Slashdot Mirror


California's Wireless Road Tolls Easily Hackable

An anonymous reader writes "Nate Lawson, a researcher at RootLabs, has found a way to clone the wireless transponders used by the Bay Area FasTrak road toll system. This means you can copy the ID of another driver onto your own device and, as a result, travel for free while others foot the bill. Lawson also raises the interesting point of using the FasTrak system to create false alibis, by overwriting one's own ID onto another driver's device before committing a crime. Luckily, Lawson wasn't sued before he could reveal his research, unlike those pesky MIT students."

354 comments

  1. sounds familiar by gentooligan · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think I read about this in little brother.

    1. Re:sounds familiar by Zygfryd · · Score: 1, Informative

      Mod parent up.

      The book linked is definitely relevant and the post has nothing to do with trolling.

      I smell moderator abuse.

    2. Re:sounds familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's modded as "Informative"

    3. Re:sounds familiar by Z00L00K · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hardly surprising for anybody in the business of computers and wireless devices.

      If it's possible to hack - it will be hacked.

      Another way to keep under the radar is to pay cash.

      There are cameras at the toll booths, but they aren't a big problem for anybody with some simple skills.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    4. Re:sounds familiar by eyrieowl · · Score: 1

      not the mod who did that...but c'mon, you can understand why, if you haven't been to/heard of craphound.com, you could look at that url and think something fishy is going on.... it does make me wonder, though...should a responsible mod try to visit a given link to verify that it is, indeed, a rickroll/malware before modding troll?

    5. Re:sounds familiar by HungryHobo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm waiting for anyone out there who doesn't like these systems to cause a little chaos.

      Imagine grabbing the ID of the mayor as he drives by(pretty damn easy) then it's just a matter of wandering through a carpark programming every tag with a matching code.

    6. Re:sounds familiar by Zygfryd · · Score: 1

      Yes, a rickroll won't hurt you and you can always use a different browser if you're afraid your regular one isn't secure enough. I'd expect a minimum of actually knowing what a post is about before moderating it.

    7. Re:sounds familiar by Vexor · · Score: 1

      Maybe that's why /.'ers don't read TFA...the fear of being rickrolled (rickphobia?). More on the main topic: It's likely they'll tag a fine to this. Probably along the lines of identity theft. Even piggy-backing on wireless is considered a felony these days.

      --
      ~Vexed and loving it!
    8. Re:sounds familiar by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      It's modded as "Informative"

      John Titor, is that you?

    9. Re:sounds familiar by patrick_soto · · Score: 1

      it is in little brother

  2. Cameras at every toll booth by maynard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And they can record license plates. I think this hack has little criminal viability. Anyone who used it extensively would be caught in short order. Though authorities might be willing to let the criminal conduct continue on until the criminal passed the felony threshold.

    1. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by introspekt.i · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Unless you dirtied up your license plates so they weren't recognizable by those pesky cameras they use at the toll stations...but hey, I'm from the midwest...wtf are toll booths?

    2. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Aphoxema · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only problem is that they probably started this system to cut on costs and cut out human error. I doubt they'll actually put in any protection or change the system, they'll just try to crack down on people that commercialize it like blueboxing and cable descramblers.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    3. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      In toronto we have an electronic toll as well. Cameras and such and completely unmanned.

      We have a law against dirty license plates. You may save on cash from using the highway, but some police officer will eventually hit you with a ticket (they do stop people with dirty plates) and your insurance rates will go up.

      Tolled roads are very abnormal in Canada, but this one works reasonably well.

    4. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by neapolitan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yep - that was my first thoughts too. Driving with an unreadable license plate, though, is grounds to get you pulled over anyway.

      In case you didn't know, most toll booth places have:

          Cameras front-mounted to take a picture of YOU or passengers...

          Cameras in the back to take a picture of your plate...

          Occasional cops sitting at the side of the road that are ready to pull you over.

      It's academically interesting (and it should be) but not useful for the criminal. You can always simply drive through a checkpoint without an ez-pass, and most likely nothing will happen for a long time. Is it worth it? Nope.

      --
      Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
    5. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by PoliTech · · Score: 1

      ...but hey, I'm from the midwest...wtf are toll booths?

      I'm guessing that you've never been to Illinois. "Welcome to Illinois! Pay toll."

    6. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by PC+and+Sony+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      The real use of this 'hack' is to screw over your pesky neighbors. Especially if you keep doing it.

    7. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by mweather · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a sad day when getting your car dirty raises your insurance rates. My lawn is brown, and I don't pay anything extra on my homeowners insurance for it.

    8. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      I just drove cross country (from Seattle to D.C.). Illinois, Indiana and Ohio all use toll roads. The Midwest is not uniquely different from anywhere else; toll roads are a state policy, not a way of life.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    9. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The best part of Illinois tolls is that they are "half Price" for "I-Pass" cars and trucks. From out of state? Paying cash? You pay double!

    10. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Funny
      "We have a law against dirty license plates. "

      Well, just rig up some sort of James Bond plate changing mechanism....where you can flip the plate, or just obscure it when going through the booth, then hit the switch, and set it to normal again.

      I've been thinking of something like this for the stupid red light cameras they've been putting in down here in NOLA.

      Back on the ez-pass system. For awhile I was having to cross the bridge across lake pontchartrain, and it was a toll bridge. I just don't like the idea of having a system track my movements, so I just paid cash...no toll tag for me. Sure, it costs a dollar more, but, worth it to me.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but a brown lawn doesn't exactly conceal your identity last I checked.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    12. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by kg9ov · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ohhh.... you must mean the great state of Chicago...

    13. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      Heh, you might luck out with an e-z pass, but the one time I went through FasTrak in Southern CA with the company car with an out of date transponder, my company got hit with fines.

      Very quick turnaround too.

      (Served them right for not keeping it current. Actually, I think they changed the car it was in so the plates didn't match, but either way, I wasn't driving a configuration the booth liked.)

    14. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a technology that's supposed to be an improvement requires cameras at every booth, and people & equipment to maintain the recordings, is it really an improvement? I think not

    15. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by wattrlz · · Score: 1

      You do realize they usually take your picture when you pay cash too, right?

    16. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if you stopped running red lights you wouldn't have a problem with the red light cameras taking your picture?

      I mean, come on - I am against taking pictures of everything all the time, but the red light cameras are one where they are pretty foolproof at only taking pictures of scofflaws who are endangering everyone else. That seems to be a good thing.

    17. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lived in Illinois for 24 years. Never paid a toll at any point on any road in the state. Of course, I never went to Chicago. The only time I have ever paid tolls is when I went to visit my family in Florida, and then only if I go through Orlando. You can avoid them there if you go through Tampa.

    18. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Chainsaw76 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "pretty foolproof"
      Your kidding right? There have been many cases of the Red Light Companies moving sensors around to catch people who Hadn't run the red light. And the one time I got a ticket from this system, the plate was unreadable, the Dark 4 door sedan pictured didn't look anything like my white 2 seat convertible, and we (my car and I) were 800 miles away at the time on the time stamp.

      -J

    19. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "You do realize they usually take your picture when you pay cash too, right? "

      Why would they need to do that? I don't recall seeing any cameras at the toll booth when I handed the $3 or whatever it was to the attendant.

      Even so, at least there is not a quick and easy way to find out when I was there on a computer like with the EZ passes....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    20. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      having visited Toronto, I must say, it is the only city in the world where I feel at home other than my own back here in the states. The hackable thing in Toronto was more the subway ticket system... Damn pesky MIT students! The roads were way too hectic to drive on though, and I still can't figure out how much a litre is and why it's so cheap compared to our evil american gallon.

    21. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      "I mean, come on - I am against taking pictures of everything all the time, but the red light cameras are one where they are pretty foolproof at only taking pictures of scofflaws who are endangering everyone else. That seems to be a good thing."

      As the other poster said, there have been cases where the private company running these cameras weren't making enough money, and shortened the yellow light, or even rigged the cameras to take pics while light was yellow, but, showing red on the ticket. Studies have shown that in a VERY high percentage of cases, if they extended the length of the yellow light at troublesome intersections, that the number of people running red lights almost dropped to near zero.

      One of my other problems with the system here...was that the cameras aren't only taking pictures of light runners. They have still and full motion cameras...they showed a case of cars sitting there at a red, and a car going around the front one and running the light, all in full motion. That means the cameras are running all the time...I don't like that.

      I'd heard that someone was bringing suit against them in that they are unconstitutional in the state of LA...in that they aren't on every intersection, and the law states something like there has to be equal enforcement on all LA roads,etc.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    22. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by chaim79 · · Score: 2, Funny

      If the chances of getting caught are high enough you can use it in reverse to screw your neighbors, program theirs to be some random person (or find one from a cop car) and let them explain it to the judge. :)

      --
      DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
      AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
      Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
    23. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by cwAllenPoole · · Score: 1

      Wow... with fines like that, most of us NJ drivers would simply skip out. People routinely pay $6 to cross a river to go to work, a $2 fine is a welcome change.

      --
      http://www.allen-poole.com/
    24. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      Tolled roads are very abnormal in Canada, but this one works reasonably well.

      I first read that as "Trolled", silly me!

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    25. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by popeye44 · · Score: 1

      We had 2 intersections here in Fresno that had Red Light Cameras. The company that put them in had a hell of a marketing department and sold the city on the idea. FF 2 years and Fresno made them pull the cameras and take down the poles etc. The company lied about how much money it would bring in. People in Fresno knew the lights would catch them and basically stopped running it. You can't make money if no one breaks the law. Better a few jump through a yellowed/red and get caught by regular police than no one ever doing it.

      --
      Inane Comments are Generously Disregarded
    26. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by mishehu · · Score: 1

      Illinois, the land of the waving palm (and I don't mean the trees... "donation" please...)

      At least with the I-Pass system the guys can't be skimming off the top in the counting rooms anymore...

    27. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by EMeta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, no. Better no one doing it. Running reds isn't like going 10 mph over the speed limit. People die from that. A lot. It really shouldn't be about the income.

    28. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      You can avoid them there if you aren't afraid of a few traffic lights, too. The toll roads are much nicer, though paradoxically, speed is more strictly enforced.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    29. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by sm62704 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm guessing that you've never been to Illinois. "Welcome to Illinois! Pay toll."

      The only toll roads in the whole state are north of I-80. Of course, you guys up there think Illinois' southern border is I-80 anyway.

      Uncyclopedia has a good article about our great state.

      Illinois boasts hundreds of thousands of miles of roadway, almost 1.7% of which are in drivable condition at any given time. The rest are under construction, fuelling the state's economy by adding needed jobs in the road construction industry, and the Illinois Political Patronage Brotherhood of Sign Holders and Shovel Leaners, which depends on constant road construction for its continued existence. To maintain the roads in this condition, state law requires concrete to contain at least 35% white corn meal (cleverly subsidizing the Illinois farmer as well as the road construction industry). It also mandates tar products to be replaced with black licorice in the manufacture of asphalt. During summer months, hapless Illinois home-owners across the state obtain big brushes and squeegees, and can be seen coating their driveways with a new layer of melted black licorice, vainly but valiantly attempting to prevent them (the driveways, not the home-owners) from disintegrating into grey pebbles. This explains the popular saying: "There are two seasons: Blizzard, and Tornado". Also synonymous with "Winter and Construction" in the North.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    30. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by timbck2 · · Score: 1

      Who modded this a Troll? I completely agree with it -- tickets for dirty license plates?

      --
      Absurdity: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion. -- Ambrose Bierce
    31. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by mshannon78660 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Down here (central Texas, Austin area), they have something called 'video tolling'. Essentially, anyone can go through the TxTag lanes, whether they have a transponder or not. If you have a transponder, you get a discount (I think it's 20%) off the cash rate; if you don't, you pay a premium (again, something like 20-33%) on the toll, plus a handling fee (something like $1 per bill). So yes, they can, in a completely automated fashion, take a picture of your license plate and record in a database exactly when you went through that toll plaza. If you drive on the toll road, you should not expect that anything will restore your anonymity.

    32. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by erroneus · · Score: 1

      That wouldn't work for long. MOST people generally drive the same areas on a routine basis. And even those people that don't could be flagged for chase. Essentially, once someone has been identified as using a false or copied code, they can take pictures of the vehicle and post it for chase along with the code being used. There are a variety of ways an individual can be flagged and the only way to continue doing it is to change vehicles and codes frequently and that would become a burdensome crime to maintain.

      The false alibi thing could conceivably work if you had proper cooperation. All one would need is to hire someone to drive your car while you drive theirs, but then again, under such a scenario, cloning transponder codes wouldn't even be necessary... just pass the person your car, your cell phone and credit card to make a gasoline purchase or two and you've got a pretty convincing alibi.

    33. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by pla · · Score: 1

      "The system is about to take a sweeping technological turn, doing away with booths, baskets, cash and relying on video cameras to bill drivers."

      How exactly do they plan to do that? Not everyone passing through their state lives there, or near enough to realistically expect them to sign up for EZ-Pass. Personally, I don't have it because, while I live in a state that does use EZ-Pass, I only go through the tolls perhaps twice a year.

      Clearly, the states would much rather switch to all electronic tolls (they seem to make a game of making the cash-accepting lanes as difficult to find as possible), but to do away with cash altogether? Not possible.

    34. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Just gotta love that. In addition, I've also heard of an automated speed camera sending a fine notice to a farmer for his antique tractor with a max speed of 8 kph - it said he was doing something in the high 80's with it.

      The funny one I saw recently sent a ticket to a guy - the picture showed the car was in the process of being towed.

      Of course, they're also throwing the ball back at you - you have to prove you're innocent, not the other way around.

      Back on the wireless toll roads, my first thought was that 'they even encrypt garage door openers to prevent this today!'. For anything more serious than a simple inventory, encrypted RFID devices should be the rule.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    35. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by schon · · Score: 1

      a brown lawn doesn't exactly conceal your identity last I checked.

      And last time I checked, a license plate doesn't hold your identity.

      Your drivers license holds your identity. Your license plate just says that the car is licensed to be on the public roadways.

    36. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I live in MI. When I go to Toronto, I use the 407. They never have a problem sending me the bill in the mail. There are no booths at all that I've ever seen.

    37. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I consider using the state-provided roads as a privilege, not a right, that requires your car to be identifiable by a valid licence plate.
      If the plates are obscured, either by dirt or by purpose, isn't it reasonable to give a ticket to deter this?

    38. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make a CAPTCHA out of your license plate.
      "But officer! It's readable by any human!"

    39. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by omeomi · · Score: 1

      I think I remember reading somewhere that they take pictures of everybody's license plate, but only save the ones of toll violators. So, if you don't trigger a violation in the system, your picture wouldn't be saved...maybe...

    40. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      It's always about income, why do you think there are over 1 million Americans in prison? The prison industry has to make money somehow.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    41. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by initdeep · · Score: 1

      and like a lightning bolt from a clear blue sky (thank you CS Lewis), the truth is revealed.

      A lisc plate DOES NOT identify a person.
      It is as stated above, merely a proof of right to be on public roads for the particular vehicle to which it is assigned.

    42. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by GSMacLean · · Score: 1

      Just layer this on top of your license plate, with a button in the car - turn your plate on and off. Someone build this, please! http://www.glass-resource.com/sub/special/privacy.htm

    43. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No more unreasonable than requiring people to wear their driver's license in a plastic badge holder while walking on public sidewalks. Papers, please.

      It should certainly be illegal to use such a tactic to evade a toll. That said, if you are not breaking the law, the only thing they truly have a legitimate need to see is the little colored sticker that says whether your plate has expired or not. Other than that, their "need" to read the plate and identify you is nothing more than a figment of their power tripping imaginations.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    44. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by initdeep · · Score: 2, Informative

      funny, i drive from des moines iowa to raleigh north carloina several times a year, passing through illinois, indiana and ohio, and never once payed a toll.

      all interstate driving too.

      seems like you went the wrong way to me.

    45. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I rode my motorcycle from Chicago to Milford, CT to see a Nine Inch Nails concert at the beginning of this month. I put my IPass (Illinois Tollway toll collection) transponder on the top of all my clothes/laptop/etc in my T-Bag (straps to my cruiser's backrest). Worked like a champ through Indiana (I-Zoom), the Pennsylvania turnpike, as well as on some huge bridge from New Jersey to Connecticut.

      Also, it'd be quite easy to switch to electronic tolls altogether. Everyone should get one (a transponder) to keep the flow of traffic moving (also, think of the cumulative fuel and maintenance saved if no one had to stop for cash tolls). If you go through and your transponder isn't working, they should read the plate and send a bill as Canada does. You'll always miss a few people because of dirty plates, but toll authorities could always strike back by requiring toll registration tied to the RFID tags now placed in all tires.

