All U.S. passports will be implanted with remotely readable computer chips starting in October 2006, the Bush administration has announced.

Sweeping new State Department regulations issued Tuesday say that passports issued after that time will have tiny radio frequency ID (RFID) chips that can transmit personal information including the name, nationality, sex, date of birth, place of birth and digitized photograph of the passport holder. Eventually, the government contemplates adding additional digitized data such as "fingerprints or iris scans."

Over the last year, opposition to the idea of implanting RFID chips in passports has grown amidst worries....
Full article at http://news.com.com/Passports+to+get+RFID+chip+implants/2100-7348_3-5913644.html?tag=nefd.lede

Since this is only news site I can find that has it it might not be accurate.

TBH national ID cards dont really scare me or bug me too much, but something like this does.

Technology bothers you? All that information is already on the passport, just using ancient ink-on-paper data storage methods. I see no reason why it shouldn't be updated to 20th century standards. If the government wants that information now, they can still require you to show them the paper.

RFID's are trackable in real time.. thats the problem.

George Orwell is laughing

One reason people might be concerned by this:
Over the last year, opposition to the idea of implanting RFID chips in passports has grown amidst worries that identity thieves could snatch personal information out of the air simply by aiming a high-powered antenna at a person or a vehicle carrying a passport. Out of the 2,335 comments on the plan that were received by the State Department this year, 98.5 percent were negative. The objections mostly focused on security and privacy concerns.
It looks like they mention it being encrypted, but even then encryption can be cracked. Also, they mention the covers... hard to really say without more details.

My understanding is that RFID chips can only store a tiny amount of information--enough to store a unique number, which would be useless without the database of information that associates those numbers with name, address, etc. Just grabbing those numbers shouldn't do identity thieves any good.

From the article.

But the Bush administration chose to go ahead with embedding 64KB chips in future passports, citing a desire to abide by

64kb of information, this is a lot of information (14 000 to 24 000 carateres of text, with one low resolution picture (40-50kb)). With this, you don't need any database to store the information.

And the 64kb version of the chip must cost more that the $1 normal version that only include an serial number.

And any encryption will probably become void as other nations will need to acces to the ship too and that the encryption will not be changed for the time that this passport will exist.

/tin hat on
The next step may be that every citizens must have his passports on him all time and add all the licenses that he have (driving, weapons port, political affilation....).
/tin hat off

Eridalafar

RFID's have a really small transmission area don't they? I would expect that the idea here is that you pass a object that senses the signal and it says, "Oh hey, an RFID chip I recognize just passed by", versus you could track someone driving around.

Besides, you could just leave the dang thing at home.

People put them in their pets so if the pet is found it can be taken to a vet or humane society and the chip can be read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID

I bet the RFID chips are just going to be used to signify that the passport is valid.

RFID's have a really small transmission area don't they?

From: Hacker conference no place for the unwary
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8795316/
"A group of twentysomethings from Southern California climbed onto the hotel roof to show that RFID tags could be read from as far as 69 feet."

If a group of kids with a minimal budget can read them at 69 feet then I'm sure that someone with better resources could extend that range significantly.

69 feet doesn't strike me as being all that far. Its not like you could track someone's every movement.

Hrm...actually encoding passport information onto the RFID chip seems like a very bad idea to me. I'd certainly oppose that, even though I'd support including a serial number plus an additional number for verification.

ACHTUNG!!!

Panamah's radio frequency is 401.7 MHz. That is all. Enjoy.

Passive RFID tags have no internal power supply. The minute electrical current induced in the antenna by the incoming radio frequency signal provides just enough power for the tag to transmit a response. Due to limited power and cost, the response of a passive RFID tag is brief — typically just an ID number (GUID). Lack of an onboard power supply means that the device can be quite small: commercially available products exist that can be embedded under the skin. As of 2005, the smallest such devices commercially available measured 0.4 mm × 0.4 mm, and is thinner than a sheet of paper; such devices are practically invisible. Passive tags have practical read distances ranging from about 10 mm up to about 6 metres.

Active RFID tags, on the other hand, have an internal power source, and may have longer range and larger memories than passive tags, as well as the ability to store additional information sent by the transceiver. At present, the smallest active tags are about the size of a coin. Many active tags have practical ranges of tens of metres, and a battery life of up to 10 years.

