Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Security

Blocker Tags to Protect Privacy From RFID Tags 295

Posted by CowboyNeal from the arms-race-for-secrecy dept.
geekee writes "According to an article at CNET, RSA Security is developing a 'blocker' tag that disrupts RFID tag transmissions, protecting a person's privacy from those who would abuse RFID technology. The blocker tag would be embedded in your watch, for instance. This method has an advantage over destroying the RFID tags after purchase because useful information on the tag could help consumers (e.g. laundry instructions)." According to the RSA scientist quoted in the article, privacy concerns regarding RFID have been overblown, but it's still worth being proactive when finding ways to defeat the tags.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blocker Tags to Protect Privacy From RFID Tags More

Blocker Tags to Protect Privacy From RFID Tags

Comments Filter:

  • God I hate those tags (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dancin_Santa ( 265275 ) <DancinSanta@gmail.com> on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:00PM (#6819849) Journal
    I haven't ever seen one, nor have I heard of any stores stocking merchandise equipped with them, but the price of Freedom is eternal vigilantism.

    • Re:God I hate those tags (Score:4, Informative)

      by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:07PM (#6819931) Homepage Journal
      nor have I heard of any stores stocking merchandise equipped with them,

      well... there's gilette mach iii razor blades (source is here [indymedia.org.uk]). apparently that's been canned because of the outcry. but early adopters always have a tough time of it..

    • Re:God I hate those tags (Score:5, Insightful)

      by joe_bruin ( 266648 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:07PM (#6819934) Homepage Journal
      ...but the price of Freedom is eternal vigilantism.

      i believe that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. that's pretty funny, though.
    • the price of Freedom is eternal vigilantism.

      Or you can simply EMP them. Blow the circuit, and then nobody can read the ID.

      Shouldn't take too much if a pulse either, as they are so small.

      Next big item on eBay: portable EMP generators.

      • Re:God I hate those tags (Score:4, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:50PM (#6820212)
        Next big item on eBay: portable EMP generators.

        Excellent. Then the next time some prick wont stop waffling into his cellphone during the movie, I can just take matters into my own hands and blast it into a useless lump of plastic.
        • I have always thought that an EMP generator would be a useful accessory to have on your robot in one of those Robot Wars programs they televise. Make a simple robot that only has hardened electron tube circuitry in it, but also an EMP generator. Your robot wheels out in the arena with the other battling robots. You press the 'EMP' button on your remote control (vaccum tube based, of course). The resulting EMP takes out all the electronics in all the other robots, the camera televising the event, all the

        • Re:God I hate those tags (Score:5, Funny)

          by Nucleon500 ( 628631 ) <tcfelker@example.com> on Thursday August 28, 2003 @10:37PM (#6820771) Homepage
          Excellent. Then the next time some prick wont stop waffling into his cellphone during the movie, I can just take matters into my own hands and blast it into a useless lump of plastic.

          But then you'd be helping the MPAA, by stopping the flow of text messages complaining about the movie!

    • the price of Freedom is eternal vigilantism.

      Perhaps you intended to to write, "[T]he price of freedom is eternal vigilantism. Or, is it evangelism? Damn, the two are so closely entwined, I can't decide. Militarism? Mercantilism? Zealot vs. Zealot? Wasn't that in MAD magazine, which I read when I was a kid and is probably a contributing factor as to why I can't get a date with a girl? Sorry, but I'm late for the militia meeting."

      To quote Tom Lehrer, "The rest of you can look it up when you get home."

      SiO
    • Because they're so small you could hide them near the scanners and ensure they don't work at all. Of course it'll piss off the repair people. Doesn't work in the store. As soon as you take it away it does.

  • Shoplifting? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ksuMacGyver ( 562019 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:01PM (#6819858) Homepage
    Wonder how this would affect shoplifting? Just wear the watch and walk out $0 deducted from your bank account?!

    • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Wear the signal blocker and get stopped EVERY TIME you walk out of a store.

      Good tradeoff, eh?

      • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by psyco484 ( 555249 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:28PM (#6820100)
        Win enough illegal search and siezure (sp?) lawsuits and they likely won't bother you. This is of course assuming you're not stealing from them.

        If the cops can't search my car without consent or a warrant, I'll be damned if a supermarket clerk can search me.

        • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:3, Informative)

          by LineNoiz ( 616971 )
          The cops can search your car without your consent and without a warrant. All they need is probable cause.

          Ironically enough, you denying them consent to search is generally considered probable enough for them to search it anyway....

        • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ceejayoz ( 567949 )
          You'd lose an illegal search and seizure lawsuit, most likely. You went into the store, which is private property. Not only that, but the fact that you're wearing a device specifically designed to jam their anti-theft devices is enough cause for suspicion.

          Same reason airport security can search every person as many times and as thoroughly as they wish, but the police can't come to your house and do the same w/o a warrant.

          • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:4, Informative)

            by psyco484 ( 555249 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @10:16PM (#6820669)
            The device in question wouldn't be designed to jam anti-theft stuff. They have no right to search you, if a cop does search your car after you deny them, they are violating your rights. If their reason was "he denied us, he must have something to hide" then they're violating that whole innocent until proven guilty thing. Airport security is an entirely different matter. By going in an airport you are consenting to a search. Stores must have you sign a consent form (like at Costco/BJ's/Sam's Club) to search your stuff when you leave. It's in their membership agreement thing, that's consent. I can't say I have personal experience, but I've heard of people that have gone into a Fry's and refused who they called "the door nazi" to check their stuff. This is completely legal and the store can't do anything about it. Knowing your rights doesn't mean you have something to hide, it's just insurance against getting screwed.

            Case in point: My roommate this past year had been arrested for alcohol possesion (he's 19). The alcohol was in his car trunk, out of view. He wasn't pulled over for DUI, but for a busted tail light. The cop asked to search his car and he refused. The cop searched it anyway. The case was thrown out, my roommate cleared of all charges, and the cop was suspended. This is an example of how the system can fail, but it's an example of how the system works and the extent of your rights in the US.

            • Depends on where you are. (Score:4, Interesting)

              by hayden ( 9724 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @11:51PM (#6821124)
              In Australia the search thing is covered by contract law. When you enter a store you enter into a contract with the owner. That contract by default does not include having your bags searched. By putting a sign outside the store that is clearly visible before you go into the store they can change the contract. It must be before you enter the store so you can refuse to agree with it by not entering the store.

              IANAL but my sister is and she gets really shitty about this.

          • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:3, Insightful)

            by danila ( 69889 )
            But I don't think the store security has any right to search you. So you can always say you are innocent and wait for the police. And it doesn't seem that the device is designed to jam anti-theft device, but to jam the spies on your body.

            Of course there are risks.
            1) US govt may decide blocking RFID is terrorism
            2) Corporations may decide it's infridgment on their IP
            Either way, blockers are banned

          • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:2, Interesting)

            by nolife ( 233813 )
            I don't know if the law considers the difference but being searched at an airport and government offices is to ensure safety of people inside, not to catch that magazine you swiped from airport newsstand. That is why you get scanned on the way IN.

      • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:3, Informative)

        by pla ( 258480 )
        Wear the signal blocker and get stopped EVERY TIME you walk out of a store.
        Good tradeoff, eh?

        DAMN good tradeoff - If they can't show the footage, in court, of you stuffing something in your pockets, they better have a hefty budget set aside for harassment suits.

        Incidentally, you know those sensors many stores already have by the doors? You can ignore them. Someone tries to physically stop you? Add assault charges on top of the civil suit. Of course, if they actually *find* something on you, I'd ima

        • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by eht ( 8912 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @09:24PM (#6820411)
          They'll make a Anti-RFID detector and you come in the store it goes off, sorry sir, you can't bring that in here.

          Quite a few stores won't let you shop carrying a backpack, so I figure they'll do sometihing along those lines.

          Don't like it? You don't have to shop there and they have the right to refuse you business as long as they aren't discriminating against a class of people(I don't think paranoid is a legal class of people).

          • We'll enter the store with the detector turned off. Then we'll turn it on and walk in the store (and eventually out of the store) jamming all RFID receivers. And of course, if this device would have at least moderate working distance, good luck to the guards finding who has it. :) It's not visible like a backpack, it might be so hidden as not to be found even if they know where to look. :)))
        • (disclaimer - IANAL)

          And it shows.

          My government teacher worked as a store security guard during the summers, and he told us many amusing stories of people who thought like you seem to.

          My favorite one: The mall he worked in was across the county line (half the mall in one county, half the mall in the next) and some shoplifters thought security guards couldn't pursue across it. One such person got a rather rude surprise when he got across the line, stopped to taunt my teacher and got tackled by his 200+ l
          • And it shows.
            Do you have anything than an unrelated anecdote to back this up? Honestly, if you know something relevant about store guards that can be applied in this case, I would be really interested.

        • Re:Shoplifting? (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Hungus ( 585181 )
          Think again about your statements about what they can and cannot do. In fact they can detain while the police arrive. So not only are you not a lawyer you are not familiar with the law, I suggest you become so.

          Disclaimer - I work with lawyers and for a private investigations and security group.
          • I think everybody can detain you until police arrives if they have a reason to believe this is necessary. It doesn't mean, IMO, that they would be immune from a civil suit, though.
          • Think again about your statements about what they can and cannot do. In fact they can detain while the police arrive.

            I'll accept the "detain", though if they don't have some really good evidence of a crime, my pockets will smile.

            However, beyond that? Hey, fair enough, you work in the field, whereas I've only gone by the best reasonable explanations I've found so far. So what powers *do* they have, and why?

            Or more to the point, if I hire a pair of goons to "detain" everyone that invades my personal

    • A better idea... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:50PM (#6820208)
      What size range would the holes in a screen need to be to block RFID frequencies? I think it might be nice to embed such a mesh in the lining of a purse or jacket...