    46. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by TJamieson · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not only reasonable, sometimes it's the law. Any place where there is a lot of snow will typically have a few people pulled over for not clearing the snow from their bumpers to reveal their plate(s).

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    47. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So you consider the use of licence plates for cars a slippery slope?
      There is a very visible difference between taking a stroll on the sidewalk and controlling a several-ton metal hunk at high speeds.
      I sort of agree with your sentiment, except that I percieve using a car on the road is a privilege, and strolling on the sidewalk a right.

    48. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I consider using the state-provided roads as a right, not a privilege, like those other things that the state has been authorized (by the people) to take my money to do.

      When a private company builds its own damn roads, then it can be a privilege.

    49. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Driving with an obscured license plate is a traffic offense in every state, for reasons that should be obvious if you think about it for ten seconds.

    50. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Happens every winter here in Norway so I recognize that. They are pretty nice when stopping cars, not giving a ticket unless it is obvious that the driver is negligent (ie, the windscreen is mostly covered in snow).

    51. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by The+Yuckinator · · Score: 2, Informative

      If your insurance rates go up for a dirty license plate ticket then you're using the wrong insurance company.

      I'm also in Toronto and there are no demerit points attached to a dirty plate or a "407 proof" reflective plate cover so their toll cameras can't get see your plate. --at least I didn't lose any points when I was pulled for each of these reasons - in fact I didn't get a ticket for the dirty plate, I just had to clean it off right then and there. The reflective cover cost me a $103.75 fine though. (still a hell of a lot cheaper than paying the 407)

      For those of you who are interested: http://www.407etr.com/ this is an express toll highway that goes over the top of the Greater Toronto Area.

      Our provincial government built it and then decided that they didn't want to manage it any longer so they sold it off to a private company for pennies compared to what it cost to build.

      My favourite part is that if the 407 decides that you owe them money (whether they're right or wrong) then you must pay that bill before you're allowed to renew your license plate with the Province. Yes, you read that right. A private company, with just one small clerical error, can prevent me from renewing my car's plate.

    52. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I might have agreed with you until they use my tax dollars to pay for this "privilege." Which they effectively pry from my hands. No, I consider it a right. And it isn't state-provided, either... it's tax-payer-provided.

      --
      "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
    53. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Do you suggest that everyone that does not have a licence, or has had it revoked, should still be able to use this privilege because they are paying taxes?

    54. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by charlesj68 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For anything more serious than a simple inventory, encrypted RFID devices should be the rule.

      Ah, but you must understand that to the "Powers That Be" you are just simple inventory.

    55. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Billhead · · Score: 1

      I don't know if I can't see the tags in your message, but while a license plate cannot identify a person, they can be used to look up who the vehicle is registered too, and there is a reasonable chance that it would be registered to the one driving it.

    56. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      But it is also possible to use it to track back to the owner of the car.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    57. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by charlesj68 · · Score: 1

      The prison industry has to make money somehow.

      "No, seriously your Honor, it wasn't my fault. Big Jail made me do it."

    58. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by celle · · Score: 1

      "I consider using the state-provided roads as a privilege,"

      You forgot something, those "state-provided" roads are paid for by us taxpayers. We pay for it, we own it and can do as we like. So where's the privilege part again?

    59. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      That's not unique for Canada. We have it here in Europe too.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    60. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      "I consider using the state-provided roads as a privilege,"

      You forgot something, those "state-provided" roads are paid for by us taxpayers. We pay for it, we own it and can do as we like. So where's the privilege part again?

      So a guy with 10 DUIs to his name still has the right to drive whenever and however he wants? I think you should rethink your position on privilege vs. right with regards to public roads.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    61. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is government you're talking about. You're not being cynical enough.

    62. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

      Yup!

      Because when you ride the bus or take the taxi, you still pay, and you still use it. It is a right.

      --
      "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
    63. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do record and verify license plates as of 5 years ago in CA. My wife's grandfather borrowed her transponder and ended up getting a ticket.

    64. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by epedersen · · Score: 1

      All you need to do is find a way update the ID wireless. You then can update parking lots, and highways full of cars with them, and then they wouldn't know who is the one doing the copying.

    65. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      As I noted in a reply to a different post basically saying the same as you...
      You're basically saying that everyone that pays taxes are allowed to use the roads? Even though they don't have a licence, or said licence has been revoked?
      Even though the taxpayers pay (through the nose, I might add), are "the people" fit to control the use of the roads?

    66. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by fm6 · · Score: 1

      You can always simply drive through a checkpoint without an ez-pass, and most likely nothing will happen [nbc4.com] for a long time.

      Maybe in Maryland. In California, the camera will note your plate, and a computer will issue a ticket. Unless you have a FasTrak device and just forgot it, in which case they'll charge your account, though I think you can get hit with an extra fee if you do this too often.

    67. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Chickan · · Score: 1

      No, prisons DO NOT make money by housing inmates.

      However, it does provide a shit ton of jobs (and prevents the need for more jobs for the inmates if they were not incarcerated) which lowers the unemployed rate and helps keep politicians in power (and so they look "tough on crime")

      There were some profitable prisons back in the day in the south, were inmates were forced to do manual labor on a farm, but all of those programs got shit canned.

    68. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No, prisons DO NOT make money by housing inmates.

      Wrong.

      Look up the public corporation "Wackenhut". They own and operate many prisons here in the USA. As a public company, it's obvious they wouldn't be doing this if there weren't a profit in it for them.

    69. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Semantics. The bus/taxi presumably has this licence plate and a drive with a valid drivers licence. In your example, you are simply goods that are transported by someone that has the privilege.

    70. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Um, no. Better no one doing it. Running reds isn't like going 10 mph over the speed limit. People die from that. A lot. It really shouldn't be about the income.

      What planet are you from? Do you really think your local government gives two shits about safety and saving lives? These red-light and speed cameras are about making money. Here in Arizona, our governor Napolitano even said so outright (that we needed more speed cameras in order to increase revenue). There have been many, many cases of yellow lights being shortened, deliberately, in order to make more money, even though it has caused more crashes. However, contrary to what other posters have said, it's not usually the private companies that do this, but the city engineers, under direction from their local government.

    71. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 2, Informative

      FasTrak is also used access the Express Lanes on Highway 91, a 10 mile stretch between Riverside & Orange counties. There are no toll booths, but apparently they have Cameras to track down violators.

      Average highway speed on that road is easily 75mph+ on highway 91, so I bet the cameras are higher-speed then the regular cameras used on the Bay Bridge toll booth.

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    72. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Mind if I come over and DUI on your roads? It is my right, as you point out. Read a few of mine (and other) replies to similar posts.

    73. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Roadside OCR has gotten good enough so they can simply log all the cars that pass a point and send them bills. Of course, there will be a small number of people who live far away and can't be billed, but the free ride they get is more than compensated by not having to build and staff toll booths.

      One use of this technology is to levy congestion tolls: incentive for people to switch to public transit in areas where traffic is out of control. This isn't going to be popular, but it might help make a lot of densely populated urban areas a lot more livable.

    74. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      To play the Devil's Advocate - Sounds like a pretty easy case of being able to prove it wasn't you. And before you say 'It is their job to prove it was you, not the other way around', sending the picture of the vehicle doing it is their way of proving guilt. It is your job to refute their evidence. Which I would assume you would have done once you realized the error.

      To play the concerned Driver - I dislike red light cameras because it causes many people who would have ordinarily have gone through a yellow light to suddenly slam on their brakes to avoid the possible ticket. I can see this causing many, many wrecks once these are implemented all over. I have seen people who are approaching a light going about 45 or 50 mph, see the light change to yellow, and slam on their brakes so hard that their tires squeal, all because the light had a camera on it. You might say that the person is an idiot, and quite right, they are. However, several of these were at lights that are heavily trafficked, did not have a big problem with people running the light, and seemed to just be put in by officials who were persuaded by the red light camera company to make the intersection 'safer' by the camera. Which, in effect, it did the opposite.

      To play the defendant with rights - The thing I hate about these is that it is no longer about a police officer actually catching you in the act. The officer will pull over an offender, and then, after talking to the person, either write a ticket, or simply give a warning. The camera, in effect, plays judge, jury, and executioner, without emotion. I mean, think about outside circumstances. Here's one situation: A guy runs a light. The camera catches him, as well as the woman he is with. He gets a ticket. Now for the rest of the story. A guys runs a light. An officer catches him, pulls him over. He notices a woman with him, in pain. He then sees that her hand is covered in blood. He asks what happened, and it turned out that the man was on his way to the hospital so that the woman could get stitches in her hand so that the bleeding will stop. The officer lets them go to the hospital, only a few blocks away. An officer can make the decision on whether a person deserves the ticket or not.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    75. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Jon_S · · Score: 1

      I used it once, got the bill and paid it, but then kept getting bills for one cent, which then increased with interest. Must ahve been somehting with the exchange rate. These are bills in the mail (international, since I am in New York) that kept coming. Pretty hilarious. Good thing I didn't have to renew an Ontario plate.

    76. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      while a license plate cannot identify a person, they can be used to look up who the vehicle is registered too, and there is a reasonable chance that it would be registered to the one driving it.

      In theory at least, and in the U.S., the state is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person accused of committing a crime is actually guilty of the crime. Proving that there is a reasonable chance the accused is guilty is not (again, theoretically) sufficient.

      Several years ago here in Anchorage, Alaska, the muni tried to set up radar guns and cameras to catch speeders in school zones. The project lasted a few months and was shut down because every ticket that was contested in court was thrown out. The reason? The courts decided that a photo of the license plate was not sufficient to prove that the registered owner of the car was actually the person driving the car. The courts said that it was the muni's responsibility to prove that the owner of the car was the one speeding in school zones.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    77. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      aybe in Maryland. In California, the camera will note your plate, and a computer will issue a ticket. Unless you have a FasTrak device and just forgot it, in which case they'll charge your account, though I think you can get hit with an extra fee if you do this too often.

      Ditto here in Florida. Without a SunPass, as they are called here, driving through the checkpoints without a device (or with a device that is malfunctioning) *will* result in a ticket being issued automatically. If you have the SunPass device, you just give them your SunPass account number (written on the SunPass device) and they will just bill your account and wipe out the ticket.

    78. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Tanktalus · · Score: 1

      That is backwards. You need something that is clear by default (so that you don't get tagged for parking on a public roadway, such as a residential zone), and only blocks when electricity is applied. I'd hate for a power-draw on my battery just for sitting there to keep the plate visible.

    79. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by element-o.p. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you've been off-roading in your street-legal vehicle, and your car/truck/whatever gets covered in mud. How do you transport it to a car wash to get the mud off the license plates so that it is legal to drive on the roads again?

      Or more likely here in Anchorage, it is late spring and the snow is melting, which when mixed with all the sand that was used all winter long to provide traction on the snow and ice makes for a muddy mess. You simply *cannot* wash your car often enough to keep it clean during break-up in Anchorage, and yes, that includes your license plates. It's difficult enough sometimes just to keep your windows and headlights clean enough to see where you are going..

      At the very most, it should be a warning ticket that is dismissed after you clean up the plates so that they are legible again.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    80. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by RpiMatty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Running thru a red light 10 seconds after it has turned red is one thing.
      Running a red light because the city changing the time, shortening the yellow light, to catch more "red light runners" is bullshit.

      http://www.motorists.org/blog/red-light-cameras/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/
      http://www.reason.com/blog/show/118879.html

      Yes, people who blatantly run a red light are dangerous, but the solution isn't to setup red light cameras, and modify times to catch more people to generate income. In lots of places it is about the income, and not about the safety.

    81. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by surferx0 · · Score: 1

      Um, no. Better no one doing it. Running reds isn't like going 10 mph over the speed limit. People die from that. A lot. It really shouldn't be about the income.

      People who run reds typically are not aware they are doing it, so the camera as a deterrent really doesn't do anything. You can't think that people just see the red and feel like they can ignore it and drive on through into cross traffic. The level of insanity that would require would not have them thinking about a red light camera anyway.

      In my city, they switch off the stoplight sensors in the middle of the night and put them all on timers, forcing you to sit at the red light for minutes on end while you are the only car on the road for miles, basically daring us to run reds in the middle of the night.

      That's the only time I can think that someone would willing run a red light and that the camera would be an actual deterrent. Of course if they just left the stoplight sensors on, that wouldn't be necessary.

    82. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Amouth · · Score: 1

      do you really have that much of an issue with red light cameras? in reality they only go off if you are running the light.. which means you should get a ticket..

      i have no problems with red light cameras.. i do have issues with them changing the timing of the yellow light on intercetions with the cameras.. but that is a diffrent disscussion

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    83. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      See also, Corrections Corporation of America.

      Incarceration is a growth industry. The more things we make illegal, the more "employees" the prisons have. The other poster made a joke about "Big Jail" but in reality, Big Jail is a major lobby in Washington DC, always pushing for harsher and harsher laws. Gotta keep those jails PACKED full of non-violent "offenders" to feed the business.

    84. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      The only toll roads in the whole state are north of I-80. Of course, you guys up there think Illinois' southern border is I-80 anyway.

      For those unaware, 'north of I-80' in Illinois ~= Chicago and its suburbs.

      Not that I'm from Illinois. I'm originally from Detroit, but I've been to Chicago and through various parts of Illinois many times. ;)

    85. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Chickan · · Score: 1

      Sure they profit, but it is the government paying for it, not the inmates. That is the important distinction to make.

    86. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      they'll just try to crack down on people that commercialize it like blueboxing

      If by 'blueboxing' you mean 'using a bluebox to get free calls on a payphone', then your analogy is incorrect to that extent. Blueboxing hasn't worked on most public payphones in many, many years, since virtually all the payphones in existence have been replaced with models that mute the microphone in the receiver until after you deposit the coins. I should know. I'm a former blueboxer. ;)

    87. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by caffeineboy · · Score: 1

      They have one of the first implemented license plate recognition "tollboothless" toll systems.

      I remember reading about it- they use SGI boxes to do the recognition and databasing.

      --
      +++ ATH0 +++
    88. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Hotawa+Hawk-eye · · Score: 1

      while a license plate cannot identify a person, they can be used to look up who the vehicle is registered too, and there is a reasonable chance that it would be registered to the one driving it.

      ... unless of course the vehicle is stolen, or a rental (in which case the rental company has a chance of figuring out who was driving), or had been borrowed by the friend, spouse, sibling, or child of the person to whom it is registered ...

    89. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You don't. You wipe off the plates before you enter the road. Being as stupid as what you're projecting should be illegal.

      I'm familiar with conditions similar to what you describe in Anchorage, only with massive snowfall. The police regularly pull over drivers with licence plates obscured, and usually lets them off the hook unless there is visible negligence. When there are extreme conditions, the police are usually aware of this and accounts for it. (Not all officers have it, but there's something called "common sense" which should be applied in situations like those)

      I live in Norway, and during winter it is common for the cars to be completely covered in snow. That does not excuse us from removing the snow/ice covering the plates, nor the windscreen and side windows.

    90. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      The only place in Illinois that has tolls is up north in Chicago. The rest of us that live here don't have them. There are some people from here in Southern Illinois that have never had to pay a toll in their life.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    91. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between snow covering your license plate and a layer of schmutz making it difficult to read at a distance of more than a few meters. I've seen people pulled over because they had some mud on it from driving in all the slush. When I look at their license plate, I can tell what the numbers and letters are. Just harassment at that point.

    92. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by surferx0 · · Score: 1

      And they can record license plates. I think this hack has little criminal viability. Anyone who used it extensively would be caught in short order. Though authorities might be willing to let the criminal conduct continue on until the criminal passed the felony threshold.

      As a user of FasTrak in California, I can tell you that they do not take your picture when you pass through with a valid billable transponder. A picture only seems to be taken when a car passes through that can't be billed.

      There are two reasons I think this. One, while FasTrak does require we list our car, color, and plate in their system, I haven't changed my account info to list my new car and plate for over a year and heard nothing about it.

      Second, passing through the FasTrak toll plazas at night are completely dark on the toll roads where I live. I only see them light up for a short time when someone with a "new car plate" drives through, obviously someone who doesn't have FasTrak and is just passing through knowing they can't be billed and just got their picture taken.

      So while other toll road companies may make it a policy to video tape everything that happens at the toll plazas or take pictures of every car passing, I'm quite sure ours does not.

    93. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      "I consider using the state-provided roads as a privilege, not a right, that requires your car to be identifiable by a valid licence plate.

      If the plates are obscured, either by dirt or by purpose, isn't it reasonable to give a ticket to deter this?"

      There are arguments on both sides of the fence.

      Trying to keep roads as safe as possible by keeping negligent and down-right dangerous drivers off of them, fine.

      Toll booths, ever-increasing ridiculous fees for license renewals and the ever-shortening of the period between expiry dates as a way to foot the bill for road maintenance ... I guess, so long as the public gets to "see the receipts" so to speak and the process is democratic.

