View Full Forums : More RFID goodness


Swiftfox
02-24-2006, 03:02 PM
"Call it Big Brother on steroids," say privacy advocates Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre, co-authors of "Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID." The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is looking for beefed up RFID technology that can read government-issued documents from up to 25 feet away, pinpoint pedestrians on street corners, and glean the identity of people whizzing by in cars at 55 miles per hour.


article here (http://www.unobserver.com/layout5.php?id=2147&blz=1)

Fyyr Lu'Storm
02-24-2006, 07:11 PM
This is a book review.

Written by a couple of bloggers, I assume.

There is no context in the link to even assume that this is anything more than conjecture.

Panamah
02-24-2006, 08:33 PM
Swiftfox, I award you this Tin Foil Beanie to acknowledge your fine service in warding against THEM guys doing the bad things. THEY fear your vigilence.

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/afdbhead.jpg

Wear it in good health.

:D

Swiftfox
02-25-2006, 11:57 PM
Tagging U.S. Schoolchildren (source (http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/12-13-2004/insider/tagging.htm)

Houston?s Spring Independent School District is equipping 28,000 students with ID badges containing computer chips that are read when the students get on and off school buses, reported the November 17 New York Times. The information is fed automatically by wireless phone to the police and school administrators. Police can monitor children from the time they leave home to their arrival on campus.

In a variation of the concept, a Phoenix school district in November is starting a project using fingerprint technology to track when and where students get on and off buses, continues the Times. Last year, a charter school in Buffalo began automating attendance counts with computerized ID badges one of the earliest examples of what educators said could become a wider trend.

That trend has been referred to as tagging schoolchildren, supposedly as a measure to prevent child abductions. The favored method involves radio frequency identification (RFID) computer chip technology similar to that used to track livestock and pallets of retail shipments.

Understandably, many older students object to the technology. It's too Big Brother for me, complained 15-year-old Kenneth Haines. Something about the school wanting to know the exact place and time makes me feel kind of like an animal.

Misgivings of that sort are not likely to abate as the RFID technology becomes more widespread and invasive. Some advocates of the RFID tagging technology, notes the Times, see broader possibilities, such as implanting RFID tags under the skin of children to avoid problems with lost or forgotten tags. More immediately, they said, they could see using the technology to track whether students attend individual classes.

:throne:

Yrys
02-26-2006, 12:58 AM
If they try implanting those in kids, they are going to get a ton of parents pulling their kids out, and lawsuits.

Erianaiel
02-26-2006, 07:03 AM
If they try implanting those in kids, they are going to get a ton of parents pulling their kids out, and lawsuits.

Perhaps now, but these people are patient. Every time a child gets abducted you will see the little 'this would not have happened with an RFID chip' news article or two.
Then when parents finally get used to the idea of their children having a bracelet of sorts with the chip and criminals get used to getting rid of it, you get the 'this would not have happened with an implanted RFID chip' line of arguments. (because by then everybody will already 'know' that only an RFID chip can protect their children)
A few terrorist attacks and a bunch of hollow rhetorics and the sheep are willing to give up basic freedoms in droves. To protect people they truly care about they are willing to move a whole lot quicker. The real problem is that it is so hard to distinguish between risk and consequences. The more serious the consequences the bigger we judge the risk to be, even if the actual chances are slim to none. (like how we judge driving a car to be safer than flying when statistics show the reverse is true by a margin of a several hundred times). Because what is likely to happen when a child is abducted is a parent's worst nightmare, we can not weigh risks properly. The chance of a child actually being abducted are very slim. Just about every single case makes the headlines in the newspapers, yet it is hardly a daily occurence. Compare that to the risk of taking another big step towards a 'Big Brother' or at least 'Brave New World' style of society when every single citizen has a unique ID implanted that can, and will, be checked throughout the day by government (all for our own protection of course).
Pretty evil choice, that :(


Eri

Palarran
02-26-2006, 12:08 PM
RFID is not, and will never be, a practical way to track people in the GPS sense. Anyone that thinks it can be simply doesn't understand what RFID is.