Because passive tags are cheaper to manufacture and have no battery, the majority of RFID tags in existence are of the passive variety. As of 2004, these tags cost an average of US$0.40 at high volumes. Today, as universal RFID tagging of individual products become commercially viable at very large volumes, the lowest cost tags available on the market are as low as 7.5 cents eachin volumes of 1 million units or more. Current demand for RFID integrated circuit chips is expected to grow rapidly based on these prices. Analysts from independent research companies Gartner and Forrester Research agreed that a price less than $0.10 (production volume of one billion units) is achievable in 6–8 years, thus limiting near-term prospects for widespread adoption of passive RFID; however, the high demand for the tags from Wal-Mart, DoD, etc., has created a big enough market to support these prices. Other analysts believe such prices are achievable within 10-15 years.

You guys crack me up...
How many of you carry cell phones around day-to-day?
And your concerned about RFID?

RFID Info

OMG! RFID in your tires! *panic*
Current usage

* Talking Prescriptions - 13.56 MHz tags are being placed on prescriptions for Visually Impaired Veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient pharmacies are now supplying the tags with label information stored inside that can be read by a battery powered, talking prescription reader. This reader speaks information such as: Drug Name; Instruction; Warnings; etc.

* Low-frequency RFID tags are commonly used for animal identification. Pets can be implanted with small chips so that they may be returned to their owners if lost. Beer kegs are also tracked with LF RFID. Two RFID frequencies are used in the United States: 125 kHz (the original standard) and 134.2 kHz (the international standard).

* High-frequency RFID tags are used in library book or bookstore tracking, pallet tracking, building access control, airline baggage tracking, and apparel item tracking. High-frequency tags are widely used in identification badges, replacing earlier magnetic stripe cards. These badges need only be held within a certain distance of the reader to authenticate the holder. The American Express Blue credit card now includes a high-frequency RFID tag, a feature American Express calls ExpressPay.

* UHF RFID tags are commonly used commercially in pallet and container tracking, and truck and trailer tracking in shipping yards.

* Microwave RFID tags are used in long range access control for vehicles.

* RFID tags are used for electronic toll collection at toll booths with Georgia's Cruise Card, California's FasTrak, Illinois' I-Pass, the expanding eastern state's E-ZPass system, Florida's Sunpass, The "Cross-Israel Highway" (Highway 6), Philippines South Luzon Expressway E-Pass and Central Highway (Autopista Central) in Chile. The tags are read remotely as vehicles pass through the booths, and tag information is used to debit the toll from a prepaid account. The system helps to speed traffic through toll plazas.

* Sensors such as seismic sensors may be read using RFID transceivers, greatly simplifying remote data collection.

* Precise and milimeter accurate location sensing of RFID is possible by adding a low cost photosensor.

* In January 2003, Michelin began testing RFID transponders embedded into tires. After a testing period that is expected to last 18 months, the manufacturer will offer RFID enabled tires to car makers. Their primary purpose is tire-tracking in compliance with the United States Transportation, Recall, Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation Act (TREAD Act).

* Some smart cards embedded with RFID chips are used as electronic cash, e.g. Easy Card in Taiwan, Octopus Card in Hong Kong and the Netherlands and United Kingdom (In the form of the London Underground Oyster Card) to pay fares in mass transit systems and/or retails.

* Starting with the 2004 model year, a Smart Key option is available to the Toyota Prius and some Lexus models. The key fob uses an active RFID circuit which allow the car to acknowledge the key's presence within 3 feet of the sensor. The driver can open the doors and start the car while the key remains in a purse or pocket.

* In August 2004, the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRH) approved a $415,000 contract to evaluate the personnel tracking technology of Alanco Technologies. Inmates will wear wristwatch-sized transmitters that can detect if prisoners have been trying to remove them and send an alert to prison computers. This project is not the first such rollout of tracking chips in US prisons. Facilities in Michigan, California and Illinois already employ the technology.

I can turn my cel phone off.

I can leave my cel phone at home.

But its only a matter of time before we begin requiring passports to travel between states (for our 'security') with the nifty RFID tags w/ biometric data.

By the time I'm my parents age, I'll have to move to Australia or Israel (depending on if Israel is still around).

Isn't this the same thing as the current RFID's on a number of CCs?

Some folks are acting as if this is a new thing and the world's gonna end in anarcy if this is implemented.