      Government profiting from the criminal behaviour of it's citizens: reprehensible. The minute punishing citizens becomes profitable the minute incentive is created for finding more and more ways to fine people. As a general rule of good practice, I feel that punishing people must always come at a cost to society. Not a profit.

      In Ontario we have demerit point system. When you're caught violating a traffic law you get a certain number of points, which varies based on the particular law you broke. I don't drive so I'm not sure how many points you're allowed to get but if you reach a certain number your license is suspended (or revoked permanently for repeat-offenders). I'm all in favour of this system. You drive dangerously you loose your ability to drive. Punishment fits the crime. Care to guess at whether or not they abolished traffic fines when they introduced the system ? It's an easy one.

    94. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Hotawa+Hawk-eye · · Score: 1

      So you've been off-roading in your street-legal vehicle, and your car/truck/whatever gets covered in mud. How do you transport it to a car wash to get the mud off the license plates so that it is legal to drive on the roads again?

      I've got an idea or two or three.

    95. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Bob-taro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, no. Better no one doing it. Running reds isn't like going 10 mph over the speed limit. People die from that. A lot. It really shouldn't be about the income.

      I'd say that depends on how long it's been red. If you mis-time a short yellow and are in the intersection when it turns red, that's not too dangerous. No more than driving 10mph over (which may be why the yellow light seemed so "short"). That's one problem with automatic ticketing systems - they can't put the incident in context very well.

      --
      Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
    96. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by babyrat · · Score: 1

      Nice scenario - in the first case, guy gets to hopsital as quick as he can, might have to pay a fine for breaking the law (running the red light) at some later date - perhaps he takes the medical records to a judge and the judge lets him off.

      In the second case, the cop pulls him over, costing potentially valuable time to stop, run the plates do everything they do before they even approach the car.

      In a real emergency I'd prefer the former, not the latter.

    97. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      Also, you may have lower intersection accidents from running red lights, but you will replace those with people slamming on their breaks trying to stop from going through a yellow light, because they are not sure if they are going to get a ticket. If they were really concerned about safety, they would just make yellow lights longer and that costs almost nothing.

    98. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by garett_spencley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "I sort of agree with your sentiment, except that I percieve using a car on the road is a privilege"

      I don't. We paid to put the roads there and everyone should be able to use them however the hell they want so long as they don't harm anyone.

      I prefer to punish people AFTER they have done harm. Not before.

      License plates, laws against drunk driving[1], justifying drug criminalization by claiming that drug use increases rates of crime, placing curfews on public parks etc. is all preemptive and it places a burden on an innocent society. There's no reason not to throw the book at someone who breaks the law but asking society to give up their freedom for the sake of reducing crime statistics is unfair. It costs tax dollars, gives the government a way to profit off of criminal behaviour (traffic fines) and regulation (licenses, vehicle registration etc.) and I don't think it actually does much in the way of achieving it's goal of preventing crime anyway.

      [1] - I realize that's borderline trollish so I'll justify that: killing someone and violating traffic laws is already illegal. Why do we have to make it more illegal? Has all of this money spent - and made - by cracking down on drunk drivers actually reduced the number of dangerous drivers on the road ? What about sober drivers who are just as dangerous as people who are drunk ? In Ontario it's now illegal to drive with ANY ALCOHOL WHAT-SO-EVER in your system. You can not transport any alcohol that has been opened and any alcohol you do transport needs to be out of reach of the driver (ie: in the trunk). During peak holidays such as new years etc. they put up road blocks on every major road and stop every single car to smell the driver's breath. It punishes everyone for the mistakes of a few. It's getting extremely out of hand.

    99. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by schwaang · · Score: 1

      According to this article:

      [FasTrak] toll evaders were responsible for $31.4 million in unpaid bridge tolls in the 2006-07 fiscal year

    100. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by camperdave · · Score: 1

      A red light camera is not going to stop you and pull you over, so if you are rushing to the hospital you may get there quicker. On the other hand, you may not get the police escort and the prepped emergency staff (from the officer radioing ahead) you might get if pulled over.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    101. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Finally, a comprehensive and intelligent reply! :)

      Here in Norway we also have a point system (dysfunctional in practice unfortunately). It does not remove the fines associated with violations. Infact, it was not designed to do this. It was designed to stop repeat offenders with fat wallets.

      You say that punishment must come at a cost to society, not profit. While I can understand your sentiment, I don't feel it makes much sense. Why should society as a whole pay for the crimes of offenders? IMHO, the offenders deserve to pay, but that also requires that the definitions of an offence are sane (which in many cases they are not), and the enforcement likewise. In my opinion, that is where the problem lies, not in the "profit" gained.
      This imho an issue of "who watches the watchers".

      In my home town, I'm repeatedly disappointed by the lack of police enforcing traffic rules even though they stand to rake in substancial amounts of money doing so.

    102. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      Yea, they even have lobbyists to make sure they get more prisons built. They are all about making money. There was an immigration prison in Texas that got shut down recently, because they were locking up whole families and not allowing access by lawyers so they could make a profit on each member of the family whether they could legally hold them or not.

    103. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by rayzat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My buddy had his truck stolen with EZ-Pass ( automatic toll payment system for those non-eastcoasters). He filled out the police reports and all the other crap. About a month later he realized the guys who stole his truck were still using his EZ-Pass driving around Jersey and they were going though the same toll boothes about the same time everyday. So he staked out the toll booth and at their usual time he saw them zip through the EZ-pass lane in his truck. So he went through himself and called the state troopers to report he found his stolen truck and it was on the turnpike. The cops were more concerned about whether he was using a hands free headset or not then getting the people who stole his truck. So he eventually followed the people to their house and called the cops again saying he was driving around and spotted his stolen truck, the cops said they would look into it. The next day he found they had done nothing so he drove up with another guy and stole the truck back with his spare key, which is when he learned it's a pain in the ass to get a car declared unstolen.

    104. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 0, Troll

      Ok, to turn this around a bit. Can you tell me exactly which pieces of asphalt/concrete you have paid for? Those would be the places where you (by your own logic) could drive whatever and however you see fit.
      Now, as you might imagine, this really doesn't work in a society.

    105. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by ThePiMan2003 · · Score: 1

      So drunk driving is OK then? Speeding? There are somethings you have to do in order to insure the safety of all the other people on the road. Taking care of your car is one of them.

    106. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by garett_spencley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ok, to turn this around a bit. Can you tell me exactly which pieces of asphalt/concrete you have paid for?

      As far as I'm concerned, all of it. We have tax on gas sale, income tax, sales tax, taxes on all vehicle purchases (new or used), driver's licenses, license plates, road tolls, traffic fines (which I'm against but we still pay them), parking fees (for publicly owned parking garages and meters etc.). All ways of giving money to the government for things like road upkeep. How they use it very much my business but I haven't personally investigated how my money was put to use.

      Point being We ALL pay for public infrastructure in one way or another so we should all be able to use it to heart's content so long as we don't harm anyone. I don't see why it should be any more complicated than that.

    107. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      Being as stupid as what you're projecting should be illegal.

      Either conditions are quite different in Norway (i.e., snow is much wetter, therefore heavier, therefore less affected by air currents), you have been extraordinarily lucky or you simply haven't paid attention in the winter. I have cleared the snow off my car, driven to work, then found snow completely covering my plates, rear bumper, tail lights, etc. by the time I arrived at work (~6 miles/7-8km). It doesn't happen all the time, but it does happen.

      There is a low pressure area behind a moving vehicle which causes any blowing snow to effectively accumulate on the aft end of said moving vehicle. You *cannot* always keep the car clear of snow in the winter here in Anchorage.

      In any case, I was referring to the accumulation of mud on the plates during break-up, when the melting snow and dirt that collects on the roads all winter long mixes into mud and begins to collect on cars. Cars ahead of you splash it on the front of your car and, due to the low pressure area I described above, your own vehicle kicks up enough spray to cover the rear of your vehicle. It is not unusual in Anchorage to use a gallon of windshield washer fluid a week trying to keep your windshield clear enough to see.

      Fortunately, most police officers in Anchorage have enough common sense to understand the problem and therefore don't harass drivers unless, as you stated, there is an obvious and intentional neglect of the plates.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    108. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      In civil court you can never be awarded more than the sum of your damages.

      There is logic in the "debt to society" point of view. When someone breaks a crime they owe society a debt. However, it shouldn't be profitable for society to collect on that debt. It's not about making society pay for the crimes of others. It's about not allowing society to become enriched by removing the freedoms of it's members.

      "In my home town, I'm repeatedly disappointed by the lack of police enforcing traffic rules even though they stand to rake in substancial amounts of money doing so."

      In my city (Windsor Ontario Canada) I'm repeatedly appalled at seeing the local police repeatedly break traffic rules in full view without a care in the world. Cops speed when they're not using their lights or sirens. They run stop signs and red lights if they're clear. If they're using their sirens, fine. Of course there's nothing really to stop them from turning on the sirens to go through a light, I guess they're exploiting that mindset. Yet they really show the public that they feel they're above the law. It's disgusting.

    109. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by tygt · · Score: 1
      My '66 Ford convertible, which I don't trust to take out of town, got auto-busted for a bridge toll violation about 150 miles away.

      The picture they provided was the back of a Ford Explorer..... yes the license was similar - a couple letter wrong only. The picture, however, should've been obvious.

      Clearing this up took 3 separate mailings.

    110. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Society pays for the infrastructure for the good of the society, not for the good of the individual.

      You are using it, even if you don't set foot/car on the pavement. The roads are used to transport goods vital for everyone in a society.

      Consider this... Without a central authority, the roads would not be built.

    111. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      No, we're not that lucky. Snow buildup on the plates are common. That is why the police officers also show common sense when stopping cars with obscured licence plates, but does not fine them.

    112. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by maynard · · Score: 1

      Blueboxing was never a payphone hack. So-called red boxes would mimic the one, two, or three chirp tones used to denote nickel, dime, quarter to the phone company. Blue boxes were used to take control of a short-haul or long-haul trunk by presenting a "supervisor tone" to disconnect the remote portion of the call while leaving the local CO's trunk out active. From there one could enter an arbitrary number sequence using a second set of MF tones specific to inter-trunk communications.

      Since it's long past the statute of limitations, I'll admit that at one time during my childhood I build and used many blue-boxes. Most of them were done with 555 timers and pots. But a popular hack back then was the AppleCat modem, that used programmable tone generators to generate its DTMF sequence for auto-dialing.

      Boy, that was a long time ago.

    113. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Having a hard time keeping up with all the replies here ;)

      I wouldn't say that being forced to pay a fine is equal to being robbed of any freedom. We have strayed a fair bit from the original point now though.
      Imho, the "profit" from the bills should not go to the enforcing authority, but rather to other causes. Eg. to help cover societys costs in hospital bills related to traffic accidents.

      Yes, the police break the rules here too. Unfortunately, we have noone that can properly "watch the watchers". The last few years there have been several deaths during the apprehension of criminals. "Shit happens", you may say and I'd like to agree. But if you view all the deaths, they all happen to be black (which is a very small minority in my town). The point is, the police cannot be trusted. But I can't see a better alternative to enforce the rules set up (If there was, I'd think we'd already see this somewhere...)
      In my opinion, a police officer caught breaking a law should be punished more severely than civilians. A repeat offender should be punished and subsequently fired.

    114. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Lachlan+Hunt · · Score: 1

      In Australia, the e-tags have to be registered for use with specific cars, at least with the company I got mine through. IIRC, when you register, you have to provide information about things like the make, model and licence plate number of all cars you intend to use the e-tag with.

      I'm not sure what procedures they have in place for when an e-tag is used in a different vehicle, but it seems likely that, if a similar hack were possible with e-tags used in Australia, the forged e-tag would get caught relatively easily because the car wouldn't match.

      --
      By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
    115. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Here in North Carolina, they hide behind "a misdemeanor does not have to rise to 'beyond a reasonable doubt' status". Translation: I'm the judge and I can do anything I damn well please.

      Oh you can appeal...if you've got money, time and patience. I was flat out told by the lawyer that all they had was some hear-say, but that's all the judge needs. My son was convicted of carrying a Swiss Army knife to school. No official even saw the knife.

      In some states, the prosecutor doesn't have to 'prove' anything. Someone just has to tell the judge what he wants to hear.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    116. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      The roads are "state-provided" with money they took from me, and then they completely surrounded me with them, so that I have no way to travel except over them.

      What about that inalienable right to be secure in our posessions?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    117. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Chainsaw76 · · Score: 1

      To play the Devil's Advocate - Sounds like a pretty easy case of being able to prove it wasn't you. And before you say 'It is their job to prove it was you, not the other way around', sending the picture of the vehicle doing it is their way of proving guilt.

      On the surface, I might agree. Except if a human had processed the information it wouldn't have ever gotten to me.

      But the machine found me guilty. The appeals process, as explained in the automated ticket, involves paying the fine first, and appealing second. If you win your appeal you will get the $50 back...

      -Jason

    118. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      I believe the tax payers have also paid for:

      * The white house
      * A huge amount of military fighter jets
      * A bigger amount of tanks

      Is it reasonable to assume that, since they are paid for by the taxpayers, they are free for the taxpayers use as they see fit?

    119. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I consider using the state-provided roads as a privilege, not a right

      As long as there are no alternatives, I would not call it a privilege.
      Once the states removed the easement laws that gave people the right to travel across other people's private land, state provided roads became a necessity and a right.

    120. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be the case, but the only ones that aren't saved are the ones where the license plate matches up with the transponder. My parents accidentally switched up their two FasTrak devices and, since they were associated with the specific license plates of the vehicles, the mismatch caused them to be contacted by FasTrak to make sure that their device hadn't been stolen and that the license plate of the vehicle is owned by them.

      I've also found that the transponders on the Golden Gate bridge, over which I commute daily, are very unreliable, to the point where they only register about 75% of the time. I contacted FasTrak about this and they said not to worry and that it would automatically get assigned to my account. And so far, it always has, so it appears to be very reliable.

      All of this makes you wonder why you need the transponder at all, until you realize that the transponder is also used to monitor traffic patterns. I personally wish that the transponders would only be for people opening an account with out of state plates. Then they could devote a single lane of each bridge to out-of-state plates that don't have a FasTrak account. The rest of the lanes could be FasTrak only and those California plates that don't have a FasTrak account would pay their bridge tolls with their next year's vehicle registration.

    121. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      The taxpayers have also paid for the White House, correct?
      I presume that the taxpayers have also paid for the 5778 manned aircraft in use by the US Air Force?
      Do you feel that it is your right to use those as you see fit? You have paid for them as a taxpayer...

      You have plenty of ways to travel, most of them are public transit.

    122. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      No. The guy with 10 DUIs has the right to keep driving until he kills someone. Then he has the responsibility of facing the death penalty.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    123. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      Thus the "In theory at least..." in my post. Sigh...I'm young enough to still be idealistic, but old enough to know the way things are supposed to be and the way things really are don't always match.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    124. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      So if I'm barely capable of standing up due to drinking myself shit-faced, have a right to use the roads as I see fit?
      If I have lost my drivers licence?

      There are in most cases an alterative. It may not be what you wish (ie, public transportation) or can afford (taxi, hiring a driver), but there are alternatives.

    125. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      So, we make enough laws so that the police can harass whomsoever they damn well please. There's nothing you can reasonably do about the situation, and it is totally harmless, but you have to hope the policeman is nice and has some "common sense". You get to be all smiles, and maybe get your girlfriend to flash him a little.

      That makes for a nice society.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    126. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by statusbar · · Score: 1

      Or... in some cases where your car is being towed by a speeding tow truck:

      Traffic Enfarcement

      Since it is your license plate that the camera picks up, you get the speeding ticket.

      --jeffk++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    127. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The drunk driving prevention campaigns (traffic stops, etc.) have significantly cut down highway deaths around the holidays, so at least there are hard numbers people can point to and say "this is helping", unlike traffic light cameras that seem to be frequently abused for the purposes of raising revenue. That's where I draw the line, personally. It is not unreasonable to expect people to not show reckless disregard for the safety of others even if they get lucky and nobody gets hurt. That's what drunk driving is. It is no less bad than cutting somebody off and swerving between lanes; if somebody does that, it seems perfectly reasonable to punish them for recklessness. I see drunk driving laws as largely the same thing.

