that, so why can't they?

  13. This will guarantee you an anal probe by wsanders · · Score: 1

    I know everyone understands PKI, right, but isn't this is equivalent to someone trying to spoof any random SSL-enabled web site with a CA_signed cert? (assuming the gov't doesn't screw up.) OF COURSE you can break it or spoof it, if you break the CA.

    It isn't designed to guarantee that the photo and the chip match, we can look at your face for that. It's to weed out the paranoid asshats who've tinkered with them, or, worse, have fake passports. Just like your browser throws up a warning if it can't figure out your SSL certificate.

    I think it's a reasonable tradeoff - your right to hide your identity, your right to make a fake passport, my right to make sure La Migra gives you an extra probe or two when you reenter the country.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  14. Fine by me by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have no problem with RFID in the passport, as long as it is implemented in an intelligent manner. I don't see it as any more of an invasion of privacy than the personal photo and address information, and also the log of my recent travels.

    I plan on having an aluminum foil carrying case for my RFID passport, when I get one, so it can't be read without being opened. Recently I saw a link to a company that makes wallets with a metal foil already embedded in the leather, so RFID chips can't be scanned remotely. The also sell a foil insert that goes in the bill area. I acn't remember the name though -- I thought it was a wordplay with 'wallet' and 'magnet', perhaps the word 'envelope'?

    The only thing I don't want is an RFID implant. You might wear a farraday armband, but the whole idea reminds me too much of Jews getting serial numbers tatooed shortly before they were shipped into the death camps.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
    1. Re:Fine by me by Clever7Devil · · Score: 1

      Revelations 13: 16-17

      And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

      and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

      Yikes! The sky is falling!

      --
      "By the time they had diminished from 50 to 8, the other dwarves began to suspect 'Hungry.'" -Gary Larson
    2. Re:Fine by me by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Hmm... here's a freebie name for someone to use if it's not the one you were thinking of:
      MagneCarte

  15. Range is a function of the reader by everphilski · · Score: 1

    In this case, the readers are rather limited. 10cm, give or take.

    1. Re:Range is a function of the reader by Pictish+Prince · · Score: 1
      In this case, the readers are rather limited. 10cm, give or take.

      You're talking about the ones in plain sight.

      --
      Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
    2. Re:Range is a function of the reader by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reader at the airport is limited. The reader being surreptitiously carried by the American-tourist-targeting mugger/kidnapper/whatever in whatever foreign country you're going to won't be.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Range is a function of the reader by megaditto · · Score: 1

      How about the ones that the terr'ists stow away?

      1) Paint an RFID bullseye on all the 'card-carrying Americans abroad.
      2)
      3) Profit?

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    4. Re:Range is a function of the reader by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Its not just a function of the reader. The standard RFID tags are passive, powered off the signal from the reader. If you make them active (amplify the signal using onboard batteries) and use a bigger aerial, then the range can be increased considerably.

    5. Re:Range is a function of the reader by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      The reader being surreptitiously carried by the American-tourist-targeting mugger/kidnapper/whatever in whatever foreign country you're going to won't be.

      I was as shocked as you will probably be when you read this, when I found out that Florida is not, in fact, a foreign country.

    6. Re:Range is a function of the reader by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean Prophet? *ducks*

  16. My main issues: by mitchell_pgh · · Score: 1

    - I wonder how long it will take to break the security? [it's going to happen]
    - I wonder from what distances the RDIF card will be able to be read? [I hear a few inches to a few yards and beyond]
    - I wonder what interesting ways people will use this information. [I'm in marketing and can already think of a few]

    1. Re:My main issues: by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

      I also wonder what happens if a strong electromagnetic wave burns out the chip while you are outside your country. What happens when you return?

      --
      So say we all
    2. Re:My main issues: by radu.stanca · · Score: 1
      - I wonder how long it will take to break the security? [it's going to happen] - I wonder from what distances the RDIF card will be able to be read? [I hear a few inches to a few yards and beyond] - I wonder what interesting ways people will use this information. [I'm in marketing and can already think of a few]
      Indeed, why no one is talking about RFID real insecurities? Remember this guys?
  17. aluminum cases through security anyhow? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Has anyone actually tried to take an aluminum foil wrapped anything through airport security? I assume that would look suspicious to anyone, i.e. why the hell is it in foil, is it a bomb, etc. Did you get harassed at all? I actually just got a passport and am travelling far, far away, so I *could* try it...