But its only a matter of time before we begin requiring passports to travel between states (for our 'security') with the nifty RFID tags w/ biometric data.
Between states will never happen. That's the whole purpose of the "United States" part. Now, if a stated wanted to segregate itself, then it's possible. But that'll take a lot of time and money.

But again, it's not like it will be any different than what it currently is in Europe. :)

You guys crack me up...
How many of you carry cell phones around day-to-day?
And your concerned about RFID?
/agree

Even if you can just turn off your phone, you still gotta turn it on to get your info. How many people are lost w/out their phone these days? Seriously. People are so concerned over so many things these days.

What they really need now is just something like a death pently for violation of use of data stored on these RFIDs. Maybe that will help put some at ease? Or will the pro-lifers have a cow that people shouldn't be put to death reguardless? /boggle

Wait... I think confusing pro-life with anti-death penalty is a mistake. They aren't necessarily the same, are they?

Isn't this the same thing as the current RFID's on a number of CCs?

Some folks are acting as if this is a new thing and the world's gonna end in anarcy if this is implemented.

Complacency in your governments attempts to classify and regulate your life and movements is the first step towards letting yourself become ruled by tyrrany.

Between states will never happen. That's the whole purpose of the "United States" part. Now, if a stated wanted to segregate itself, then it's possible. But that'll take a lot of time and money.

But again, it's not like it will be any different than what it currently is in Europe. :)

It will happen if the Federal Government demands it, using interstate commerce and national security as its reasoning.

And frankly, I wouldn't want to live in Europe, home of "Your papers, please".

How many of you carry cell phones around day-to-day?
And your concerned about RFID?
You have a choice about whether to carry your phone around with you.

Even if the initial implementation of an identification scheme is relatively benign you have to be awfully trusting of your fellow man not to be concerned with what it could become.

Seriously. People are so concerned over so many things these days.
If the last six years have shown me anything at all, it's that people aren't concerned enough. Either that or they have been fooled by political slight of hand into being concerned over the wrong things.

Technology bothers you? All that information is already on the passport, just using ancient ink-on-paper data storage methods. I see no reason why it shouldn't be updated to 20th century standards. If the government wants that information now, they can still require you to show them the paper.
Hackers can't rip off the information on your current passport from 70 feet away.

You have a choice about whether to carry your phone around with you.

Even if the initial implementation of an identification scheme is relatively benign you have to be awfully trusting of your fellow man not to be concerned with what it could become.

You do with a passport too.

With a cell phone, I can pinpoint you easily anytime you have the phone on. With an RFID in a passport, I can only if you pass within range of a reader.

Just what information do you imagine hackers are going to be interested in on a passport? Your country of origin, your name? The office the passport originated from?

Really, I think before getting massively paranoid it would be a good idea to find out how it is to be used and what information it would contain.

With an RFID in a passport, I can only if you pass within range of a reader.
So a hacker might have to drive all the way out to the airport or a border crossing to mine for IDs? That really doesn't make me any safer.

Just what information do you imagine hackers are going to be interested in on a passport?
Anything that might allow them to impersonate me.

I think before getting massively paranoid it would be a good idea to find out how it is to be used and what information it would contain.
From the first post: "Eventually, the government contemplates adding additional digitized data such as "fingerprints or iris scans." That's just what they are contemplating doing with today's technology. Who knows what will be on there in 20 years. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. Seriously, count on it.

So a hacker might have to drive all the way out to the airport or a border crossing to mine for IDs? That really doesn't make me any safer.
Nah, people are hacking cell phones 2 miles away. I'm sure they'll do the same thing with RFID tags. :p

Just kidding; cell phones are powered, RFIDs aren't. Signal strength is lessened greatly since it's non-powered.

Complacency in your governments attempts to classify and regulate your life and movements is the first step towards letting yourself become ruled by tyrrany.
Similar to that of a parent watching their children, no? ;)

I'm tired of the "one government to rule them all" arguments, seriously. Why is everybody so suspicious of the government? Sure, there's some things they do that's sketchy, but nothing's perfect. And it will never become another "Hitler" run again (learn from the past?). A communist environment does work, if done properly. But I do agree our government is NOT ready for any communist environment. However, I'm still not all paranoid that our government is out for complete authorative rule.

Similar to that of a parent watching their children, no? ;)

I have parents already. I don't need Uncle Sam also.