      That said, I do agree with you that open container laws are idiotic. If you haven't been drinking it, transporting it is irrelevant. It strikes me as primarily a way for officers who haven't met their quota to jail or fine somebody who they believe has been drinking even if the BAC evidence says they haven't. The obvious completely legitimate example that these laws prohibit is somebody carrying a half-consumed bottle of wine from a friend's house because the friend didn't like it. You can't put it in your trunk because it has been opened, so the cork might come out while it is rolling around, and then you'd have a horrible mess, so your passenger holds it or you wrap it in a blanket on your passenger seat and strap it in or whatever. That's not in any way contributing to drunk driving or reckless driving on the roads, but in many places, it is still technically illegal.... That's where the laws cross the line from preventing reckless disregard to being paranoid nanny state behavior. I'm not convinced that those laws do enough occasional good relative to the widespread inconvenience to meet the quality threshold that we should expect from our laws. I'm also not convinced the harm is bad enough to bother doing anything about it. It's in that fuzzy grey area between the two. :-)

      I do agree also that random road blocks are pushing the limit a bit, if only because they are a major inconvenience to a lot of people and are a tremendous waste of resources that could be better spent elsewhere. I think it would be far more effective to station cops randomly outside local bar and liquor store parking lots to pull over people who get in their cars while unable to walk in a straight line... and prosecute the bar owners for not enforcing laws requiring that they take the keys and call a taxi for patrons who seem incapacitated when they leave. Unfortunately, in our sue-happy culture, bar owners would probably claim some kind of discrimination and get a damage award from the city/county/state.... *sigh*

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    128. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by curunir · · Score: 1

      if they extended the length of the yellow light at troublesome intersections, that the number of people running red lights almost dropped to near zero.

      While extending the length of the yellow is, no doubt, a good thing, it's far more important to have the count-down timers on the corresponding crosswalks to indicate when the green will end. When people know that there is a red-light camera at an intersection, they'll often react very poorly when the light turns to yellow (as in slamming on their brakes). Without that indication of when the light will turn yellow, you get people getting rear-ended because they stop more quickly than the car behind them can.

      --
      "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
    129. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol,It is always about income.D.C. pronounced they would make 4 million of of their new red light cams and that the are using them for profit...corruption abounds.

    130. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Do you have a better suggestion than police?

    131. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by pluther · · Score: 2, Informative

      I suppose a photo of the license plat alone would not be sufficient, but that's not how most places do it.
      I once got a ticket from an automated red light camera in San Jose.
      The picture, unfortunately, clearly showed not just my license plate, but my face.

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    132. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      Heck, all you need to do is hire the lawyer that plays golf with the judge every sunday and you win.*

      Much of what you see in "law drama" on TV is utter BS. The system is set up to ensure lawyers and judges are the real winners regardless of the verdict.

      *Unless evidence is so obscenely against you that you need to hire the laweyer that plays golf with him on saturday and the lawyer who's married to the judge's wife's tennis instructor as well to win. /sarcasm

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    133. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by T3Tech · · Score: 1

      Which happens to be some company which has no idea, nor is in any way concerned, with what corp. officer, employee, friend of either, etc. was driving the vehicle because they don't keep such records and have a really good insurance policy...

      --
      Of course I didn't RTFA... why would I do that? You really are new here aren't you? Don't let my UID fool you.
    134. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arminw · · Score: 1

      ....that requires your car to be identifiable by a valid licence plate....

      The main reason the state requires license plates is to be able to collect taxes on cars more easily. Any other uses are secondary and are mostly used as excuses. As they say, it's the money!

      --
      All theory is gray
    135. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      Except I have no choice but to PAY for that priviledge or go to jail for tax evasion (ok, perhaps a fine but...then I have to pay anyhow). So it's OK to be forced to pay for the roads that i can be prohibited from using - and no one sees an issue here?

      It's all part of a system that makes a crime out of things with no victim. If I don't have plates on my car *at all*, who exactly is getting hurt?

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    136. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That's beside the point. The point is that someone is profiting off of prisons, and because of this, there is a vested interest in increasing the prison population as much as possible. It's in Wackenhut's interest to have as many people in prison as possible. Because of this Wackenhut employes lobbyists, who make "campaign contributions" to politicians, who pass laws to increase this population, regardless of whether this is actually good for society or not.

    137. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by ForestGrump · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the other side...
      I spent 5 months last year in Illinois (business trip that was extended too many times, but as a contractor either do it or go home and stop getting $$$).

      There is a real need for cash lanes because of the out of towners, and rental car users.

      Driving rental cars you have either:
      1. No i-pass and must stop at ever toll booth and throw quarters
      2. is a more expensive car with an i-pass, but then avis decides to charge you administrative fees if you use the i-pass (which results in me throwing quarters at every toll booth).

      As for toll roads in general, I think they're more hassle than they're worth. Who normally walks around with $20 in quarters anyway? I did after a week in Illinois.

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    138. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      My brother in law was stopped by the police as he was rushing his wife to the hospital, because she was in labor. The policeman took note of the situation, allowed him to proceed, but followed him and wrote him a ticket at the hospital.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    139. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arminw · · Score: 1

      ...Taking care of your car is one of them....

      How does a clean license plate add to safety? The biggest reason for having a license plate on every car is to make it easier to collect tax money. Many so-called safety and licensing requirements, not only in cars, but in general, are nothing more than another tax. Governments have an insatiable appetite for money.

      --
      All theory is gray
    140. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by b0bby · · Score: 1

      In the tickets I have seen from red light cameras around here, you see two images - one of the vehicle on the line, with the light red, the next with the vehicle in the middle of the intersection, still red. It would be possible for them to shorten the yellow to increase the number of people running the red, but you're not going to be able to "move the sensor" in such a system and frame people. As a motorcyclist, I'm against speed cameras, but don't have a problem with the red light cameras. ;)

    141. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You can't opt out of paying for the roads. Therefore no, he shouldn't be banned.

      If he runs someone over because he's drunk and kills them - toss him in an electric chair and be done with it. The next guy will think VERRRRRRY carefully - not about what BAC he's going to blow but if he's actually OK to drive safely. Some people can drive fine (or nearly enough) with a BAC above .10. Others have issues standing up unaided at or below .04. It varies per person. To make matters worse, studies have shown that distracted driving (cell phone - hands free or not, makeup, newspaper, eating, kids) or driving while tired can be AT LEAST as imparing as being drunk.

      Here's a suggestion - make people responsible for the outcome of their actions. Don't criminalize things if no one is being hurt, inconviniences, or suffering some kind of loss. It seems like a brutal system (let the DUI's go free and kill someone) at first but if we attach REAL penalties that match the ACTUAL loss the dumb people will be weeded out plenty quickly.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    142. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      A licence plate is by no means necessary to collect tax on any given vehicle. They could just as easily use the VIN (Vehicle identification number) for that purpose.

    143. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Q2Serpent · · Score: 1

      You can just mount some IR LEDs around your plate and render the video images captures useless. Now your plates are visible to cops (so you won't get pulled over for hiding them) and yet cameras will have trouble recording them.

    144. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No, I don't see an issue here. You're also paying for the White House, yet you are not allowed to enter (possibly except on tours). You have also contributed to the USAFs more than 5k manned aircraft, yet you are prohibited from using them (unless you fulfil certain requirements. It's way harder, but in essence the same as getting a licence plate for your car).
      That is an essential part of any society I know of.

      I pay taxes as any other person, and I have serious issues with how they are being spent. But that is not the issue here.

    145. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by T3Tech · · Score: 1

      Once upon a time in the US, it was generally considered a right for individuals to use public roads for personal travel, whereas commercial use of public roads was what was considered a privilege.

      --
      Of course I didn't RTFA... why would I do that? You really are new here aren't you? Don't let my UID fool you.
    146. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Times change. That is in most cases a Good Thing (TM). When the premises change, so should the rules.

    147. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Since we all pay for them, I consider them a right.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    148. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      It's pooled funds for public projects (kind of an 'uh, duh' moment eh?) so no individual has specific ownership of a part. That's the WHOLE POINT of pooling funds in a society to accomplish things an individual could not...except retarded licensing laws actually work against this basic concept.

      If, however, you owned some land and paid to have a road built and maintained - you could then limit access, charge for access, or drive while drunk as you pleased. You confuse public works with private ownership.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    149. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by fm6 · · Score: 1

      It's not like they don't know who the cheaters are. They just haven't gotten it together to squeeze the unpaid tolls and fines out of them. And I'd bet that it would cost them a lot more than $30 million a year to go back to human-toll-takers-only.

    150. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by geekoid · · Score: 1

      All irrelevant to the posters point.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    151. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      Prisons make big money, paid for by tax dollars. The state pays $x/day to a private prison to house a prisoner and the prison makes a profit at that rate. It's extremely profitable

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    152. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by FrankieBaby1986 · · Score: 1

      I consider state-provided roads Something I paid taxes for and as such, consider them a right, not a privilege.

      --
      ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
    153. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Can't opt out? Sure you can! If you let go of all you ties to society and live as a hermit in the woods, you can avoid paying any taxes. The thing is, you would probably not like that very much either. Partaking in a society both giveth and taketh away. Paying for infrastructure that makes sure that your groceries, furniture, etc., etc., comes close to your location is part of the road use. If you don't accept that, you should also not be allowed to purchase items transported to you by those means, should you?

      I'm not going to start a discussion on whether or not the death sentence is Good (tm) or Bad (tm), because that's way off the mark for what we're discussing.

      IMHO, the penalties for traffic offenses should be way harsher

    154. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      How exactly does speeding hurt someone? HITTING someone will hurt them. Forcing them off the road because you can't control your car can hurt them. While it's more likely if you're going fast, it's not guaranteed and there are PLENTY of other things that also increase the same risks. A bad driver going 50 is easily as dangerous as a professional race car driver going 200.

      Driving fast by itself DOES NOT HURT PEOPLE. Why are things like this so hard to comprehend? If it's 6:30AM and sunny on a warm clear summer day with not a car in sight in the few miles I can see in front or behind me, why can't I go 150MPH on a highway in a Ferrari? Who exactly would be injured? Besides costing ME almost 3x the time, what would slowing down to 55 accomplish?

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    155. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Licence plates are not necessary for tax collection. A VIN would suffice.
      The licence plate is not for your safety, but that of others around you.

    156. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      Oh, in NY I frequently see cops pull up to a red light in a major intersection, slow down, look both ways...flip the lights to go through if it's clear and then turn them back off and go on their merry way.

      Who's watching the watchers?

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    157. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      So if I'm barely capable of standing up due to drinking myself shit-faced, have a right to use the roads as I see fit?

      I've seen you bring this up in a number of posts. Quit being an idiot, or obstinate.

      Just because someone considers it a right to drive does not mean that in all and every conceivable situation they still consider an individual to have that right.

      People who go off and make up absurd strawmen to knock down aren't doing anybody favors.

      So, do you have a coherent argument why driving should not be considered a right, because all I've seen from you on this topic is frothing at the mouth about driving drunk.

      If I have lost my drivers licence?

      This is a little better question but trivial. You know how, sometimes, we take people's rights away from them? Like that little right called freedom when we put people in jail? Well, amazingly enough, one can view the drivers license in the same way!

      Alternately, we can try your approach to rights (templated on your objections), where we should let everyone out of prison since freedom is a right...

    158. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      I've answered a bunch of replies just like yours already.

    159. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my god, that is the most mindblowingly horrid website I've ever seen. Almost ALL the links on the left are GIFs that CHANGE THEIR TEXT! WHY?! Who the hell would do such a thing? They aren't even synchronized, they just randomly switch! Most MySpaces are better than this. What a shame...

    160. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      Yes, I have a right to use them. I will use them, indirectly of course, to provide defense of my country (or invade someone who pisses us off...but i digress /bushism) as needed. If you want to do analogies then try to be accurate (and don't use car analogies!). Those 5778 manned aircraft will protect me even if i'm a fuck-tard sitting in jail for DUI.

      Public transit is simply NOT an option for a large portion of our population. It's also irrelevant.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    161. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      Hey, perhaps I'll just follow this along.

      Your viewpoint of rights is equivalent that of to a three year old. things are much more complex than you want them to appear.

      In your view of rights we could never incarcerate anyone, because they have a right to be free.

      Let's use a car analogy this time. Fitting.

      You have the right to drive on the road. This does not give you the right to run over pedestrians. Or the "right" to ignore stoplights. Why do you think driving while intoxicated should be different?

      As I said in another post- please explain why you do not consider driving a right.

      Arguments of the form: "If i have a right to drive, I have a right to do X while driving" are fallacious. Please let me know if you have trouble seeing this. Perhaps I could be more clear.

    162. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      And if you got home OK without injuring anyone or causing any accidents who, exactly, is the victim of your "crime" of driving drunk?

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    163. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm from the midwest...wtf are toll booths?

      They're those little huts where you have to pay to drive on some roads, like the Kansas Turnpike, or the Cimarron Turnpike, or the Indiana Toll Road.

      The only tollbooths I've encountered in California are for bridges in the San Francisco Bay Area.

    164. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Would you not say that the public also owns the White House? The Air Force (and its materials)?

    165. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      You are still indirectly using the roads when you purchase almost anything.

    166. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      And your is equivalent of that of a one-year-old... Duh...

      I consider driving a privilege because controlling a several-ton vehicle on a road poses a serious risk to others. At that point, I consider an action to be a privilege, not a right.

    167. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Driving with an unreadable license plate, though, is grounds to get you pulled over anyway."

      You would think so, but its somewhat common in the area. No doubt less than 1% of all the cars are driving plateless or with obscured plates, but I count a couple every time I take a drive on hwy 101 (a local highway). I would say that half the limos in the area drive plateless too and the CHP seems to do little about it.

    168. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      A persons freedom is defined in basic human rights. Driving isn't.

    169. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      This in no way invalidates the thought that driving is a right not a privilege, which is what people were objecting to.

      You challenged the parent to tell you which parts of the road he has paid for. He came back and said - considering the amount of various taxes i pay, all of them.

      You responded with the post I'm replying to, which neatly sidesteps the original issue.

      Society pays for the infrastructure for the good of the society, not for the good of the individual.

      No, "society" doesn't pay for anything. As an individual I pay towards the infrastructure. I wish "Society" would pick up the bill, but it doesn't ever seem to have the money. The quid pro quo of the social contract is that I expect something in return for that.

      You are using it, even if you don't set foot/car on the pavement. The roads are used to transport goods vital for everyone in a society.

      Consider this... Without a central authority, the roads would not be built.

      What does this have to do with it being a right to drive? I don't quite follow your logic.

    170. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Seriously... Do you want such a society?

    171. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      I don't. We paid to put the roads there and everyone should be able to use them however the hell they want so long as they don't harm anyone.

      Uh huh. And I think the government should refund 110% of tax revenues back to taxpayers. Unfortunately, the laws of logic and reality keep demands like that from being taken seriously.

      Sure, we already paid to put the roads there. But if and when everyone invokes their supposed right to use the roads, they become useless. In order for traffic to actually *move*, satisfying the entire reason for existence for the roads, you will have to charge the market rate for their use: enough to prevent choking of the flow.

      Yes, as a taxpayer, you do have a valid (quasi-)ownership right in the roads. You are absolutely right about that. But the way to respect this right is not by allowing people to choke off flow whenever they feel like with whatever vehicle they're qualified to use; it's by (p)refunding to each person their fractional share of revenues net of admin costs. That way, anyone who decides not to invoke their right is compensated, and those who demand to drive at the same time as others can see what the true cost of that use is, and thus whether it's worth it. Furthermore, it provides for the coordination and incentives for public transportation options to take root.

      It's funny how people can see the wasteful socialism in trying to give government-provided bread to people on demand, but not in trying to give government-provided road use to people on demand.

      And before you say it, no, "just build more roads" is not a solution. Eventually, those roads have to feed into lower-capacity roads, so unless you want to turn downtown streets into megahighways, eventually you run into insurmountable logistical problems.

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    172. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      You get something in return for the money you pay in taxes. You get goods transported to whereever you feel like buying them.

      I consider driving a privilege, because you have to gain this privilege. If it was a right, you'd inherently have it regardless.

      You're of course correct in correcting me in the "society/individual", but I think you get my drift nevertheless. All the individuals pay for a common good that is being provided by the governing body. Since this is for the common good, rules have to be in place to prevent abuse and ensure the safety of all the other citizens.

      I'm growing a bit weary of this discussion though. I've lost count of how many replies (and how much time I've spent!).

    173. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arth1 · · Score: 1

      So if I'm barely capable of standing up due to drinking myself shit-faced, have a right to use the roads as I see fit?

      Are you really this stupid, or are you trolling?
      That you have a right doesn't preclude you from having obligations in order to exercise that right, mainly to protect the rights of others to the same resource.
      Like the the obligation to follow traffic regulations, which prevents you from driving in a way that would deplete others of their rights to use the road.

      Just like I have a right to catch fish in the local lake, but I can't use dynamite or cyanide to do so, nor catch more than a certain number of fish, because doing so would deplete others of their right to fish. And their rights are just as valid as mine.

    174. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      And yet we incarcerate people all the time.

      That alone should tell you that using an argument of the form:

      *If Driving is a right then I can drive drunk!