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:aluminum cases through security anyhow? by jargon82 · · Score: 1

      Nice knowing you ;)

    2. Re:aluminum cases through security anyhow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are going through airport security, you wouldn't be hiding your passport now would you. The tin-foil is not to keep it from being read by airport security, it's to keep it from being read by EVERYONE ELSE.

    3. Re:aluminum cases through security anyhow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what happens when the RFID gets mysteriously disabled? Does the void your passport?

    4. Re:aluminum cases through security anyhow? by chemguru · · Score: 1

      I get stopped EVERY time I forget to remove my spare anti-static bags from my laptop bag. The scanners can't see through them so a manual search is then ordered. I imagine the same would occur with Al foil.

      --
      --Chemguru
    5. Re:aluminum cases through security anyhow? by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Has anyone actually tried to take an aluminum foil wrapped anything through airport security?

      Sure, you should see the hassle that Metal bands like Spinal Tap have to go through trying to get aluminum foil covered cucumbers through airport security!

      Its really humiliating to have to pull it out of your pants, makes the crotch look all saggy.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    6. Re:aluminum cases through security anyhow? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "as anyone actually tried to take an aluminum foil wrapped anything through airport security?"

      Yes I have....I was bringing some andouille sausage with me to cook at a friend's house...I did the usual to keep it fresh for travel. I froze it solid, wrapped in paper towels, and then wrapped in aluminum foil.

      I've done this in checked baggage and in carry on...no big deal.

      I could see they had checked the checked baggage, but, had not unwrapped it....and nothing done with the carry on, which was my backpack.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  18. Still .... by wsanders · · Score: 1

    - I mean it doesn't have personal information, even if decoded, so what use is it to anyone, except that it identifies you with a big random number like a cookie does.

    Although I do hear there were plans to put this into the data in clear text:

    "YOU'LL BE SORY THAT YOU MESSED WITH THE U.S.of A.
    'CAUSE WE'LL PUT A BOOT IN YOUR ASS IT'S THE AMERICAN WAY"

    OK, maybe the case isn't such a bad idea after all.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:Still .... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Perhaps someone could put that data on their own RFID chip, and cross the borders using your identity, not thiers?

      Passports already have electronically scannable data in them. The chip is pointless.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:Still .... by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      I mean it doesn't have personal information, even if decoded, so what use is it to anyone, except that it identifies you with a big random number like a cookie does.

      Wherever you go, anywhere in the world, anyone who gets within a few feet of you can conclusively identify you as a U.S. citizen if they so wish to. (I assume there is some common code that identifies it as a U.S. passport.)

      I've never seen the state department do anything that jeopardizes the safety of American travelers as much as this will.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    3. Re:Still .... by oyenstikker · · Score: 1

      But you don't show your cookies to anyone other than the one who gave it to you. Else you would be trackable.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    4. Re:Still .... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I mean it doesn't have personal information, even if decoded, so what use is it to anyone, except that it identifies you with a big random number like a cookie does.

      Huh? You mean all of this personal info (PDF, see page 16) ??? You'll note that encryption is optional, but data integrity via a 1-way hash is mandatory.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    5. Re:Still .... by Curmudgeonlyoldbloke · · Score: 1

      Wherever you go, anywhere in the world, anyone who gets within a few feet of you can conclusively identify you as a U.S. citizen if they so wish to.

      They pretty much can now, even before you've opened your mouth - from a combination of dress, mannerisms, etc. Once you start speaking, the accent confirms it. Social norms in different (Western) countries are often very different and the game of "guess the country of origin of your fellow travellers" at an airport is surprisingly easy.

    6. Re:Still .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, now build a machine that can reliably identify the country of origin of someone that pass within a few feet of it. One of the big concerns is that it would allow the creation of smart IED devices which could be placed all over the place and activated without a terrorist having to watch each location to determine who is present.

    7. Re:Still .... by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      That was a quote from the GP. Did you intend to reply to them instead of me?

      Your post proved my point - encryption is optional, and the data in the MRZ section isn't encrypted anyway. That includes issuing country.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    8. Re:Still .... by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      And you are assuming that I'm as stupid as the standard American traveler. I know how to dress for the countries I visit, I know when to keep my mouth shut, and can get by in German well enough disguise my accent, especially German isn't the native language of the person I'm talking to, either.