I'm tired of the "one government to rule them all" arguments, seriously. Why is everybody so suspicious of the government? Sure, there's some things they do that's sketchy, but nothing's perfect. And it will never become another "Hitler" run again (learn from the past?). A communist environment does work, if done properly. But I do agree our government is NOT ready for any communist environment. However, I'm still not all paranoid that our government is out for complete authorative rule.

It can happen here.

a government administration who can control the masses, can do what it wants, when it wants, with whomever it wants, with no consequences to themselves. ( See: Iraq War )

Even if the initial implementation of an identification scheme is relatively benign you have to be awfully trusting of your fellow man not to be concerned with what it could become. ...
If the last six years have shown me anything at all, it's that people aren't concerned enough. Either that or they have been fooled by political slight of hand into being concerned over the wrong things./agree completely. As a society we have become all too complacent.

guice, one thing you need to understand is that "the government" is a collection of human beings... most of whom have been trained to be politicians, and those who haven't don't long survive in a political atmosphere.

My guess is that you wouldn't blindly trust the politicians in government individually with your house and car keys. Think next of hundreds of these people you wouldn't give out your keys to and ask yourself what makes them so blindly trustworthy as a collection that doesn't make them blindly trustworthy as individuals.

Or do you just trust everyone and not even lock any of your possessions?

Why is everybody so suspicious of the government?
For the same reasons that one would be suspicious of anything that wields a huge amount of power -- because if it chooses to, it can make your life miserable in proportion to the power it wields.

And it will never become another "Hitler" run again (learn from the past?).
Prove it. :)


However, I'm still not all paranoid that our government is out for complete authorative rule.
How can you be certain that will be the case with the government that exists 20 years from now? Or 200 years from now? Why give them the tools now when, at best, it buys us a bit of convenience. The rewards aren't worth the risk.

I don't have so much problem with this. Travelling across international borders is a privelidge not a right and the authorities are entitled to control the borders. If controls are extended beyond travel then that might cause problems.

It is strange though that the chips are going into the passports of the US citizens and not being assigned to the papers of foreign entrants. The controls are making it harder to misuse US passports but that is obviously going to impinge on US passport holders, i.e. regular US citizens.

Isn't this the same thing as the current RFID's on a number of CCs?

Some folks are acting as if this is a new thing and the world's gonna end in anarcy if this is implemented.

It is not anarchy that I fear, it is tyranny.

And it will never become another "Hitler" run again (learn from the past?).

If there's something we have learned from the past... is that history repeats itself.

Hitler had RFID?

No, he had tatoos

History also tells us that as a mass, US citizians don't take things up the arse. I think that will assist in preventing abuse of these RFIDs which is why I'm not too concern.

The moment abuse surfaces, US citizians will "riot" in-mass. It's a sensitive issue. I don't expect anybody to sit on their toosh if somebody in the upper ranks attempts to abuse this data.

The government is suppose to be there for the good of the people. Granted sometimes the people need to put the government back on track, but it still doesn't make some ideas the government has a bad idea just cause the CHANCE of abuse is there. Like I said before, there's a CHANCE your neighboor could shoot you, but still doesn't prevent you from trusting them, no?

There is no need for us to wait until abuse to rise up. We can nip it in the bud now.

Besides..it'll be hard to riot when they take away our weapons after giving us all transmitter IDs so they know where to find us.

History also tells us that as a mass, US citizians don't take things up the arse.
Since 9-11 we've been taking it up the arse pretty much continuously. Our response to the terrorist threat was to blindly trust the government while it compromised our civil liberties, started wars, and alienated our allies.

No, he had tatoos
I swear the first time I read that, I read "No, he had tacos".
Was very :confused:

Since 9-11 we've been taking it up the arse pretty much continuously. Our response to the terrorist threat was to blindly trust the government while it compromised our civil liberties, started wars, and alienated our allies.

Yeah, Klath is right about that. The weird thing is that the reality of it doesn't seem to elicit the sort of howls of outrage that the scifi, future-tech, not-implemented stuff does.

I swear the first time I read that, I read "No, he had tacos".
Was very :confused:

I propose that had Hitler had taco's, he'd have been a much less angry man.

Schnitzel doesn't digest nearly so well as tacos.

Government out of the picture, what's the toughts of the RFID tags? It's extremely appearant that the government "chance" of abuse is clearly effecting everybody's judgement on this.