      Is not going to cut it as a counter argument against driving being a right.

      In several posts you have used this exact argument and you seem no where near to even acknowledging that this is not a valid tack.

    175. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that you have a right to hunt? I would've thought that too is a privilege.

      From the Wikipedia definition of privilege:

      a privilege is conditional and granted only after birth. By contrast, a right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement held by all citizens or all human beings from birth.

    176. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Well then, maybe a definition of privilege and right would be in order:

      A privilegeâ"etymologically "private law" or law relating to a specific individualâ"is a special entitlement or immunity granted by a government or other authority to a restricted group, either by birth or on a conditional basis. A privilege can be revoked in some cases. In modern democracies, a privilege is conditional and granted only after birth. By contrast, a right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement held by all citizens or all human beings from birth.

    177. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Call me Captain Obvious, but this entire article is "ho hum." Tell me something I didn't know. You could easily steal a transponder too but it doesn't do you much good unless it's registered with your car.

    178. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      And your is equivalent of that of a one-year-old... Duh...

      Really? Hmm.

      First of all, you were the one with the stupid argument. I mean, really. "Since it is a right to drive, it must be a right to drive DUI." Stupid. Can you argue that you really had all pistons firing on that one?

      Now is the first time I've seen a coherent reply. Thanks!

      I'm not so sure I like your definition, though. I'm not entirely comfortable about having what may or may not be a right circumscribed by risk.

      At what point do you decide that the risk is low enough for something to be a 'right', or conversely, how high does the risk have to be before we classify something as a privilege? Having people out on the street instead of safely sedated certainly is a serious risk to others. Just saying.

    179. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that you have a right to hunt? I would've thought that too is a privilege.

      Yes, being native to the land, I have a right to hunt and fish.
      As long as I share that right with others who have the same right.

      You, who live somewhere else, do not have that right, but may still enjoy the privilege of doing so, if allowed by the land holders.

    180. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Arterion · · Score: 1

      You're right in theory, but in practice, local judges are insanely corrupt, and just find everyone guilty. It's easy money, and you either pay them a small fee, or pay a lawyer and the courts a big fee to appeal. It's just not worth it.

      When this happened to me, I pretty much lost all faith in our legal system.

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
    181. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Did you read the definition of a right? Why does one have to have a permit to hunt certain animals?

    182. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Arterion · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call it either -- I'd call it a requirement, just like food or shelter. Good luck trying to do ANYTHING that doesn't involve traveling along a road, or using something that's traveled along a road.

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
    183. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by dbcad7 · · Score: 1

      Right, Privilege.. Kind of both.. Driving is a regulated activity. Everyone has the right to try and conform to the regulations, if you don't then your are not issued (given) a license.. but the term privilege mainly refers to punishment (similar to children., act out in school, and you can not use the TV).. If it was just a matter of regulations and fees, then it would not be a privilege, but adding in the punishment factor makes it that.

      Trucking companies also pay road taxes, and DMV fees... What irks me, is when I see a particular stretch of road that is torn up and re-lain multiple times a year. (I remember one incident where the road was only new for about 2 weeks before it was pulled back up)

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    184. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by sponga · · Score: 1

      Some goof ball here in Southern California tried to trick the Fast Track system and maybe some other cameras around the city by using white out on his license plate.
      He whited out some of the number '8' to make it look like a nine and some other things, he got fined big time not only by Fast Trak but by the city also.

      You try to drive by with a duplicate one it would automatically tip off the operator stationed at the booth and dispatch the CHP officer who is always parked at the entrance to the special Fast Trak lane where the sensor detects it.
      Some goof balls would reach out the back of their car and block their license plate with a book or hand everytime driving by, they got through about 25 times but finally got caught after their faces were caught on camera and compared later.

      I love dumb criminals and the people caught trying to fool these systems should be punished rightfully for trying to create civil chaos. You name it and they have done it out here in California, just ask a CHP the dumbest criminal thing he has seen on the freeway and those guys will go on for hours of the most hilarious shit you will ever hear.

    185. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by PoliTech · · Score: 1

      Err, sorry to inform you but the entire north part of the state of Illinois is not "Chicago".

      You say that you lived in Illinois for 24 years, yet you have never been anywhere north of I-80? That strains credulity.

      If one were to just drive through the Florida panhandle and then maintain that one never has to pay a toll in Florida, how much credibility would that have?

    186. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Crazyswedishguy · · Score: 1

      We paid to put the roads there and everyone should be able to use them however the hell they want so long as they don't harm anyone.

      I would personally change that to "so long as they don't put anyone's life in danger". Reckless driving itself doesn't necessarily kill, but it greatly increases the risks of killing (that's not to say that nobody ever dies by driving responsibly, but you're more likely to get hurt or hurt someone else by driving recklessly).
      I'd be fine with reckless driving if the only person it would affect was the driver. That simply isn't the case. I know people who got seriously injured and even one who died, not because they were driving drunk or recklessly, but because some other idiot was. It doesn't help these people much that that driver is now in jail. I hate having to drive really slow sometimes, but prevention is necessary. And so are drunk driving laws. What you do with your life is your business, but that ends when you start affecting my life.
      Just because you think it isn't going to happen to you doesn't mean you shouldn't care. Maybe you don't value life that much?*

      * I hate how cheesy that sounds, but I neither believe in god nor am I excessively sentimental. I just want to live, and I think that if you respect other people's right to live, that right is yours too.

      --
      This space up for sale.
    187. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Driving is a regulated activity. Everyone has the right to try and conform to the regulations, if you don't then your are not issued (given) a license.

      A right is inherent, a privilege is given/gained.

    188. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      All I knew for sure was some people made money off of selling them. :3

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    189. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by ThePiMan2003 · · Score: 1

      You of course are a perfect person who would never miss anything. I am mostly worried about those other drivers who have poor judgment and would speed in other places.

      Though I would like to point out that if it is a clear sunny day with not a car in sight for miles feel free to speed since there would be no police officers in sight for miles either so you won't get in trouble.

      However, if there is a cop somewhere that you did not see, there could be something else that you did not see either.

    190. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than the Toll it takes to actually live somewhere in southern Illinois ... yeech

    191. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arth1 · · Score: 1

      See my earlier note on "obligation", and how you can't exercise your right to the detriment of other people's rights.

      Yes, you have a right to water. That doesn't mean you can take all the water so others don't get any, or piss in the well, for that matter. Cause a right doesn't imply an exclusive right.

      Now go away -- I won't even read you from now on.

    192. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're totally wrong. We still have "pea farms" here in the south too, so wrong on two counts.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    193. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by rkanodia · · Score: 1

      It's not just possible for yellows to be shortened, it's already done. A reporter in Beaverton, Oregon, showed that stoplights with cameras in that city had shorter yellow times than those without. Union City, California, had to return over a million dollars in camera-generated traffic fines after someone proved that their yellow light times were more than a second lower than the minimum established by state law.

    194. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      That is very mature of you.
      If driving was a right, it would be "impossible" to revoke it. It isn't.
      Also, if it was a right, you wouldn't have to qualify (ie, get a drivers licence) to do it.

    195. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 1

      Depending on where you are, that may not even be illegal. In my area of California the rule is that you must not enter the intersection once the light turns red. If you're one inch in when it turns red? A-OK, that's legal. (As long as you exit the intersection within a reasonable amount of time, otherwise it's considered blocking the intersection.)

      --
      Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    196. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by WMD_88 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but to get back east after going through Tampa, you have to use...a toll road. Does cost less than the Florida Turnpike, I'll admit.

    197. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My favorite example is in states with icy winter roads.

      I have myself slid through a red light (doing less than 10mph coming to the light, and slowed to around 5mph when I hit the black ice) right in front of a cop. Who was coming the other way, and also sliding through the red light. We both came to a stop, I helped him push his car out, he called a gravel truck and cussed the guy out. We then each went on our merry way, no ticket.

      Cameras can't exercise common sense and judgement, and usually don't provide enough detail for a jury or judge to make an informed decision.

    198. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Poohsticks · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately in this instance, the toll roads in California WERE built by a private company. They were built with all sorts of loans and incentives from the state, but it was a private company that put them in place. The Transportation Corridor Agencies is a collective group of private investors and construction companies that built and now run the toll-roads.

      More information here:http://www.thetollroads.com/home/about_history.htm

      --
      "The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been wide
    199. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by kmac06 · · Score: 1

      Depends how it's done. Running a red light can be done safely, just like breaking most other traffic laws can be. Of course running a red light at a busy and blind intersection is very dangerous. Running a long light where there is no traffic and a clear, full view is not at all dangerous.

    200. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by WaltFrench · · Score: 1

      Indeed, privitization of what used to be thought of as "public infrastructure" is aggressively promoted throughout the world.

      So here's a thought experiment. Take police & fire services. National defense. Drinkable water. Cleaning the streets & parks. Building, maintaining & expanding hiways & streets.

      Now apply how delighted you are with similarly privatized, monopoly providers: cell phone service providers. Cable TV. Landlines. Over-the-air news & entertainment from your local stations.

      How's that feel? Want more of it? Good; it's coming.

      --
      "Inquiring Minds Want to Know!"
    201. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by speedingant · · Score: 1

      Remember, your taxes paid for the roads so we can also get trucks to the supermarkets so you can get your *insert luxury food here*.
      Its your choice on what to do with those roads, but if you do something that breaks the law, then you're liable for your actions.

    202. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by rant64 · · Score: 1

      This very much depends on your perception of punishment. I really don't mind stopping over to have my breath analyzed when I know that at least some fool is fined or apprehended. We're all paying for others pulling off this crap, I know, but to me it seems a good deterrent. I think repeated or heavy violations should be punished severely though, that's an understatement. Put a drunk driver in a driving simulator and have him drive through a city street, for example. Make sure that the vehicle overreacts or doesn't always respond to the driver's input. Make the vehicle realistically hit someone. I guess that will wake up most otherwise sane people.

    203. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "controlling a several-ton metal hunk at high speeds"

      Is this some sort of Transformers porn? If so, I'm buyin' ;)

    204. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arminw · · Score: 1

      ...They could just as easily use the VIN (Vehicle identification number) for that purpose...

      The VIN is the root number that the license number is tied to. A cop following you cannot see at a glance if you paid your tax on time or at all. Without a license plate someone moving to another state would not be forced to pay, unless the cops stopped them to check the VIN. The main purpose of a license plate is taxation. That is also the biggest reason why boats and airplanes or licensed.

      To tax any object, it has to be tracked easily. I suppose in the electronic age, the visible plate could be, and maybe eventually will be replaced with a self reporting electronic device.

      --
      All theory is gray
    205. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arminw · · Score: 1

      ...A VIN would suffice...

      Without a license plate, how would the state of California tax a car which I bought from my brother or uncle in Nevada? The cops would have to stop everybody randomly to check the VIN on cars. License plates have other uses of course, such as making it easier to recover a stolen vehicle. Still, the primary reason for a license plate is tax revenue.

      --
      All theory is gray
    206. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

      No, you're playing semantics.

      Whether you pay the toll directly or indirectly, you're still covering the cost of the use of the road through your fare.

      The point is, you're still paying for that "right" to be on the road, whether you're in a taxi or bus or your own vehicle.

      I think if it were truly a privilege, then you could tell some people "You can go on this road. But you can't. And you can't, but you can..." But instead everyone can use it. Because they have that right when they pay the toll.

      --
      "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
    207. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Here in Norway we have stickers we put on our licence plates that "prove" that we have paid the taxes required. A colored sticker would be enough, and the police could "sample" to see if anyone has faked it.

    208. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by arminw · · Score: 1

      ...A colored sticker would be enough...

      So where on the car must your sticker be stuck? We also have such colored stickers and they must be put in the right upper corner of the license plate. BTW, I have nothing against paying taxes for the cars. Here all vehicle taxes must be used for automobile or transportation related purposes. Because of that spending mandate, we get good roads, bridges and in some places, rapid transit for our tax money. In many places however, car taxes end up in the general pot and are used for all sorts of expenses that have nothing to do with cars or other transport.

      --
      All theory is gray
    209. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not so fast, what if on coming traffic is moving. you've see cars flipped over in the intersections? that because of red runner trying to be the last on through and a fast moving Green lighter clipping them. Running red lights should be automatic $500 fines.

    210. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Regarding your sig, are you serious? If we wrongfully jail someone for 10 years, it's sad that we can't give them their time back, but at least we can set them free. Wrongfully death penalty someone, and there's no fixing the mistake at all.

      Also, due to the extra appeals and attorney's fees in death penalty cases, it generally costs society more dollars to kill an inmate than it does to house and feed them for the rest of their naturally-occurring lives. So not only is not killing inmates more humane, it is also more economically efficient.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    211. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by WhiteHorse-The+Origi · · Score: 1

      Yeah the gov't is out of control. It's as if they've overthrown the people...

    212. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is more to crime than saving a few bucks on tolls. Does no one else think it would be fun to go around a large airplane or mall parkinglot reprogramming everyones ez-pass to the same person? Or randomly swapping them around?

      Kids these days, no respect for anarchy.

    213. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Laws that make sense. Limiting criminal charges to only people who have actually commited a crime. Limiting convictions to only those crimes that have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. These are some fairly radical ideas, but I think they just might work.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    214. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by repvik · · Score: 1

      Those are perfectly sane ideas, but how do you propose to enforce them?

    215. Re:Cameras at every toll booth by torkus · · Score: 1

      Yes, because I'm going to hit another vehicle hiding between bushes and trees or behind the corner of a bridge overpass, etc. I would actually have a very hard time INTENTIONALLY hitting a car in such a place.

      There's also a huge difference between intentionally hiding out of sight and other traffic in my 3 second bubble. I'm not worried about stupid/bad drivers if they're no where near me.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  3. Alibis? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 4, Informative

    You've got it the wrong way around - people won't use this to create alibis before committing a crime, they'll use it to establish evidence of the target being in a certain area at a certain time even though he swears he was elsewhere

    At any rate, certain requirements have to be met before something can be introduced as evidence. I'm assuming most things (like this) would, by default, not constitute evidence anyway. Email (at least in this country) needs to be provided along with an audit trail before it's accepted as evidence

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    1. Re:Alibis? by chebucto · · Score: 1

      Stop, you're both right!

      I would think false alibis are just as likely as framing.

      As for evidence, I seem to remember hearing snippets on Off The Hook about this sort of data being used as evidence in the past.

      --
      The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
    2. Re:Alibis? by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This wont help with Alibis because no court will accept a time stamp and a transponder id as evidence. Who is to say that you were driving the car, or even that someone didn't take your FastPass and drive through with a different car. To be entered into evidence you would have to take the time/id and review the video records to get a car/face match.

      Even if this worked for an alabi like TFA implied, you could get into trouble real quick if you didn't know the final destination of the car. What? You tell the police you went to X? Well the car you gave your ID went to Y. The car also is still driving around town and went through two toll booths while you were in police custody.

    3. Re:Alibis? by aug24 · · Score: 1

      That could be done by just inserting values in the database. No cloning required.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    4. Re:Alibis? by guy5000 · · Score: 1

      now awaiting the law and order episode

  4. Article Text by dfm3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Between the splash screen redirects and the ads, this article is nearly unreadable. Here's the text for those who don't want to put up with the crap.

    ----
    Drivers using the automated FasTrak toll system on roads and bridges in California's Bay Area could be vulnerable to fraud, according to a computer security firm in Oakland, CA.

    Despite previous reassurances about the security of the system, Nate Lawson of Root Labs claims that the unique identity numbers used to identify the FasTrak wireless transponders carried in cars can be copied or overwritten with relative ease.

    This means that fraudsters could clone transponders, says Lawson, by copying the ID of another driver onto their device. As a result, they could travel for free while others unwittingly foot the bill. "It's trivial to clone a device," Lawson says. "In fact, I have several clones with my own ID already."

    Lawson says that this also raises the possibility of using the FasTrak system to create false alibis, by overwriting one's own ID onto another driver's device before committing a crime. The toll system's logs would appear to show the perpetrator driving at another location when the crime was being committed, he says.

    So far, the security flaws have only been verified in the FasTrak system, but other toll systems, like E-Z Pass and I-Pass, need to be looked at too, argues Lawson. "Every modern system requires a public security review to be sure there aren't different but related problems," he says. Indeed, in recent weeks, researchers announced flaws in another wireless identification system: the Mifare Classic chip, which is used by commuters on transport systems in many cities, including Boston and London. However, last week, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) filed a lawsuit to prevent students at MIT from presenting an analysis of Boston's subway system.

    The Bay Area Metropolitan Transport Commission (MTC), which oversees the FasTrak toll system, maintains that it is secure but says it is looking into Lawson's claims. "MTC is in contact with vendors who manufacture FasTrak lane equipment and devices to identify potential risks and corrective actions," says MTC spokesman Randy Rentschler. "We are also improving system monitoring in order to detect potentially fraudulent activity."