I would support giving students _badges_ with RFID chips, or magnetic strips, or any other code that can be quickly read by a computer at a very short distance. In high school we used to waste a significant portion of time (several minutes of every class) taking attendance. If students could simply swipe a card as they walked in and out of the classroom, then more time could be spent actually teaching. That's no more an invasion of privacy than taking attendance in the first place.

Panamah
02-26-2006, 12:13 PM
RFID is not, and will never be, a practical way to track people in the GPS sense. Anyone that thinks it can be simply doesn't understand what RFID is.
Thank you for restating what I've said in former threads. You'd really need GPS to do it. I don't know what the range on RFID is but probably not far, unless you have a lot of power . A little plastic RFID thing isn't going to have it, nor a chip.

If I were a parent, I'd love to have a GPS attached to my kid. It'd make them kidnap proof... almost.

This is the size of the thing to pay your tolls automatically using RFID. If you implant that into someone's arm... ow. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/80/FasTrak_transponder.jpg

Passive

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 CMOS integrated circuit (IC) in the tag to power up and transmit a response. Most passive tags signal by backscattering the carrier signal from the reader. This means that the aerial (antenna) has to be designed to both collect power from the incoming signal and also to transmit the outbound backscatter signal. The response of a passive RFID tag is not just an ID number (GUID): tag chip can contain nonvolatile EEPROM(Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory) for storing data. 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 2006, the smallest such devices measured 0.15 mm × 0.15 mm, and are thinner than a sheet of paper (7.5 micrometres). The smallest EPC chips (the one used by Wal-Mart and the Department of Defense) are measured at 0.25 millimeters square, such devices are practically invisible. Passive tags have practical read distances ranging from about 2 mm (ISO 14443) up to about few metres (EPC and ISO 18000-6) depending on the chosen radio frequency. Due to their simplicity in design they are also suitable for manufacture with a printing process for the antennae. A development target are polycarbon semiconductor tags to become entirely printed. Passive RFID tags do not require batteries, and can be much smaller and have an unlimited life span.

2 metres = 6.5 feet. You'd have to have a RFID detecter every 6.5 (at the furthest!).

Good RFID article at Wikipedia with examples of how it is being used in RL... not just the fantasy world of the paranoid.

Klath
02-26-2006, 01:15 PM
2 metres = 6.5 feet. You'd have to have a RFID detecter every 6.5 (at the furthest!).

http://www.technologyreview.com/WireStory/wtr_14631,323,p1.html
"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 (21 meters). That's important because the tags have been proposed for such things as U.S. passports, and critics have raised fears that kidnappers could use RFID readers to pick traveling U.S. citizens out of a crowd."

Swiftfox
02-26-2006, 01:21 PM
I was looking for the law that says the government already has the right to mark its citizens with an identifying mark such as a tattoo (not a far cry from RFID), when I stumbled onto this mock site (http://www.whitehouse.org/homeland/tattoo.asp).

The implantable RFID chips are already being glamorized. A Miami (http://www.infowars.com/articles/bb/club_microchip.htm) night club and one in Barcelona (http://technology.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,,1234827,00.html), have offered VIP status to patrons who will take the chip.

Stormhaven
02-26-2006, 01:26 PM
Seeing that RFID tags are crackable by <a href="http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=180201688">cell phones</a>, I don't think the government is going to use them for super secret tracking things just yet.

Panamah
02-26-2006, 01:39 PM
There you go! Super-low power RFID = Bar code.

What sort of RFID chips where those, Klath? Passive? Powered? I think the technology used would make a huge difference.

Klath
02-26-2006, 02:25 PM
There you go! Super-low power RFID = Bar code.

What sort of RFID chips where those, Klath? Passive? Powered? I think the technology used would make a huge difference.
They were passive.

Edit: This is a better link.

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/08/wireless_interc.html

Fyyr Lu'Storm
02-26-2006, 04:11 PM
Perhaps now, but these people are patient. Every time a child gets abducted you will see the little 'this would not have happened with an RFID chip' news article or two....

Do it for the children!

Fenlayen
02-27-2006, 01:20 AM
Pfft you want tracking, then you want to read this :epopcorn:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/4747142.stm

Swiftfox
02-27-2006, 09:11 AM
No consent required by user for this. (http://www.showmenews.com/2006/Feb/20060204News003.asp)

By this summer, Missouri Department of Transportation officials will begin using drivers’ cell phone signals to monitor traffic patterns in the Columbia area.