      The other reply has a very good point, too. IEDs that explode when an American walks by can now be standardized and mass produced.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  19. Walking in a checkpoint with a mu metal case... by sam0vi · · Score: 0

    ... and if you are not in a $2000 suit, i'd say you are in for a world of trouble

    --
    When my Karma level reaches 0 I feel in piece with the Universe
  20. Schneier says "rewew NOW" by MrAtoz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For what it's worth, Bruce Schneier is recommending that everyone renew their passports now so that you can avoid having a chipped one for another 10 years:

    The security mechanisms on your passport chip have to last the lifetime of your passport. It is as ridiculous to think that passport security will remain secure for that long as it would be to think that you won't see another security update for Microsoft Windows in that time. Improvements in antenna technology will certainly increase the distance at which they can be read and might even allow unauthorized readers to penetrate the shielding.

    As he says, "You don't want to be a guinea pig on this one."

    He also says you can disable the chip by running the passport through the microwave, but "although the United States has said that a nonworking chip will not invalidate a passport, it is unclear if one with a deliberately damaged chip will be honored." My guess is that it would result in a long and painful trip to the customs interrogation area.

    1. Re:Schneier says "rewew NOW" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that in general you are not allowed to renew your passport while it is valid. Even if you claim that it was stolen, you will be given a new one, but it will not be valid as long as you think: it keeps the date of the old one. Furthermore, it might happen that you need the new model for entering some countries (say US) and that means getting another one.

    2. Re:Schneier says "rewew NOW" by MisterBlue · · Score: 1

      My whole family just renewed passports and the new passports we received in the mail last week were "electronic passports".

      It's too late.

    3. Re:Schneier says "rewew NOW" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've had some RFID bades for 8 years. Wave them with in a couple of inches of the door and the door opens. If you put them in your back pocket and sit down that is enough to flex the anntena them such they die (still with no visable damage). If you keep them in your wallet they survive just fine.

    4. Re:Schneier says "rewew NOW" by Misanthropy · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I was thinking. Just got my new one in June. No chip. Expires 2016.

  21. Fools by tocs · · Score: 1
    The U.S. completed a live test of the e-Passports in April 2006.

    But they did not give the exact date. Maybe it is all a sad joke.

  22. shielded cases for 18 dollars by fantomas · · Score: 4, Interesting

    http://www.difrwear.com/products.shtml

    looks like somebody's already selling them Bruce!

  23. Microwave Ovens by thorkyl · · Score: 1

    Solve RFID tag issues.

    But then again so do really large magnetic fields.

    I have a big magnet just waiting for my new passport.

    But then again, why are they doing it?
    Are they just getting rid of mounds of paper?
    or are they tracking you as you go around the world using black choppers?

    --
    I hear voices in my head. Oh wait, thats just me talking again...

    --
    -- I am the NRA, enough said...
  24. Re:can they be opened with a Diebold key or bar ke by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    No, they can't be opened with a key, but shortly after passing through passport control, you can find all your information online with Google. Very handy. Now you can never forget who you are...

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  25. Typical Response without knowing the facts by unPlugged-2.0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Come on slashdot-folks I expected better than all these comments about tin-foil hats.

    It's bad enought that I have to put up with this any time I talk to any non-techie about the fact that I work for an RFID company and no I am not evil and do not wish to track their every move and alert someone that they are using the bathroom too much.

    --Now for the Facts--

    There are two main categories for RFID systems on the market today. These are near field systems that
    employ **inductive coupling** of the transponder tag or Smart Label to the reactive energy circulating around the reader antenna, and far field systems that couple to the real power contained in free space propagating electromagnetic plane waves.

    The passports are (repeat after me) *inductive* which means that they are activated by a magnetic field which is amplified by that metal loop you see to provide power to read the memory on the chip. The claims that someone could build a reader to read your tag from even 10 or 20 feet away is ridiculous. It would require the creation of such a big magnetic field that it would probably zap all magnetic material (such as hard drives, floppy discs, usb keys) that I am sure someone would notice. Also in order to read the reflection of the magnetic field which is what determines the response (RFID works like an echo you yell at something and wait for the echo to figure out what the id is) you would need such a big receiver (note this is still for 10 - 20 feet only) that you would literally look like someone out of the verizon commercial.

    I know us techies are generally oblivious to the outside world but I think if you saw someone like this within 10 feet you should generally notice. Also you should run because that magnetic energy will probably fry your nads among with other crucial body parts you may never use (sorry couldn't resist).

    The only real danger is that some hot woman with an rfid reader decides to bump into you and just happen to place her hand where your passport is. If you foresee that happening a lot then I suggest you get a tin-foil cover. However if that happens to you a lot then you are probably not on slashdot and reading this anyways.