    In the past, authorities have insisted that the FasTrak system uses encryption to secure data and that no personal details are stored on the device--just two unique, randomly assigned ID numbers. One of these is used to register the device when a customer purchases it, while the other acts as a unique identifier to let radio receivers at tolls detect cars as they pass by.

    But when Lawson opened up a transponder, he found that there was no security protecting these IDs. The device uses two antennas, one to detect a request signal from the toll reader and another to transmit its ID so that it can be read, he says.

    By copying the IDs of the readers, it was possible to activate the transponder to transmit its ID. This trick doesn't have to be carried out on the highway, Lawson notes, but could be achieved by walking through a parking lot and discreetly interrogating transponders.

    What's more, despite previous claims that the devices are read only, Lawson found that IDs are actually stored on rewritable flash memory. "FasTrak is probably not aware of this, which is why I tried to get in touch with them," he says. It is possible to send messages to the device to overwrite someone's ID, either wiping it or replacing it with another ID, says Lawson.

    "Access to a tag number does not provide the ability to access any other information," says MTC's Rentschler. "We also believe that significant effort would need to be invested in cloning tags." He adds, "If any fraudulent toll activity is detected on a customer's account, the existing toll-enforcement system can be used to identify and track down the perpetrator."

    Lawson says that using each stolen ID just once would make it difficult to track

    1. Re:Article Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No ad-block?

    2. Re:Article Text by Bryansix · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is worth noting that the FasTrak system is deployed throughout California and not just in the Bay Area. I have four tollways near my home alone that use the system and I live in Southern California. It is a given that if it is a Toll Road and it is in California that it uses FasTrak. The only exception may be toll bridges.

    3. Re:Article Text by egnop · · Score: 0

      Thnx

  5. cameras / scanners by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't know about California, but in New England they have cameras that can match up a vehicle with a FASTLANE transmitter. It would not be very hard to also hook up license plate scanners. This seems like a crime with very little payoff, and huge chance of getting caught.

    1. Re:cameras / scanners by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      and it's really easy to obscure your plate to side and overhead cameras. A very simple system is a frame with louvers that obscure it from side angles, can be made in anyone's garage with pop cans and is nearly invisible to cops driving behind you.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:cameras / scanners by halcyon1234 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't have the newspaper article on hand, but a couple years ago in Toronto, someone was avoiding tolls on the 407 (Ontario's only toll road). They put their license plate on hinges, and attached a piece of string to it that ran through the car to the front. A tug on the string, and the plate flipped up.

      And he would have got away with it if it wasn't for those meddling-- well, Ontario Provincial Police doing a blitz on the highway specifically looking for speeders, dangerous drivers and toll-evaders.

    3. Re:cameras / scanners by dfm3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Where I live, it's common for thieves to steal license plates and slap them on their car before committing a crime. It raises far less attention than a car with no plates, and even if bystanders copy down the offending plate number, such information is useless.

      Combine a stolen plate with a stolen ID, and it would be very difficult to track down a one-time offender disregarding something like facial recognition (drive through the tollbooth every day at 8 AM, though, and I'm sure they'd catch on pretty quickly).

      Another loophole is those temporary 30 day tags you get when you purchase a new car. In many states they are not unique, not trackable (in our state they just have a sharpied 6-digit expiration date in big numbers), easy to fake, and nobody thinks twice about them.

    4. Re:cameras / scanners by Rastl · · Score: 3, Informative

      Any obvious physical means to obscure the license plate would be self-defeating.

      Just get some polarizing film and put it over your license plate. Unless the cameras are head-on (which generally they're not) they're going to get a black rectangle where the license plate should be.

      A 'clear' film would be much less likely to attract law enforcement attention than some kind of physical change.

      I believe this kind of thing is illegal but then again if you're going to be using a cloned transmitter I don't see that breaking another law would cause you to lose any sleep.

    5. Re:cameras / scanners by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Here in Chicago area, we had someone years back rob a supermarket and kill a woman in the process, fleeing in a vehicle with temp plates. Now, dealers have to give out real plates when they sell a car (some dealers are still in the transition phase, but soon all will be required) and the plates are live as soon as you drive off the lot.

    6. Re:cameras / scanners by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      Sometimes they just steal the whole car for a crime. Case in point a neighbor once had his car stolen before christmas. It was full of the kids presents he was hiding and it was believed to have been stolen for that reason. The cops found the car three weeks late burnt out with the presents still inside. When asked why would they steal a car and just burn it the cops replied it was most likely used in a serious crime like transporting a body or moving large amounts of drugs.

      At that point with the plates intact on the right vehicle even a curious cop who punches in the plate number will see it matches the vehicle.

  6. What about the license plate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Massachusetts, the similar "Fast Lane" RFID transponder id is linked to your license plate. If you drive through a toll gate with an id that does not match your license plate (high speed cameras read the plate and use OCR to record it), your account gets flagged and you get a nastygram in your snail mail box along with a fine.

    People victims to this type of clone would then obviously appeal and the stored license plate number of the cloner would then be easily used to find them.

  7. This is nothing new... by Chineseyes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When I was a teenager (late 90s) there were a few people selling a device about the size of two bricks that could fool ez-pass by using another person's id. This is why when you sign up for ez-pass you have to give them the make and model of your car as well as your license plate number. They have two cameras on either side of your car pointing at you and numerous overhead cameras when you pass through so I believe any sort of fraud would be pretty difficult to pull off. I'm sure California has a similar setup and if they don't then they better get working on it.

    --
    I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended

    --A wise old fart named SC0RN
    1. Re:This is nothing new... by ckthorp · · Score: 1

      Ah, but you could use the hack to frame someone for fraud. They would have a hard time clearing their name because computers are "infallible."

    2. Re:This is nothing new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if the cameras verify your car's make and model, and license plate.... what again does the wireless transponder thing do?

    3. Re:This is nothing new... by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

      They would have a hard time clearing their name because computers are "infallible."

      It's not magic, if someone's pass had been overwritten as a prank, it would be easy as hell to verify afterwards with a handheld scanner.
      Then it's down to a _person_ deciding if it was a prank or on purpose, so where does taking the side of the computer fit into this? Are you trying to say the passes might overwrite themselves to another ID, and there is simply no one to blame? HAH!

    4. Re:This is nothing new... by ckthorp · · Score: 1

      You could verify that it was changed, but how do you verify who did the changing? Especially if it happens several times over several months? Note that I wrote frame, not prank. A prank could be written off as a one-time computer glitch or something. As a serious pre-meditated frame-up, I suspect the bureaucracy would decide against the individual.

    5. Re:This is nothing new... by powerlord · · Score: 1

      So if the cameras verify your car's make and model, and license plate.... what again does the wireless transponder thing do?

      Assuming I understood the original parent correctly, they are claiming that the Wireless transponder is supposed to be the "Foreign Key" to the table of information that is suppose to match what the cameras can see.

      Personally I doubt anyone actually looks at any of the cameras unless and until there is a problem, and I find it highly unlikely that the system actually bothers to do any recognition (on the license plate or on the make/model of car).

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    6. Re:This is nothing new... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Personally I doubt anyone actually looks at any of the cameras unless and until there is a problem, and I find it highly unlikely that the system actually bothers to do any recognition (on the license plate or on the make/model of car).

      It's pretty clear that the camera is doing plate recognition and is tied into the system, at least in the SF Bay area bridges, because they also bill you by plate number if you left your transponder at home or go through one of the lanes where the transponder interrogation is defective. It would be an excessively expensive human resource load to have humans do this recognition when there is fine software available (and no doubt already being used for other purposes on the same cameras.)

      As for the grandparent poster's question... The transponder lets the system respond quickly enough to register the car on its way through the tollbooth at 25 MPH or so and provide feedback in the toll booth display and the transponder's sounder that the toll has been paid. It also serves as belt-and-suspenders if the license plate isn't readable with sufficient accuracy or at all.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    7. Re:This is nothing new... by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

      I just don't see a significant difference between what we're calling a prank and a frame up.
      Someone is going to risk being caught be parking lot surveillance, or neighbors to change someone's pass to a different ID, all to ... what? Get that person's pass privileges revoked? Make them give up and not use it? Are those outcomes not utterly pointless?

      Nobody on either side will suspect a third party after your second attempt?

      So I don't get it, is a "frame up" supposed to be like a prank but more persistent, and more risky, and not done just for fun?

  8. So let me get this straight... by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

    The transponder doesn't do challenge response, it just spews out an ID number when polled?

    1. Re:So let me get this straight... by mapsjanhere · · Score: 1

      Nope, it's just an oversized RFID similar to what Walmart puts on their pallets.

      --
      I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
    2. Re:So let me get this straight... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      Embedded devices are rarely designed to be very secure. One of the problems is that often there is not enough space for strong crypto, even a strong cryptographic hash. Things are getting better these days, with smaller transistors and lower power circuitry, but it is still difficult to get really strong crypto in a small RFID transponder like that.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:So let me get this straight... by nwf · · Score: 1

      Have you seen those toll tags? I have an EZPass, and it's larger than my iPhone. They could put all sorts of stuff in that thing.

      --
      I don't know, but it works for me.
    4. Re:So let me get this straight... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      Remember that your iPhone has a big, juicy battery in it, that can power more advanced computation. An EZPass tag is powered by the radio waves it receives, and so cannot have the same sort of processor than an iPhone has.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
  9. No Authentication = Easy Crime by binaryspiral · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When you have the ability to send the same data over and over again without any form of authentication or obfuscation - yes, it can be copied and used by anyone else.

    There are ways to prevent this:

    Use a rolling code, like my garage door, key fob, and online banking fob uses.

    Use another form of authentication, like color of vehicle, plate number, or something else easily identifiable on the car.

    These are about as secure as my Speedpass fob that I can use to purchase fuel and snacks at Mobil stations. If its stolen, anyone can use it.

    1. Re:No Authentication = Easy Crime by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      There are cameras at CA FasTrak lanes that do take photos of the cars and your make/model/color and licence plate are on file.

      I think it's reasonable to assume that for the wireless bit, they wanted it as simple as possible. Less data to send, less chance you'll miss anything at 80mph.

      That's why the other bits are in place.

    2. Re:No Authentication = Easy Crime by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      > Use another form of authentication, like color of vehicle, plate
      > number, or something else easily identifiable on the car.

      The insufferable thing is... they already HAVE cameras with character recognition at the tolls gates. If you blow through the lane without paying the toll, fast-track or otherwise, the system snaps a photo of your license plate and you get a ticket for the violation in the mail a few days later. So if they were to just change their software, they could dispense with the expense and hassle of fast-track and the toll lanes, and just photo the license plates that use the bridges and bill you at the end of the month for that usage.

      But that would mean giving up the ticket income for toll violations, the toll collectors are no doubt unionized, and someone is getting kickbacks on fast-track. Gotta love the government, eh?

      cya,
      john

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    3. Re:No Authentication = Easy Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "These are about as secure as my Speedpass fob that I can use to purchase fuel and snacks at Mobil stations. If its stolen, anyone can use it."

      Yup, kinda like cash. I use it to purchase snacks and fuel at the local gas station, and if it's stolen, anyone can use it.

    4. Re:No Authentication = Easy Crime by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Billing is an issue, though. You have to be in some kind of electronic payment system for that to work. If they have to spend $.42 to send you a $2 bill, they're not saving much over the fancy system.

      But you're still right, though. Why not just register your tag with an electronic billing firm, that has permission to deduct the tolls from an account you fill for the purpose?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:No Authentication = Easy Crime by sobachatina · · Score: 1

      What you describe is exactly how it is done in Texas.

      The toll pass gives you a 10% discount but if you don't have one there isn't a ticket. You can just have your tags registered and they will bill your account. If they don't have anything in the system they just send the bill to your house.

    6. Re:No Authentication = Easy Crime by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      How unexpectedly sane.

      I suppose it's the difference between an organizational structure based on the premise that "people are evil, let's soak them with fines" and, "Let's minimize the number of opportunities for people to do things that result in fines."

      Reminds me of Starship Troopers, actually.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  10. Problems with the Clone/Alibi idea by sfm · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, pretending to be someone else may save you some tolls, but eventually someone will figure out who is posing as a different driver. The Bay Area bridge, airport parking lots, and many other places have cameras that photograph both the driver and the license plate of the vehicles that pass. Maybe some good will come out of all this surveillance.....but probably not.

  11. As former toll systems programmer... by faragon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Old wireless toll systems didn't event use encryption, such as the case of old Amtech 2.4GHz systems, which are limited to store information similar to a typical ISO Track #2 credit card (PAN, and some other info). However, modern system, such as the CESARE european standard (public information, no revealing secrets here, of course), includes modern security (realtime generated derivate key negotiation, etc.).

  12. Luckily, Lawson wasn't sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Not yet. But he will be. We are seeing an irresistable force meeting an immovable obstacle. Society is creating a scenario where as technology moves forward the gap between truth, progress, science - and security, stability, state widens. They are not naturally in conflict, but we have chosen to make them so. The law and research are increasingly at odds. Corporations and governments have begun to build presumed ignorance into business and administration models, backing up security through obscurity with sanctions of threats, imprisonment and violence. The way it looks to me over the next 10 years research is not going stop, and neither is the landgrab for power and easy exloitation. Sooner or later these worlds are going to clash in a big way (many would say they already have as the economy collapses). Basic activities like the teaching and practice of chemistry, physics and computer science are being attacked to maintain a fragile status quo. Yet, economic development is not possible without research and education. It seems society has painted itself into a corner. It cannot progress without science and yet it is so threatened it will not tolerate it amongst its people. It's killing off the nutrients that feed it.

  13. Ah! by ebonum · · Score: 1

    Damn it! Will someone arrest this guy? I've been doing this for years. How can he go out an publicly disclose something like this? This is criminal! How much longer will this trick work? Another month or two? This is going to cost me. CA gas prices are already too high. I pay plenty of taxes on the gas, I really don't want to have to pay this also.

  14. California Schemin' by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Funny

    all the streets are free
    and the highway's no pay
    I've been for a drive
    on a self-made freeway

    My hacks will do the charm
    Cuz I'm in L.A
    California Schemin'
    on a self-made freeway

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:California Schemin' by FrankieBaby1986 · · Score: 1

      Phony Transmitter

      Gives Me A Ride

      To My Job For Free

      BURMA SHAVE!

      --
      ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
  15. Can you get stopped for by joeflies · · Score: 1

    leaving the new car plates on your car even after you get your real license plates?

    1. Re:Can you get stopped for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course. That's what the expiration date is for.

    2. Re:Can you get stopped for by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Yes. The temporary tags are only good for so long, though that's creating some annoyance here because the state is taking longer to issue plates than what the tags are good for.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:Can you get stopped for by Solarbeat · · Score: 1

      In California, we don't get temporary plates w/ expiration dates. It's usually just a paper plate with the dealer's logo. (We get temporary registration attached to the windshield.) They're pretty quick about getting proper plates out, but I've known people to drive around with their dealer ad/plate for many, many months.

  16. Anarchy on the Roads by JiffyPop · · Score: 1

    The solution to all of the comments that your license plate will still identify you: as you drive around simply start saving and replacing the ID in devices as you pass other drivers. After a week you could replace your own ID with any of the values you swapped around during the week (hundreds? thousands?). Voila! Plausible deniability.

    I'd hate to be working for whoever has to sort out the mess in the end, though. That's a lot of work to create for others just to avoid some tolls.

  17. Easily hackable, but a useless hack... by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...given that almost all of the toll transponder systems in the US have cameras, and plate recognition is done. I once got a ticket from another state (NY), claiming a plate I had years ago had gone through one of their upstate tollbooths. Also, my father would get notices in the mail from our state's system when he moved the transponder to a vehicle that wasn't registered to use it. So. Useless hack, sensationalist article, film at 11.

    1. Re:Easily hackable, but a useless hack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not 100% sure on this, but I believe the cameras are only used in instances where the vehicle fails to properly authenticate.

      I fairly sure of this because I have used my I-Pass with my wife's car several dozen times over the past few years.

    2. Re:Easily hackable, but a useless hack... by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      Think they'll ever be done though? If you're choosy, the PA turnpike still has EZPass lanes that DON'T capture a picture of your plate and grinning face as you sail through the lane with the transponder under your seat.

    3. Re:Easily hackable, but a useless hack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So. Useless hack, sensationalist article, film at 11.

      It wasn't advertised as a money making scheme; It was presented to show the insecurity of the system and its unreliability as "evidence". Clearly, Nate is chipping away at the perceived security of RFID.

  18. Life Imitates Art by jasontromm · · Score: 1

    Sounds exactly like something out of Cory Doctorow's recent novel, "Little Brother."

