Slashdot Mirror
CC Companies Scotch Mythbusters Show On RFID Security
mathfeel passes along a video in which Mythbusters co-host Adam Savage recounts how credit card companies lawyered up to make sure the Discovery channel never, ever airs a segment on the flaws in RFID security. "Texas Instruments comes on [a scheduled conference call] along with chief legal counsel for American Express, Visa, Discover, and everybody else... They [Mythbusters producers] were way, way outgunned and they [lawyers] absolutely made it really clear to Discovery that they were not going to air this episode talking about how hackable this stuff was, and Discovery backed way down being a large corporation that depends upon the revenue of the advertisers. Now it's on Discovery's radar and they won't let us go near it."
Myth Confirmed.
They weren't able to stop this one, which, if you haven't seen yet, is pretty amazing.
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
not true... You are not required to be a lawyer to be on the supreme court of the united states
For a good reference describing some of the problems with RFID technology, check out the book "Spy Chips" by Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre http://www.amazon.com/Spychips-Major-Corporations-Government-Track/dp/1595550208/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220142206&sr=8-1 This has been our for over 2 years now, but the general public has no idea on the capabilities or consequences of RFID systems. Give it a look.
If you don't do business with the credit card companies, you will have a very low credit rating. If you don't do business with the banks that use RFID bank cards, you might not have any bank at all in many areas of the country. Without a credit card or bank account you will find your options for owning a house or a car reduced to nil. In Canada, you cannot pay your taxes in cash. You cannot get an iPhone with cash. And yes, it is legal for a business to refuse cash purchases.
The credit/currency corporations are the key to being "in the system" and if you are "out of the system" you will be homeless or in government housing in short order. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but it is an unfortunate reality. Perhaps you could lead a bank and credit card free life dealing only in Ithica Hours. But freedom from the financial corporate overlords is rare and hard won. Those overlords like RFID, so you will have RFID.
We are all just people.
"It's only a matter of time before this gets pulled off Youtube."
Save a copy to repost or post elsewhere.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3006
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
"Texas Instruments comes on [a scheduled conference call] along with chief legal counsel for American Express, Visa, Discover, and everybody else... "
After discovering a flaw in one of Texas Instruments' RFID tags, researchers from RSA Labs and Johns Hopkins University say they plan to continue their testing with exploits against other RFID equipment.
Doesn't look like the secret everyone thinks it is. Note the date. And this just from a few seconds with Google.
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
The signature is not a security feature. Unless you want to train tens of millions of clerks in precision handwriting analysis techniques.
It's merely a token of accession to contract terms. Having people write, "yes" would be just as effective.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
YouTube is required by law to take down content when someone files a DMCA takedown notice, and put it back up after 14 days if the person who uploaded it files an uncontested counter notice. I believe that is what happened when the IOC mistakenly filed a notice against some video footage titled "Olympic Opening Ceremony" or something, which turned out to be footage of people protesting outside the Chinese embassy in New York.
They believed, due to the title, that it was their copyrighted material. When it turned out it was simply mislabeled, the footage was restored.
Well, you said it yourself. If YouTube wants to remain within the safe harbour offered by the DMCA to online service providers, they pretty much have to follow that procedure. If they didn't, they wouldn't be in business very long.
Besides, it's the users who would create any kind of "community" that would exist around YouTube, by creating and uploading original content, as the person who uploaded the video we are discussing did. If all you are doing is uploading copyright material that doesn't belong to you, there's not much YouTube can do to defend you.
I don't care why you're posting AC