The system is controversial and has received criticism from national privacy groups that argue it would allow government agencies to spy on drivers. Proponents say that cell phone information would remain anonymous and that no customer information or phone numbers would be disclosed.


"We get nothing but travel time and speed," McDonald said. "We do not collect any private information."

For now ...

Panamah
02-27-2006, 11:12 AM
They've got sensors buried under the freeway all over CA that report speed and amount of traffic. MI is just being lazy. But again, if they're just tracking the number of different signatures being emitted from cell phones in a given area, I don't see that as an invasion of privacy.

God, I can't believe the paranoia about this when people don't even give a rats ass the government is wire-tapping citizens.

Erianaiel
02-27-2006, 01:15 PM
RFID is not, and will never be, a practical way to track people in the GPS sense. Anyone that thinks it can be simply doesn't understand what RFID is.

Well, all you would need to do is put a reader in every car, and every door of publick transportation and you pretty much know where every citizen is every moment of the day.
But the point is not necessarily the feasibility but the fact that it is already being promoted as a good idea to permanently track people.


I would support giving students _badges_ with RFID chips, or magnetic strips, or any other code that can be quickly read by a computer at a very short distance. In high school we used to waste a significant portion of time (several minutes of every class) taking attendance. If students could simply swipe a card as they walked in and out of the classroom, then more time could be spent actually teaching. That's no more an invasion of privacy than taking attendance in the first place.

Well, I could argue that taking attendance helps the teacher to know who each of his students is. Using some kind of card does not help. After all, the idea of school is to teach children things, not to turn it into a prison for them.


Eri

Panamah
02-27-2006, 01:22 PM
Well, all you would need to do is put a reader in every car, and every door of publick transportation and you pretty much know where every citizen is every moment of the day.
Not quite following your logic Eri. If the transmission is just a few feet then only your car would know when you are nearby. You'd need a GPS in the car so that they can track you while you're in your car.

Again, they could only track you getting on/off buses/metro/whatever. They couldn't track you once you got off unless they put some sort of detection device every 6 feet or so.

Klath
02-27-2006, 01:31 PM
If the transmission is just a few feet then only your car would know when you are nearby. You'd need a GPS in the car so that they can track you while you're in your car.
If the transmission is more than a few feet then it makes it possible to place readers in places like intersections and bridges where pretty much any tag in rage can be identified.

Swiftfox
02-27-2006, 06:04 PM
people don't even give a rats ass the government is wire-tapping citizens.


That should have been enough to impeach Bush.

Arienne
02-27-2006, 07:42 PM
That should have been enough to impeach Bush.Hopefully it will be.

Panamah
02-27-2006, 08:06 PM
Hopefully it will be.
Please! The congress isn't even going to have hearings into the issue. It is being swept under the giant rug.

Madie of Wind Riders
02-27-2006, 10:59 PM
In high school we used to waste a significant portion of time (several minutes of every class) taking attendance. If students could simply swipe a card as they walked in and out of the classroom, then more time could be spent actually teaching.

ROFLMAO!! Are you serious? The 5 minutes it takes to take attendance of 40 people would make *that* much difference?

Fyyr Lu'Storm
02-28-2006, 12:26 AM
5 minutes of a 50 minute class, is 10% wasted time.

Erianaiel
02-28-2006, 02:58 AM
Please! The congress isn't even going to have hearings into the issue. It is being swept under the giant rug.

The rug industry must be the biggest receivers of government grants nowadays ... I mean, the size of the rug needed to sweep all these scandals under must be mindblowing.
Oh, and aren't rugs made in the middle east too?


Eri

B_Delacroix
02-28-2006, 07:49 AM
Not to mention that, in my experience, pretty much all of high school was wasted time.

Panamah
02-28-2006, 10:22 AM
The rug industry must be the biggest receivers of government grants nowadays ... I mean, the size of the rug needed to sweep all these scandals under must be mindblowing.
Oh, and aren't rugs made in the middle east too?

LOL! Yes, we outsourced it to Dubai.