    --
    "Politicians always tell the truth, when they're calling each other liars."
  19. Why use transponders at all? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Transponders are useful for cars without local plates or cars with dirty plates, but otherwise, why bother?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Why use transponders at all? by faragon · · Score: 1

      You're right, it's done that way because the transponder is "the contract", similar to a credit card. Using just the vehicle identification plate, you should have a contract for every car you drive, while with the transponder you're able to use your own/lover^Wwife/renting car, etc.

    2. Re:Why use transponders at all? by DrDNA · · Score: 1

      or cars with dirty plates, but otherwise, why bother?

      I think you answered yourself right here.

  20. Re:Not impressed! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

    "First time?" We are lucky to get it right the 800th time.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  21. colorado replacing toll booths with cameras by peter303 · · Score: 1

    About 10% of the toll road rides are infrequent-users who dont have transponders. Colorado decided to terminate the booths and use cameras to mail bills to users. Its cheaper than people.

  22. "Lawson also raises the interesting of using ..." by frglrock · · Score: 1

    I wish I could "raise the interesting" like that ... hmmm, the more I look at that sentence the more wrong it gets.

  23. As seen in Little Brother by atdt1991 · · Score: 1

    The idea of hacking the FasTrak system (or, more specifically, cloning FasTrak units) for false alibis and other social mayhem was explicitly brought up in Cory Doctorow's Little Brother. I think it is way more interesting in the fiction book, because they rapidly re-cloned random other cars, essentially switching IDs around.

  24. E-Z pass users get the same rate and I-pass users by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    E-Z pass users get the same rate and I-pass users get E-Z pass rates as well. Also alot of People in WI and IN have I-pass / E-Z pass.

    Now E-Z pass is the system to hack as many states use it.

  25. Roll Eyes by mpapet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. How many tolls will be stolen? Too few for anyone in the project to care. They will treat this like "ID theft" and the burden is on you.

    2. How many people are going to want or actually *do* anything TFA suggests. It's a number very close to zero.

    The same kind of thinking applies to most automated transit toll collecting system. No one that could do anything about these issues cares or would be foolish enough to waste budget on corner cases like this. It would be a huge political/professional liability if they did.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    1. Re:Roll Eyes by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand the motivations of pirates and thieves. If the technology can be produced fairly easily, there are people that will buy it. If it can be assembled by someone with a little instruction and some dexterity, so much the better.

      I'll bet that there are plenty of people that would be willing to pay $50 for a lifetime transit "pass" that would let them ride free for years. Assuming the specifics were addressed and these "passes" needed to be updated, there are still plenty that would pay $50 a year to keep riding free. Same thing for tolls. If you could have Arnold Schwarzenegger's EZpass code do you not think there would be customers?

      All the vendor of these things has to be is in a place that can thumb their nose at US law. Today that is easily Russia and most of Southeast Asia. Mexico, probably as well. There is money to be made with this, and I'm sure it will be made.

      How many tolls and fares? Lots and lots. Will the various agencies decide they have to make major change? Maybe. The biggest problem is if there is any commercial exploitation of this the users will take in the wallet for high-priced, more difficult to use, systems with greater security.

  26. Little Brother (Cory Doctorow) by reality-bytes · · Score: 1

    I wonder if Nate Lawson had read Cory Doctorow's "Little Brother" before his work on the Fastrak transponders?

    It just so happens that Doctorow's fictional 'Little Brother' work describes just such an exploit being used on a Bay Area transit card system.

    Having said that, Doctorow mentions in his preface that most of the technologies in the work are either current reality or the possibilities of the near future.

    Nowadays, it seems it's more about which transit card/xpndr system hasn't been done yet.

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  27. E-Z Pass by akunkel · · Score: 0

    I don't know about cloning an E-Z Pass but if you use the E-Z Pass tag on a car that it is not registered to you, you get a ticket from them with the offending license plate number. At least this is the case in the NY Metro area. My wife got a ticket when I used her pass while waiting for a replacement for my non-functioning pass. I have had several friends who used to swap the passes between cars start to get tickets for the same reason. Are they scanning all of the license plates and matching them with the E-Z Pass tag or only some? This would seem to make cloning less effective unless you were maybe driving a stolen car/swapped plates since they would know the plate number of the cloned tag.

  28. No ad-block by dfm3 · · Score: 1

    Sometimes corporate policy limits what one may do with their computer... yeah, I know, I should get back to work.

  29. The other readers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We mustn't assume that these vehicle transponder only use is for for toll collection. They work anywhere they want to place a Transponder reporting unit.and they they can even read transponder from other states
    I don't know about California,
      but many other states use similar transponder units in vehicles. In our state there are readers all over the place. they are used for example to track vehicle movements, this information is used here in the North east to track unsuspecting Criminal suspects and to enforce traffic camera violations , some police vehicle have a reader in them to track suspects on the move .
    And since there is a time stamp and unique serial number, they can be used by the police to get you a speeding ticket.
      Example a reader sees you moved from point A - B too quickly and Bingo ! your average speed over that distance is know They can be used for many purposes beyond toll collection

      Hacked transponder units may throw a monkey wrench into potential criminal investigations , traffic violation support and vehicle road use tracking statistics , and many things not know to the public , for example If I wanted to clobber only out of state drivers or those who can better pay fines, the police can just read these things and statistically more out of state drivers or those who travel and use hem have more money. What better way to target them for traffic violations and increasing revenue
    In our state You must have good credit to get one of these things , so they know you can pay their big fines , and this is just but one nefarious use by crooked lawmakers

    1. Re:The other readers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's illegal in California (defined as a speed trap) for police to use time over a known distance to issue tickets. VASCAR and anything like that isn't valid evidence of speeding and will result in a ticket being thrown out. Also, officers are supposed to visually estimate a offender's speed before verifying their estimation with radar/LIDAR.

      Also, in San Diego there aren't any cameras in our FasTrak lanes. All enforcement is manually done by officers sitting on the shoulder of the freeway. You don't get a toll-evasion ticket ($25 or so) here; you get hit with a $371 carpool violation for failing to display your transponder.

  30. Nah, it's laziness.... by OmniGeek · · Score: 1

    While it's true that passive RFID devices are notably short on power and computing capacity (and can be vulnerable to tricks like power-consumption analysis and direct physical probing to attack their encryption), the central reason most of these systems are poorly encrypted if at all is...

    Cheapness, intellectual laziness, and garden-variety stupidity.

    One CAN make these systems much more secure, but it requires cryptographic competence and the determination to do the job right. As Schneier says, crypto is hard to do properly, so it costs time, money, and thought. And the end user can rarely distinguish a secure system from a crappy one, so the economic incentive do do it right is minimal.

    Methinks we could use a good set of standards and an accepted certification process for rating the attack-resistance of systems like this. Won't happen, of course...

    --

    "My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
    1. Re:Nah, it's laziness.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the central reason most of these systems are poorly encrypted if at all is...

      There's very little benefit. Why spend a fortune when it doesn't mater? No one is going to get away with stealing more than a few bucks. Whey spend millions preventing it?

  31. Simple solution by FST777 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't let private companies run these things.

    As a Dutchie, I'm completely stunned at the thought that any government will let privately owned companies run the traffic...

    --
    Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
    1. Re:Simple solution by scorp1us · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Bah, giving the government any kind of power just opens it up for abuse.

      The four words "promote the general welfare" in the US Constitution have given rise to social security, medicare and other unconstitutional entitlement programs (They only reason why they are not unconstitutional is because there is no guarantee of any entitlement)

      The commerce clause - "The Congress shall have power . . . To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;" has been used to stretch the reach of federal regulation. Where it was originally meant to keep commerce from being uninhibited, it is not used for regulating everything that might ever be sold across state lines.

      The problem I have is these traffic "safety" devices are a back-end tax. And as a revenue generator, they are subject to different levels of enforcement based on budgetary needs. What was once acceptable becomes unacceptable, not due to risk, but because there is a budget deficit.


      There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things a crime that it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws.
      -Ayn Rand

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    2. Re:Simple solution by fprintf · · Score: 1

      As an American, I am shocked at the functions you give to your government to run on your behalf.

      --
      This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
    3. Re:Simple solution by quacking+duck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe other democratic governments aren't quite as corrupt?

      It's amazing to me that you can totally distrust your government to do anything right, yet think that private enterprise overseeing parts of your life is somehow better.

      Okay, so less of your income is taxed. The flip side is that the company isn't accountable to anyone--you can't vote them out! And if they *are* accountable to someone... well guess what, it's probably to government oversight!

    4. Re:Simple solution by AnotherUsername · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I trust the government to do a better job than a private company. Call me crazy, but the private company is in it SOLELY to make money. The government, while making money, would be doing it because it is a job that they are trusted to do fairly, and are held accountable by the people. Companies are held accountable by their shareholders, and will do anything and everything to make money, including screw over the general populace.

      As for your condemnation of the 'promote the general welfare' clause, I ask, why not have these programs? Part of the government's job is to provide a safety net, because, believe it or not, sometimes shit happens. Part of living in a society means helping out others in that society. If someone in your community is needing help, you help them out. Having programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and other programs is so that, when the times get rough, there is something there to help you get back on your feet. This is called COMPASSION for those in need.

      As for the commerce clause - Are you kidding me? Companies are being allowed to EASILY send all their jobs overseas, buying shoddy products from China to be sold here, to pollute as much as their money will let them, to use tax loopholes to screw workers out of benefits they have had for years, and God knows what else. And you think their the government is regulating with an iron fist? On the contrary. The government needs to start regulating commerce much, much more, to ensure that corporations do not trash the world and the people in it, simply for a better bottom line. While there is nothing wrong with a free market, an unregulated free market will bring about the downfall of civilization, and working man will suffer the most because of it.

      As for your Ayn Rand fascination, you probably should know that she is all about herself, and screw everyone else. She was a selfish bitch who didn't give a damn about anyone else except herself.

      And if you were thinking that running red lights is not illegal, and that you have a right to run them, please never drive near me. I'd rather not die because you felt it was your moral right to plow into me at 70 miles an hour.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    5. Re:Simple solution by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

      the company isn't accountable to anyone--you can't vote them out!

      You can't vote out public companies or state-hired engineers either. You vote out the elected officials who hired them (or who are the boss of the boss of the guy that hired them)

      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    6. Re:Simple solution by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Part of the government's job is to provide a safety net, because, believe it or not, sometimes shit happens. Part of living in a society means helping out others in that society."

      Well, I don't know of anything in the Constitution of the US that states that this is the the job of the government.

      If you can point on this job of the Federal govt....then please do so. Otherwise, it should have required an amendment.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:Simple solution by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      As for your condemnation of the 'promote the general welfare' clause, I ask, why not have these programs? Part of the government's job is to provide a safety net, because, believe it or not, sometimes shit happens. Part of living in a society means helping out others in that society. If someone in your community is needing help, you help them out. Having programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and other programs is so that, when the times get rough, there is something there to help you get back on your feet. This is called COMPASSION for those in need.

      Government enforced compassion? The problem with government enforced compassion is that it isn't compassionate. Compassion involves empathy. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc, involves following a byzantine bureaucracy to arrive at a government mandated payday. It involves politician using the redistribution of wealth as a carrot to attract votes. It involves some people promising other people that a third group is too successful and possibly have "excess profits".

      Compassion goes from one human to another. The Federal government is never involved.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    8. Re:Simple solution by torkus · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but as much as i dislike 'big business' the government is worse. At least if you're running a company you look to do things efficiently and not in obvious violation of the law. As a governmental agency you have none of that. If the waste, graft, and red tape come to the attention of a media outlet looking for a story then you're forced to look like you're cleaning up your act for a while. You also have very little legal accountibility compared to a private business.

      General welfare programs: The GOVERNMENT should not and would not need to provide these - if it wasn't virtually impossible to get it elsewhere. "shit happens" - true - but your utter disinterest in planning for things that go bump in the night shouldn't obligate someone ELSE to care for you. Take out insurance, use a charity. Massive spending on the welfare program that is grossly abused by so many does not help the overall 'greater good'. It helps the minority at the (great) expense of the majority.

      Commerce: No no no. A thousand times no. First off, big companies have the lobbying power to generally get whatever they want. Their abuse of the commerce regulations is what led to jobs going overseas and the H1-B visa nonsense. We have so much regulation, red tape, and similar nonsense that of COURSE they're going to export jobs to where people simply want to work for a livable wage. Do we have a commerce problem? Yes. It's driven by greed of big business and the corruption in our commerce regulation.

      -ignoring ann rand comment-

      You confuse what a 'right' is. Go read the constitution some time. If someone drives 70 and goes through a light slightly after it turns red or on an empty road there's no harm done - why do you even care? If someone hits your car and is at fault, they should be resonsible for any damanges or injuries in full.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    9. Re:Simple solution by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      It says so right there at the beginning, in the Preamble:

      We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

      Making the lives of the citizens of the United States better. This includes all citizens, not just the ones who are healthy, or not down on their luck, or having any number of misfortunes that would deprive them of a generally decent life. Everyone needs help sometimes, and not everyone has someone who can help them.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    10. Re:Simple solution by torkus · · Score: 1

      Sure you can vote out a private company: Don't buy from them.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    11. Re:Simple solution by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      Sure you can vote out a private company: Don't buy from them.

      Sigh... I suppose on the subject at hand, i.e. private companies running red light cameras, you're going to detour around intersections with them? Cost yourself some gas every time you do so?

      Unless these companies are diversified into consumer goods or services, just under what circumstance would you be buying anything from them in the first place?

    12. Re:Simple solution by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      First paragraph: Running a company is about doing things efficiently, yes, and normally at the expense of everyone not in an executive position of that company. As for the not in obvious violation of the law, well, a violation of the law is still illegal, whether it is obvious or not. It seems that the bigger the company, the more able it is of covering its tracks. As for the part about the reporter looking for a story, and being forced to look like it is cleaning up its act for awhile, how is this any different from a major corporation?

      As for the general welfare paragraph:
      Many times, it is not utter disinterest.
      What is someone gets hurt, and is unable to work for a long time, of which during this time, savings run out. Once savings run out, what happens then?
      What if a man loses his job due to layoffs, and is unable to find a job, because nobody is hiring?
      What if someone has been working for a company for a long time, and that company is bought out, and the new owners decide that the benefits package is going to get alot smaller? Say, for instance, the medical insurance package is cut. And then someone in the person's family is injured. What then?

      How to stop corporations from sending jobs overseas: Use tariffs on their goods made overseas. Tax them so hard that they have no choice but to either stop selling in the U.S., or keep jobs here.

      My comment about the stop light and not driving near me was sarcasm.
      Also, if someone drives 70 through a red light, they could easily hit someone going through the intersection. If they hit someone in the side going 70, there probably won't be injuries. There will be a dead person in that car that was hit. They may be responsible, but can they bring a dead person back to life? Yea, there's a possibility of it, but probably not. Hitting someone going 70 isn't a mere matter of a heart stopping. It's more of a 'Pick up the body parts' matter.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    13. Re:Simple solution by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "promote the general Welfare"

      I don't think the founders meant this to mean that we instantiate a welfare system like we have today. It is to promote the general welfare of the country, to basically set the stage for people to take care of themselves and pursue their own happiness and success in life.

      The Constitution is not there to give rights to people, it is there to specifically spell out the limited powers that the federal govt. has. Most power is to reside in the states...I'd say that the 'services' and safety nets would be done at that level. But, I don't see that shy of an amendment that the Federal govt. which is supposed to be weak, has the power to do what it has done today.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:Simple solution by scorp1us · · Score: 1

      The term is "promote" as in make better, not "provide for"

      The statement is clearly aimed to bias the actions of the federal government towards the promotion if conditions in the country via the enumerated powers granted in the constitution - by making laws, trade, monetary policy, treaties, etc. It does not however confer any authority to tax the rich to feed the poor. No where is this more evident than with the passage of the income tax. The nation was at the time, substantially funded by import tariffs which affected the poor far more than the rich. The income tax was supposed to relieve the import taxes (20% of an item's cost) and place that burden on the rich who merely made money by having money. That is the spirit of the statement.

      I have no idea how anyone knowing anything about the constitution, could ever say the founders envisioned a federal government that was to provide for its people. Surely, if this was an aim, they would have said it in more than 4 words... In fact this is our 2nd constitution, with the first having been scrapped due to states having to much power and the federal not enough. What we have is a incremented federal power, while still preserving the sovereignty of the states. Given that you're supposed to be a state citizen first, how could the founders ever intend for the federal to support everyone in a nation?

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    15. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's amazing to me that you can totally distrust your government to do anything right, yet think that private enterprise overseeing parts of your life is somehow better.

      Well, let's check the numbers:

      Deaths from Unconstrained Government: 133,147,000 Murdered, and Counting

      Deaths due to Criminals (corporate or individual): a far, far smaller number.