    Sorry but I am a little sick and tired of hearing about all these security concerns by people who don't know how these systems actually work. Can you tell?

    1. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by Ludedude · · Score: 3, Interesting
      "Sorry but I am a little sick and tired of hearing about all these security concerns by people who don't know how these systems actually work. Can you tell?"

      Sorry, but I am a little sick and tired about hearing about how there are no security concerns from the people who don't care about anything but selling their products to a government that wants more control over its people. Do you care?

      --
      Then != than you morons.
    2. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by MisterBlue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most of the the comments in this forum are uninformed...

      The passport case already has protection so the RFID cannot be read when the passport is closed. No need for tin-foil cases. (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/70433.htm)

      The contents of the RFID is your identifying information signed by a government key. The encryption has already been broken, but until the signing keys are compromised, new contents cannot be put into the RFID (refer to the many docuements on hashing and signing technologies).

      There has been a lot of complaining about the RFID and after all the hearings, things were done to make the implementation better. My complaint is why they chose RFID -- if you have to open the passport, wouldn't an optical reader do just as well?

    3. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good points. However, there are two issues with electronic passports:
      1) Someone can still read it remotely, and get access to all kinds of personally identifying information. Yes, you have to get close, but it still is quite possible. Ever seen pickpockets at work? They manage to *remove* your wallet without you noticing it. Considering the potential damage that can result from someone getting their hands on your passport, I'd rather not make it easier for people to access them.

      2) You don't know what's on your passport. Yes, there are commercial RFID readers out there. Yes, you can probably buy one. Yes, you might even get it to work properly. But at what cost? Besides, is there any encrypted information on there? I'm sure the friendly US government won't give you access to the data on it. As for the dangers of what's on there... it will basically work like a permanent tag that people will trust completely. Just as an example of how easy it is to screw with these things, my current passport is a replacement for a lost one. However, some nitwit in database entry decided to mark my current passport as lost. Which means that everytime I enter the country, I get to sit for 45 minutes in the special triage section of customs and immigration. And it can't be fixed either - I asked several times.

      In short, there is little benefit for me, but a whole lot of risk. I most likely will just fry my RFID chip when I get my new passport.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    4. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

      As a guess as to why RFID? THey were sold a bill of goods that this will make counterfiting harder.

    5. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by jrumney · · Score: 1

      The only real danger is that some hot woman with an rfid reader decides to bump into you and just happen to place her hand where your passport is.

      I'm gonna start keeping my passport down my pants. Just in case.

    6. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      a government that wants more control over its people.

      Please explain how RFIDs are going to increase the control the government holds over passport holders. RFIDs may be a bad idea, but there is nothing that will help the government control people here.

    7. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by unPlugged-2.0 · · Score: 1

      You do make some good points but they are not anything that are not dangers right now.

      1) If somebody stole your passport right now they have an easily readable number as opposed to a chip which they would have to invest in expensive hardware for and also happen to be a hacker of sorts or know how to go on blackhat forums and find the encryption algorithm for the US passports. Don't you think this would be a much bigger barrier to entry than just a passport with all your information printed out.

      2) Yes you really don't know what is on the passport and this is an excellent point. But really lets face it do you know how much information they have correlated to your ssn? Or how much information is secretly encoded in the bar stripe of your credit card? Neither do I, does that mean there is nothing there?

      I think that if you zapped your passport you are probably going to have an unpleasant search at customs or check-in.

      I am already brown so I have to go through that quite frequently. I really don't want to give them any extra chances :)

    8. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by unPlugged-2.0 · · Score: 1

      Ok first of all I am not selling any RFID products. I work for an RFID software company that is working on making this technology more accessible to regular people. Also I work on Open Source to make this free for others with interest. How am I trying to push an agenda?

      Second of all there are tons of security concerns but the physical limitations of RFID are so severe especially with the ones that are used on the passports that you would have to steal someone's passport and invest in a lot of equipment and programmers to do so.

      All I am trying to say is that it is in no way less secure than it is right now. You are not really losing anything and meanwhile the government gains a lot of benefits.

      As for the government tracking your every move they do that anyways didn't you ever watch the X-Files. Come on now.

    9. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      You're right, the points I raised are not fundamentally new issues that are strictly tied to RFID chips. However, it is much easier to exploit these existing issues with RFID chips. Want to get the passport information from 100 people in an hour? Stand in the subway next to people arriving at any international terminal. Same thing with data on the passport. Yes, there's plenty of correlation out there already (though nothing on credit cards - at least not the dumb magnetic stripe ones). But that doesn't mean I want more of it.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    10. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by Ludedude · · Score: 1

      Anything that can be used to track the whereabouts of a populace, be it RFID, cameras, GPS in cellphones, can be used by a government to control its subjects. Once you lose your ability to go anywhere without being followed, you lose your freedom.