The only argument people have against is the government can abuse this.

What if it's a third part company that implemented this? Sony? AT&T? Sprint? (main international "super powers"). Would you then accept it?

What do you say about the RFID's that your company plants in your IDs (providing you're in a secure complex with badges). What about the RFIDs on the new CCs? RFIDs being placed on consumer product packaging?

I propose that had Hitler had taco's, he'd have been a much less angry man.

Schnitzel doesn't digest nearly so well as tacos.
Well he was already a great orator, so he was obviously full of gas.

Re: Hitler and tatoos.

A couple of months ago I spent time with my Dad talking about his early days. He talked about his release in 1949 from Russian prisoner-of-war camp. A German physician, who was also a POW, put a cast on his arm that had been bruised. Imbedded in the cast was paper with a list of Germans that had died as POWs. My dad passed that information on to authorities when he reached Germany.

... I'm digressing.

I asked my Dad if there were German POWs that were not released by the Russians. He said yes. They were SS, and were identified by their tatoos. He remembers them crying about being left behind. My father said he suspects they were never released, and some may still be there.

SS? I hope they were tortured. The Soviets were good for some things.

Government out of the picture, what's the toughts of the RFID tags? It's extremely appearant that the government "chance" of abuse is clearly effecting everybody's judgement on this.

The only argument people have against is the government can abuse this.

What if it's a third part company that implemented this? Sony? AT&T? Sprint? (main international "super powers"). Would you then accept it?

What do you say about the RFID's that your company plants in your IDs (providing you're in a secure complex with badges). What about the RFIDs on the new CCs? RFIDs being placed on consumer product packaging?

I work in a secure complex, and my company tracks entry into specific areas. No problem.

But - I do not want to be tracked once I leave the parking lot. I do not want OnStar in my car. I do not want cameras on every stop light, as the city seems to be implementing. I most definitely do not want face recognition software hooked up to those cameras. I do not want my grocery purchases tracked. I do not want my financial information "shared" with anyone without my permission. I do not want my web visits tracked.

I do want freedom. I want concealed carry. I want to be able to use deadly force if someone breaks into my home, period. I want to be able to read whatever I like in the privacy of my home. I want to be able to build a house on property that I legally purchase.

What is boils down to is that I respect the rights and privacy of others, and I want them to do the same for me.

Hope this helps :)

http://travel.state.gov/passport/eppt/eppt_2498.html

http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1483.html

MRP info and VWP info:

http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/without/without_1990.html

There's your info on the passports.

They are effective as of Oct 26, 2006, and will begin implimentation as early as Oct 25, 2005.

So... for all you people who are familiar with the technology...

Is there a way to block it? I mean... can you put your passport in a metal case or something and "turn off" the signal?

**edit** I am reading some of the comments on the first link provided in the post above and it seems that we're seeing a "bait and switch" from our government again. Most comments center around the "unencrypted" and few are even commenting on the tracking aspect of the chips. This, in itself, is scarey to me. It identifies US citizens' locations abroad and even without personal information, if the target is random_american_citizen, our state department is the one pointing a finger saying "here's one! Oooooo get this one! here!!! here!!!!!"

The chip will securely store the same data visually displayed on the photo page of the passport, and will additionally include a digital photograph.

That implies some sort of encryption.

I think they're doing it to speed up US citizens entrances at the border crossings especially if they're using face recognition ID of the stored picture. But, indulge in the paranoid daydreams if that's your thing.... ;p

/shrug

I don't mind Customs Agents having the information, but I want to be fully aware when they are looking at it. AND I want a way to "turn it off" if for no other reason than it's MY info and I don't want it available without my consent. :) Call it paranoia if you want, but as a US citizen I should be able to EXPECT my personal information to be private. I shouldn't have to go to extraordinarily extreme lengths to regain the rights and freedoms I feel the Constitution has said are mine.

Is there a way to block it? I mean... can you put your passport in a metal case or something and "turn off" the signal?
You can't "turn off" the chip since it'll have no power source. But you can cover it up easily with any kind of metal. That'll sufficiantly block any readers from bring able to read it.

It'll actually be a very good idea if they created the Passport "binder" with some kind of material that will intentionally block this chip from being read unless the passport is opened. This will help ease any concerns of stolen data.

Yeah! A tin foil hat for your passport. :lol: