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."
No disrespect to the MythBusters, but if they could figure it out, plenty of others will also.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
This isn't at all about the hackers ... this is about making the general public aware just how bad this is.
I don't. They tend to be old, out of touch with modern technology. I think enough BS by CC lawyers would confound them and justice would not be served.
But I'm told I'm a cynic :)
Blar.
So, rather than face lawsuits over contractual obligations to build and maintain a secure system (hah), they litigate the party who exposes them for attempting fraud.
Should it be surprising that in a culture that prizes profits and pride over progress, that litigation threats are used to squelch otherwise good feedback and information?
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
Of course, now that the story is propagating all over the Net, pretty soon everyone will know about the alleged security flaws (if not the details), and the CC companies and their legal eagles will look quite villainous. When will they ever learn?
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
freedom of speech.
Because PBS isn't advertiser funded, it gets its support from private individuals and (to a rather minor extent) the government. While corporations can (and do) donate, it isn't their lifeblood.
I agree with you though. I've seen that episode and it's a fantastic rebuke of the credit card industry.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
I think you have just shown a perfect example of why we need television that isn't funded by advertisers. PBS can air the show because they aren't driven by profit and aren't beholden to those corporations (although even that is starting to change with corporate sponsorship of PBS). While you can argue that public television is beholden to the government, at least it is beholden to a (slightly) different power.
Sure, but regular credit cards are already established. RFID credit cards are yet to become standard, and that should be prevented.
Judges are lawyers and that is forced by law. You can't be one without being a lawyer.
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
I truly see Frontline as one of the last and only truly investigative journalism programs on TV. It's the only show where I have found myself thinking "wow what they are reporting is interesting but it raises question A" and then as if by magic, the show continues: "we decided to further investigate and here's what we found about question A and this lead us to questions B, C and D"
meep
...for Slashdot to hammer the crap out of some corporate bullies, it sounds like this might be it. Could someone appropriately knowledgeable perhaps post a detailed account of how incredibly hackable RFID security is? A couple of URL's leading to websites with all the red meat would also be appropriate. PGP proves that once the genii is out of the bottle, it can't be put back in all that easily.
Frankly, I'm sick and tired of all these corporate assholes and their attitude. You can bet your bottom dollar that they'll keep the current, flawed system as-is, and simply out-last any hacking victim who dares to challenge them in court. The best solution is to make sure everybody with even a grade school education and a card reader can screw them at will. Maybe then, they'll do something about fixing the problem.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
"...and I have decided to keep those revelations to myself so that it is not exploited by every script kiddie and wannabe hackers to try."
And you are the only person that will figure that method out, I guess. Hopefully, you are the smartest person alive, and the problem so difficult no one else can possibly figure it out too, and abuse it.
The way we move forward as a race is that we share information, both about what works and helps, and more importantly about what doesn't work or causes harm. If the people affected the most by the flaw that has been discovered do nothing about it, then disclosure is the way. That way everyone else is informed and warned, as they should be.
Alright, showing my ignorance of our legal system here, but where does law fit in here? I don't see how the DC could get sued over this info. I *do* see the issue of ticking off their sponsors, but why are the lawyers involved?
Let's hope they don't run a segment on how bad fast food is for you any time soon...
There is also no law that requires the credit card companies to spend their advertising dollars on the Discovery Channel, or any other media outlet owned by the same company. That's what this is all about.
The key sequence to access my Slashdot bookmark in Firefox is Alt-B-S. I don't believe this is a coincidence.
Also, lawyers are the reason we no longer have habeas corpus, so the show should be filmed in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Lawyers are also the only reason you ever had habeas corpus in the first place, and the only chance you have of ever getting it back.
Lawyers are like nuclear tech, they can be used for good or evil.
Make a note of this on their Wikipedia entry.
Except where National Security(TM) is concerned, there is no valid argument in law to prevent Discovery/Mythbusters from airing facts about the lack of security surrounding RFID, and Discovery/Mythbusters are under no contractual obligation to keep such facts secret.
Schwab
There is more at work here than the law. The implicit (explicit?) threat is that if Discovery airs this show, the CC companies will cease advertising on the Discovery network.
That's why you get programmes like Top Gear from the BBC. No commercial channel would dare upset the card manufacturers like it does.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
How do you know the credit card companies aren't trying to fix the issue? And why not also blame the Discovery Channel, who didn't even try to put up a defense?
I think this comes down to "we advertise on your network and don't want you making us look bad" instead of "we are trying to keep this flaw a secret, even though it is already common knowledge."
http://www.rfid-cusp.org/blog/blog-23-10-2006.html
But if no one ever shouts "Look, hole" even when at sea, no one ever man's the pumps or patches the holes.
I thinks this would be a good time to point out that more than half the U.S. Presidents were lawyers. Some of them were among the best regarded presidents, some among the worst.
It's not been lost? Tell it to those in Guantanamo Bay, or those held without legal consul, notification to their families, or admissions of their presence in this and similar facilities. Since their names are secret, and even admitting that you know the names can get you thrown in jail as a security risk, that's about as serious a violation of habeas corpus as you can commit. It's also a major violation of the Geneva Convention.
So the principal is, in fact, in danger.
If there weren't any lawyers, you wouldn't have any stuff in the first place because someone would have already ganged up and kicked the shit out of you.
Only the biggest, fastest, and strongest is free in a lawless environment. Corporations don't need the law to collect power, but individuals do to fight it.
it might take a while for the guilty parties to be held responsible. Eventually the law will catch up with them.
The article you link to describes how "Months or years of continued litigation may lie ahead, unless the Bush administration, or the administration that follows it, reverses course and closes the prison at GuantÃnamo Bay, which now holds 270 detainees."
No mention of guilty parties being held responsible. You really think that's going to happen?!
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Worse, the companies will be continuing to claim how great the new security system is, even as they furiously try to shut up anyone that has a counter claim.
Imagine what could be done if the USA had a similar arrangement to the BBC license fee for PBS.
The BBC is funded by a compulsory license fee, which you must pay if you have a device capable of receiving it's broadcasts. For television, it's less than £12 (less than $22) per month. From this, and from licensing of their content worldwide, they maintain
The beauty of media, as many Slashdotters will have noted already, is that the more you spread it around, the greater it's total value is.
The USA has a far greater population than the UK, so they could either pay about £5 a month ($9) for the same level of service (I'm assuming that infrastructure costs do not diminish but content is a fixed cost in this estimate), or pay about the same, and get much more excellent, commercial-free content.
Another enormous benefit of the BBC is that the commercial channels here are forced to raise their game. We have on average (and enforced by regulation), only 7 minutes of commercials per hour (about 12 minutes at peaks times), instead of the more customary 18 in the states. USA networks frequently cut old Trek by 9 minutes to fit it in because in the 60s you had half the commercials.
Television is by far the most powerful influencer, informer and educator of the masses and to leave it solely in the hands of the corporations is to invite facism.
Given a free reign or even a mandate to "inform, educate and entertain", public broadcasting can elevate an entire nation.