      --
      Then != than you morons.
    11. Re:Typical Response without knowing the facts by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So, how is RFID in my passport (expires in 8 years, so I have a while before I have to worry about it anyway) sitting in my dresser drawer at home helping the government track me? For the few times a year when I travel internationally, my name is on passenger manifests, tracked through immigration/customs, and such anyway. So how is the RFID going to change this at all? It doesn't help the government track me at all, other than changing a 3 second swipe of a magnetic card to a 1 second RFID read, saving me time and the government (and thus me) money, and having it be a little bit harder to forge, there are no effects of an RFID enclosed in a Farraday cage on an item I carry a couple times a year.

      You sound like a crackpot that hates all government, rather than someone coming up with rational and well thought out explanations of how it is going to be misused and abused by the government.

  26. Renew Now by jay2003 · · Score: 1

    I sent in my passport in for renewal about a month ago since it expires next year and it came back without RFID. I suspect if you send in a renewal the next 2 weeks to the National Passport Center, you'll get a new one sans-RFID. I now have 10 years before I have to worry about passport RFID and tin foil hats for my passport. Hopefully by the next time I have to renew, the State Department will have realized their stupidity and gone to contact chip rather than RFID.

  27. 13 million seems awfully high by notyou2 · · Score: 1

    U.S. passports -- about 13 million will be issued in 2006

    Is this really correct? That would mean that over the course of a decade, roughly 130 million passports are issued? So there are 100-something million active passports... 1 in 3 americans (of all ages). That seems high.

    1. Re:13 million seems awfully high by robogun · · Score: 1

      The number has spiked due to the new requirement that all people crossing the border hold passports. Next time you're in the post office, take note of all the people applying for passports.

      There are a lot of people who cross the border every day on business. Previously, only a drivers license was required for readmittance from Canada and Mexico.

    2. Re:13 million seems awfully high by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      >the new requirement that all people crossing the border hold passports

      If you are a US citizen, you still don't need a passport to go to Mexico, but you sure as hell need one to come back.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  28. South Park quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it's like San Fransisco is more of a European city, like Paris or Milan.
    </smug>

    1. Re:South Park quote by d_54321 · · Score: 1

      In other words, it serves San Francisco right for being so smug?

  29. Why would you assume that? by wsanders · · Score: 1

    What would be in the passport besides a long random number? Most other countries (not counting failed states) will be doing this exact same thing in a few years.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:Why would you assume that? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Well, because I assume that countries will want to be able to read each other's RFID codes. Great Britain now has RFID codes in their passports; of course they'll make it so our readers can read their passports, and vice versa.

      Then all of Europe shares in the system, then parts of Asia, then so many readers are out there that can at least decode the country (if nothing else) that it becomes likely the data will leak out to third parties.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  30. You don't understand the PKI by wsanders · · Score: 1

    Any country using the chip will instantly see that the chip has been tampered with, just like you know an SSL web site has been tampered with then the certificate you get doesn't match the signature at the CA. The face in the chip won't match the face on the passport, and you'll have some splainin' to do, hopefully in a country with due process.

    If they don't read the chip, then yes they can forge your picture just like they do now.

    Like Bruce Parens said, the only risk is that that guy walking by you on the street with the backpack with the radio antenna coming out of it is scanning your passport, and then the data is of no more use than the cookies that /. put on your browser today. I suppose they could aggregate the information to track you movement, assuming a worldwide cabal of dedicated passport war-scanners. If you are THAT paranoid, might as well stay at home with your tinfoil hat on.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:You don't understand the PKI by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Any RFID chip that broadcasts a particular signal is indistinguishable from any other RFID chip that broadcasts the same signal. Thus to the scanning equipment, it is the same passport. The cloning of e-passports has already been demonstrated.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:You don't understand the PKI by kbielefe · · Score: 1
      Any RFID chip that broadcasts a particular signal is indistinguishable from any other RFID chip that broadcasts the same signal.