      And you find the distrust of government "amazing"? I find *that* amazing.

      The alternative, by the way, is not between government or "private enterprise" overseeing parts of my life; it's between having the final say over who oversees what part of MY life... or not.

    16. Re:Simple solution by torkus · · Score: 1

      Just have to poke at general welfare... If someone gets hurt, that's what insurance is for. It's not imposisble to purchase private disability insurance even today. If someone is reckless enough to have no insurance, no savings, no family and likely no self-preservation instinct, there's still charity.

      If a man loses his job due to layoffs he gets another one. Somebody is hiring, somewhere. If he has no marketable skills then get a brainless type job. Will he still be driving his ferrari if he didn't plan ahead? Nope. QQ Then again layoffs are more a product of our stock-holder driven ecconomy if you ask me. If no one is hiring anywhere then it's the great depression round 2 and society will get smacked in the head by reality finally.

      Benefits package getting smaller? No insurance? Well that's a combination of disgustingly overpriced and overregulated medical care and, again, business decisions being focused on stockholder pennies instead, investor relations, and the CEO's bonus.

      Taxing goods from overseas heavily? Great idea. Stifle growth some more. Don't expect our ecconomy to adapt at all, just punch the other guy in the balls because we're not capable of a fair fight. Over taxing goods just results in "criminals" circumventing the taxes because it's cheaper and there's more profit that way. Sad if the 'greatest country in the world' can't compete with some 3rd world piss-pot no-mans-land.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    17. Re:Simple solution by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      Apparently your idea of a 'fair fight' involves the other guy getting to use an assault rifle while you can only use your fists. It is sad that the 'greatest country in the world' can't compete with 3rd world piss-pot no-mans-land because companies have realized that they can pretty much get away with no regulation in those 3rd world piss-pot no-mans-land while in the U.S. they have to actually treat their workers like human beings. And attitudes like yours only reinforce big corporations view that what they do is right.

      As for your view of someone being 'reckless enough to not have insurance', try having a minimum wage job, with a car payment(with insurance), rent payment, phone bill, grocery bill, paying for gasoline to fuel vehicle, and trying to afford health insurance. Are you kidding me? Do you realize how much health insurance is? Give me a break. Those items I just named are pretty much considered base requirements for living in society today. Now, when I wrote this, it was based upon a single person household. Now add in a kid or two. Do you honestly believe someone can afford health insurance with all those expenditures? Quit fooling yourself.

      I hope you were kidding when you spoke of the Ferrari, but judging by your other comments...
      Anyway, it is getting harder and harder for people to find jobs. I believe whole-heartily that if something doesn't drastically change in the next two or three years, we will be in the Great Depression, round 2. As for your statement about being in a stock-holder driven economy, I agree that we are in such an economy, and it is proving to be a major downfall. Even among businesses that actually have a sense of decency, and a "It's not all about the money" sense of self(I'm looking at you, Anheuser-Busch), the stock-holders do not have such a sense, and think only of their wallets, as we have seen very recently in the A-B case. Goodbye American owned companies. It seems that most of these investors either don't realize or don't care that they are pretty much selling off the country, one share at a time. And it is pretty disgusting that more people aren't pissed off about this.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
  32. Re:Not impressed! by gnick · · Score: 1

    I am in fact disappointed that we as Americans appear never to ever get it right first time! ...

    We invented the modern computer and all that goes with it...

    Right - Good thing that didn't need any revision after our first implementation.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  33. False Alibis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't be worried about people using that system to make false alibis. Most people who have the technical knowledge even for a small hack would be paying someone else to do their dirty work for them anyway.

  34. If you know a hack, DON'T TELL anybody! Fool... by Simonetta · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If you know a hack, DON'T TELL anybody! Fool... Really. What's the point of holding a press conference to point out a way for techies to save money? If you have studied for years for skills to design, program, and build a device that can defeat the automatic removal of money from your bank account, then for goodness sake's, don't tell anybody. Use this knowledge discretely for the benefit for your family and your people.

        Spend the money that you save on your children. Or have some children if you don't have any. Or give it to your favorite charity. Or help someone that you know that is hurting in these bad times. Or put the money that you save under the mattress to support your own bad times that may come in the future.

        No one in a giant corporation is going to give you anything for pointing out security flaws that allow people in the tech community to save money. They are going to take the money that you save them and bribe politicians to give them massive tax breaks! Don't you pay attention to the news? All giant corporations are corrupt to their very core. If you find a way to keep them from taking your money, well don't tell them.

        There wouldn't be the need for toll roads if the state highway administrations had not been ripping off the funds for the past fifty years. Illinois is the third most corrupt state in the USA (after Rhode Island and Louisiana). Toll highways is only the latest and greatest scam.

        Be real. The country is falling apart after forty years of absolute corruption. Take care of yourself and your family first. Then give your money to giant corporations and the super-rich tax-avoiders that control them.

  35. Anonymous clubs by bugnuts · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Perhaps this can be used to create privacy clubs, where they all travel on cloned cards and all share the bill. Their movements couldn't be tracked via this system as long as multiple people were using it.

    I hope this wasn't posted already... I searched the thread for "Anonymous" and then felt kind of silly.

  36. Little Brother by Apoorv+Khatreja · · Score: 1

    Those who have read Cory Doctorow's 'Little Brother' would know that this is not at all something that would be a surprise. Though the method maybe different but Doctorow did visualise that such misuse of electronic identities would be way too easy. In his book, it was done through arphid cloners, where just brushing the device near a person who had his private data in a magnetic card in his pocket would suck all the info from it, and could then be transferred to another card. Teens used this to have fun, they went around exchanging people's data causing chaos, traffic jams, and huge shame to the people who originally introduced the system - the DHS.

    Somehow, I get the feeling that Lawson'sidea isn't so original.

    --
    RutSum.com
  37. It's worse than that, Jim! by seanonymous · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When this story first broke a couple of weeks ago, they suggested a far more serious abuse than just taking someone's transponder ID as your own.

    It was suggested that the reading and reprogramming could be accomplished so quickly that one could set up an antenna near a busy highway and read IDs from vehicles while assigning them the ID of the previous vehicle.

    This would result in a huge shuffling of IDs that would be a bureaucratic nightmare for the state and a huge pain for FastTrac's customers. The state is trying to get as many people as possible to adopt this system, and a major hack like that could possibly reverse their momentum.

  38. The New Rules by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Luckily, Lawson wasn't sued before he could reveal his research

    That's all that the Boston MTA has done with their stupid suit, and the stupid judge that initially went along with it. Now if you've done research that you feel deserves presentation, the target of your research gets no warning and no time to find a clueless judge. If you don't feel this is an improvement, let that Boston judge know about it.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  39. Security by obscurity breakdown by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, a lot of these systems have been based on the premise that end users either didn't have the technology or weren't sufficiently interested in hacking them. Most subway fare collection systems are the same way -- the manufacturer puts in some safeguards by storing data in a different way but it's all eventually hackable.

    Security by obscurity only works until you can buy the technology your system is based on at Best Buy. Back in the '80s, when New York established EZPass, your garden variety hacker didn't have access to the proto-RFID technology that those tags are based on.

    The bad thing is that once devices like toll passes are issued to drivers, it's expensive and really difficult to do an across the board replacement. If you make the device expensive enough to be field-upgradable, you risk making it too expensive to provide universally. Worse yet, you give hackers all sorts of fun possibilities when you include a flash device.

    I guess the only fix is to store very little on the device and do all the processing server-side. This is especially important with stored-value cards like transit passes. The question then becomes how little data you can actually store and make the system work and identify only you.

    1. Re:Security by obscurity breakdown by Brandano · · Score: 1

      You need at the very least a way to establish an encrypted 2 way connection. If the tag only transmits an unique sequence it would be easy for a 3rd party to eavesdrop it and copy it verbatim, without even the need to know what the actual data is about

  40. Free Burgers! by cat_jesus · · Score: 1

    McDonald's uses that very same system to allow you to pay for your meals in the drive through. Just make sure you clone someone who is insanely rich and you might not ever have to pay for another McDonald's meal again.

    Well, eventually you'll pay with your life, but that's a different matter altogether.

    1. Re:Free Burgers! by Shados · · Score: 1

      Call me when I can use this to get free filet mignion and tuna steak...

  41. Car Cloaking Device / Holographic projector. by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

    I will just use my car cloaking device/ holographic projector to clone the image of the car ahead of me onto my own car. I could use a car I saw yesterday or a pickup I saw three weeks ago. Just plug in the pre-set and I am good. If the cops are chasing me, I just get ahead of them and switch the image and pull over like a concerned motorist. The cops then just drive on past me with their sirens on.

    Just need to make sure to switch images while I am under a tree or somethign of they have a eye in sky helicopter following the chase.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    1. Re:Car Cloaking Device / Holographic projector. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Back in the '50s I knew a guy with a sports car who had five bat-handle toggle switches he'd mounted at the front of the console between the seats. They did things like disable the brake lights and popeye the tail and headlights. When a cop was after him he'd disable the brake lights, make a turn, switch his car's light-show appearance, and slow 'way down...

      He also used aircraft landing lights for his high-beam-only lamps for a while - again with the switches. They'd light up the trees on the horizon bright blue. (Don't shine your high beams in HIS eyes!) He said he quit that after getting caught in a roadside inspection traffic stop. When they put the brightness sensor caps over his highbeams and had him turn on the lamps the sensors caught fire. B-)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  42. Summary of Article by lancejjj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This means you can copy the ID of another driver onto your own device and, as a result, travel for free while others foot the bill.

    Interpretation:

    This means that one can steal services electronically, committing a felony punishable by jail time, while at the same time greatly annoying fellow citizens whose id has been stolen.

  43. Aren't all RFID systems intrinsecally vulnerable? by Brandano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even without going all the way to cloning the RFID or transponder apparatus, as long as an invalid code or handshake sequence causes the toll boot to fail you just have to rig a bad copy with a small activation delay to attack a toll boot with a DOS. Go through the toll boot as usual and throw your decoy tag on the roadside and every car going through will fail to activate the receiver. And if you feel particularly devious you just need the device to turn on and off randomly...

  44. Re:If you know a hack, DON'T TELL anybody! Fool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this guy a fool?
    You Hack Big, and tell the public and hold a news conference, so you can Get hired to a High paying Job in law Enforcemnt and that's the fact ,
      If your real good , A 20 year sentence is over in 2 months and a million dollar starting salary awaits you .
      Need an example ?
    His name is Kevin.

  45. Yes. No different than the real world. by bigtallmofo · · Score: 1

    The transponder doesn't do challenge response, it just spews out an ID number when polled?

    Yes, that is the case. This is just like the real world though... The other day I was walking down a street in downtown Philadelphia with a notebook in my hand and I asked everyone I passed, "Hello, what is your social security number?". Each person was more than happy to give me theirs. My little experiment even found a flaw in the SS system. Would you believe that the stupid SS office accidentally gave hundreds of people the number "123456789"? Idiots!

    So, you see - there's no security risk to this design whatsoever.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
  46. Alibi? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1
    Lawson says that this also raises the possibility of using the FasTrak system to create false alibis, by overwriting one's own ID onto another driver's device before committing a crime. The toll system's logs would appear to show the perpetrator driving at another location when the crime was being committed, he says.

    Pardon me, but wouldn't it be a heck of a lot easy just to have a friend drive your car while you're off somewhere else committing a crime? To say nothing of the fact that if you wrote your ID into somebody else's transceiver, you'd be expected to pay all of their tolls -- something most criminals wouldn't be too keen to do.

    No the _real_ fun with this will be when they start using this system to fine speeders. Then you can clone the ID, drive through a toll booth, drive the cloned ID through a toll both 100 miles away a minute later, then laugh as they fine you for traveling 600mph in your old AMC Gremlin...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  47. "False alibi" == redundant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't all alibis, by default, false? Only a guilty person needs an alibi. Innocent people never need one.

    1. Re:"False alibi" == redundant. by DrDNA · · Score: 1

      No it is not. You could, for example, say "Joe Smith was briefly a suspect, but it turned out he had a valid alibi."

    2. Re:"False alibi" == redundant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you serious? Mind boggling if so.

      Say someone steals your car while you are out of town, and runs over and kills someone. A street camera caught the incident and the driver looks enough like you to have you brought in. Your alibi is that you weren't even in town and have records and witnesses to prove it.

  48. gas tax by Dan667 · · Score: 1

    Seems like toll roads are just a waste of time, resources, and money. I hope more people continue to hack these systems and it becomes such a pain in the ass to keep them running that they start shutting them down and the companies that lobby the local governments go out of business. They could accomplish the same infrastructure with a gas tax and it would be less intrusive and more effective. Nobody wants more taxes, but it is really the best way to pay for these projects.

  49. dirty plates = still pointless by davidwr · · Score: 1

    With dirty plates and a stolen transponder code from a look-alike car, you now have a way not just to skip paying but to stiff an innocent victim.

    With dirty/unreadable plates, the camera can alert the cop down the road to be on the lookout for you and ticket you for having unreadable plates.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  50. On behalf of everyone in the bay area I say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shhhh!

  51. Technical details are on his blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're looking for more technical details on the attack, slides, etc., they can be found on his blog.

  52. tracks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah,everyone knows rfid is hackable.
    Don't worry they ar working on rfid paint and even a way to attach it to your dna.Pretty creepy stuff if you think of the implications.
    As long as people are stupid enough to buy into the toll roads will help ease traffic BS crap like this is gonna come up.Instead of making laws that force states to spend highway funds on highways we end up selling them to privately

  53. Wouldn't work in Houston. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    Our toll roads are backed up by pictures of your car & license number.

    And they do audits-- if the wrong car has the tag, you get a $5 ticket. And that's without the real person complaining you are ripping them off.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  54. Low tech hacks are the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone notice this little tidbit in TFA:

    There is another way, he says. "It's probably in the user's best interest to just leave it at home." This is because FasTrak uses license-plate recognition as a backup.

    In other words, no need for any fancy high-tech clone. Just swap plates with a valid user and drive on through. How long would it take you to notice someone had swapped plates on your vehicle?

  55. That's an idea for the UK by cheros · · Score: 1

    They now have these cameras that apparently time you going from A to B. That could be fun with cloned licenses - especially if you yourself are somewhere with a good alibi..

    The likelihood of this happening already must be high given that plate cloning is rife since they put this congestion charge in London..

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  56. Five federally mandated ID chips in all new cars. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    We mustn't assume that these vehicle transponder only use is for for toll collection. They work anywhere they want to place a Transponder reporting unit.and they they can even read transponder from other states.

    But it won't do you any good to not have one, at least if you have a new car.

    The federal government has mandated remote tire pressure sensor systems in all new cars. These involve a device that replaces the old rubber tire valve stem and has a pressure sensor, multi-year battery, and transmitter inside the wheel. It periodically transmits the tire pressure, along with its unique serial number (so the car's dashboard computer can sort out the tires and ignore those on other cars.)

    These transmitters (except maybe the one in the spare, which might be shielded too well) can all be read using a buried coil antenna in the road.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  57. I put mine an a anti-static bag... by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

    Actually FastTrak sends you a anti-static bag so you if you don't want to participate in the driving times between signs and cities which uses your FastTrak to see how fast you can drive between two points. This is same as stopping these thieves stealing your ID from your FastTrak when you are not at the toll plazas. The problem is the thieves all be around the toll plazas in the San Francisco Bay Area trolling for IDs. However there are alot of CHP units at the toll plazas also so it would be interesting to see what happens.

  58. Leaving the Transponder at Home by alphasubzero949 · · Score: 1

    From TFA:

    There is another way, he says. "It's probably in the user's best interest to just leave it at home." This is because FasTrak uses license-plate recognition as a backup.

    I don't know about the other FasTrak systems in the state, but the TCA in Orange County will actually penalize you if your vehicle accumulates too many 'pay-by-plates.'

  59. Re:Not impressed! by mjwx · · Score: 1

    We (the united states) invented the modern computer and all that goes with it..

    Charles Babbage and Konrad Zuse disagree with you. Please avoid making asinine blanket statements without the facts to back it up in future.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  60. MIT students sued before they could publish? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bullshit, there's a nice pdf available on wikileaks that details all of their work, gives nice instructions on how to ride for free and all the other stuff they did, and even shows you how to build a warkart!

  61. There are ways to protect yourself by GPS+Tracking · · Score: 1

    This is no surprise to me. Hackers have found a way to do just about anything. There are a lot of people already protecting themselves from these type of crimes by installing a gps tracking device in their own vehicle. Obviously, there are other reasons for this too, such as, theft protection and recording mileage for tax purposes. However, for the point of this article, an innocent victim can prove their vehicle was no where near a toll, contrary to any overwriting of a FastTrack device.

    --
    Work smarter, not harder, with gps tracking