      This is not a chip that broadcasts the exact same signal over and over. Under this type of authentication, at least part of the signal changes every time in a way that appears completely random. You'd require physical access to the passport, some pretty sophisticated equipment, and (depending on the implementation) possibly quite a bit of time in order to clone it -- eavesdropping on a couple transmissions would not be enough.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  31. it's election time...bug your candidate! by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

    How about this as a creative solution--bother your incumbent congressman or congressional candidate, ask them if they support unjustifiable technology that can prove to be a risk to US citizens abroad.

    I'm telling both the guys running for my district (which, fortunately, is a competitive one) that I'll vote for the guy who votes to repeal the REAL ID Act and, at the very least, makes the RFID chip optional in new passports.

  32. E-passport images by Misanthropy · · Score: 1

    Check out the over-the-top patriotic imagery in the new "e-passports"

    http://travel.state.gov/passport/eppt/eppt_2501.ht ml

    Is this some kind of reverse psychology?

  33. only a matter of time ... by cycle003 · · Score: 1

    While implementing RFID does add a layer of forgery protection, it is only a matter of time until someone finds a way to exploit the security features. Currently, if someone forges a passport, they only need to incorporate their picture into it. Once cracked, a forged or hacked RFID chip can simply be incorporated into a forged passport.

    Although I'm not too keen about passports containing RFID chips, I'm pleasantly surprised that the gov't actually considered public feedback and did a decent job of implementing security features. The problem, however, is that people tend to become overly confident and reliant in such technology. Image the possibilities if (when) the ability to alter the RFID chip is realized. One scenario that's not often considered is one in which a hacker could cause an unsuspecting victim to be scrutinized by authorities by modifying the RFID data to differ from the printed info. Although this example may not be as dangerous as those involving forgery, it sure could provide an advantage to an unscrupulous business competitor.

    The State Dept. has only confirmed that one the 13 or 14 passport agencies, the Colorado Passport Agency, is issuing passports with RFID chips. This agency began issuing them on Aug 14, and since all agencies are expected to be issuing them this year, there may be more agencies doing so.
    1. Re:only a matter of time ... by kbielefe · · Score: 1
      Although this example may not be as dangerous as those involving forgery, it sure could provide an advantage to an unscrupulous business competitor.

      That's what's so amusing about conspiracy theories: common sense not required. You get hold of your enemy's passport, and what do you use it for? Inconveniencing him at the airport one time.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  34. Is that Tin Foil on your passport or by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    are you happy to see me?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  35. Range function of reader, threat infinite by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    player 1 said: The reader being surreptitiously carried by the American-tourist-targeting mugger/kidnapper/whatever in whatever foreign country you're going to won't be.

    player 2 said: I was as shocked as you will probably be when you read this, when I found out that Florida is not, in fact, a foreign country.

    Not to mention people waiting by the baggage carousels to read your passports for any international airline, and the people in cars next to you going to Canada and Mexico.

    Going to be a lot of cloned passports.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  36. change by sethwm2 · · Score: 1

    SOOO changeable.. Proven is hacking conventions

  37. Yes! HD's in anti-static bags look like drugs by SomethingOrOther · · Score: 1


    Comming back into the UK, Stanstead Airport customs.

    I get asked to open my bag containing 6 Hard Drives in anti-static bags.
    Customs raise an eybrow. Only then do I realise each drive looks exactly like a brick of hash wraped in foil.

    Dressing like a typical stoner probably didn't help either.

    --
    Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
    Don't believe what you read is the truth.
  38. Where to buy/how to make an RFID reader? (writer?) by lpq · · Score: 1

    How does one get a hold of an RFID reader? Are there writable RFID's? Like can I create my own RFID's and put them on things in my house (with my own numbering system, I'm not sure it would be a privacy issue (?)), so I can constantly find things like my keys, the remotes...etc...?

    I'd like to know when something has an RFID in it as well...I bought a pair of leather work gloves at Home Despot the other day. There was no obvious tag -- but she deactivated them anyway and they beeped. I find out later there is a tag sewn into the leather label that is stitched into the glove. Not so easy to remove without a seam ripper.

    I like to regularly remove store tags when I get things home, but some of them are getting harder to find. Of real annoyance is my local Longs (a high-priced, "5 & 10" -- that's 5 and 10 Euros, not US cents, as the dollar is deflating in value ~ 7-9% / year since Bush took office). They stick the RFID's on the written labels of medical instructions on over-the-counter medicines, hiding text, and ripping off large parts of the label when removed. But even a small box of No-Doz gets a tag these days with No-Doz rising to $.15/tab in the cheapest size. Inflation, biting into my caffiene in a serious way -- they only used to be ~.10/tab a few years back. Ouch!