  • Going lotech (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Empiric ( 675968 ) * on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:01PM (#6819859)
    Juels said that he foresees a day when tags in clothes can tell washing machines the proper way they need to be washed.

    This just seems like really stretching for a scenario in which RFID tags will be useful beyond inventory tracking (What happens when 5% of your laundry says "warm" and the rest says "hot")?

    Before paying RSA for advanced laundry stealth technology, I think I'd first try something a little more straightforward, like a few seconds in my microwave.
  • It's a bit strange for RSA to come up with an innovative product that's a reasonable thing for consumers to buy... I wish them good luck with this, and might buy one myself if they offer it at a reasonable price. (say $10)

  • But... (Score:5, Funny)

    by cliffy2000 ( 185461 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:01PM (#6819863) Journal
    Just remember to take off your RFID blocker watch before trying to get on a plane. Try explaining THAT to airport security:
    You: "It's a watch that protects my privacy from the invasive government by sending out waves of non-dangerous radiation!"
    Them: "Terrorist!"
    You: "But it's just radio wa-wahhhhhhh!" *getting taken away in handcuffs*

    • Re:But... (Score:2, Funny)

      by cgranade ( 702534 )
      Then they'd install an RFID tag under your skin in an undisclosed location so that Asscroft can track you.

      • Re:But... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by IM6100 ( 692796 )
        Actually, the RFID will be installed early in each good citizen's life by well meaning liberals, at which time the person will also receive his National Health Insurance ID number. Machines at all fast food outlets will scan for these numbers to determine if the citizen is allowed to eat more fast food or if he has eaten his limit for the week.

  • Is that legal? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PeteQC ( 680043 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:01PM (#6819865)
    is that legal to block radio frequency? Isn't it the same problem that movie theaters came across when they wanted to block cell phones' frequency but they can't because of the law?

    IANAL, but I think it may not be legal!

    • Clue (Score:2)

      by HeghmoH ( 13204 )
      Movie theaters blocking cell phones is illegal because they're blocking other people from communicating with a third party.

      This is perfectly legal. You're only interfering with things you already own.
      • Nope - they're illegal because the cell phone area of the spectrum is regulated by the FCC, whereas the frequencies used by RFID tags are not.

        Plus, you're not interfering with things you already own if you walk into Walmart wearing the device.

    • Re:Is that legal? (Score:5, Informative)

      by BigDish ( 636009 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:13PM (#6819993)
      With current laws (unless this gets called a circumvention device under the DMCA) it would be legal. This is because the RFID tag will be unlicensed and fall under part 15 of the FCC's rules. Cell phones, on the other hand, are in licensed spectrum, and transmit with much more power than part 15. Part of the requirements for a part 15 device to operate is it must not intentionally cause interference (ie blocking a cell phone) with another, LICSENCED device (so interfering with an RFID tag is OK, cell phone is not) Additionally, most likely power levels greater than part 15 would be required to block a cell phone transmisssion. So in short, this is legal, call phone blocking isn't.

    • Re:Is that legal? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by El ( 94934 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:14PM (#6819997)
      Building an RF-sheilded cage is NOT illegal; transmitting on frequencies you have no license to transmit on is illegal. While "jamming" cell frequencies may be illegal, it would be perfectly legal for a theater to embed well-grounded copper mesh in their walls and ceiling, effectively making cell phone communication impossible. Why don't they do it? Because they would lose customers!
    • I think the deal with banning cellphones in movie theaters was that in case of an emergency (e.g., doctor on call; someone having a heartattack) the cellphone wouldn't work, thereby causing potential loss of life (and a humonguous lawsuit to boot).

    • Re:Is that legal? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Hanzie ( 16075 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:23PM (#6820062)
      No, it's not legal. You're intentionally circumventing anti-theft technology. The DMCA says you're a felon if you use it.

      You'll be intentionally jamming radio transmissions. The FCC won't like that either. Don't try to say "it's unlicensed spectrum", you're still intentionally blocking legal radio communications traffic. Police radar is also unlicensed spectrum, you can have your own unlicensed transmitter, just by purchasing a radar gun. Many internal security systems use radar for detection of intruders. If you get caught with a jammer for police radar, you are screwed.

      RFID jamming will be prosecuted the same way.

      If you really wonder about the legality, just ask yourself, who benefits from RFID? Who benefits from blocking RFID? Which one owns more law-writers? (Excuse me, vote-sellers. The laws themselves have been written by lobbyists for a very long time now.)

      • Re:Is that legal? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by MooseGuy529 ( 578473 )

        You're intentionally circumventing anti-theft technology.

        RTFA, it's for keeping people from reading the tags after you buy something, not to let you shoplift!

        You'll be intentionally jamming radio transmissions.

        So if I go and buy two FRS radios and have them jam each other, do I have to sue myself? It would be another tag that generates interference only when read so people can't read the tags. It's not to prevent others from using the technology for their own uses, or to jam receivers everywhere.

  • Going to be very popular! (Score:4, Funny)

    by El ( 94934 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:02PM (#6819868)
    I here Wynona Ryder has already order a bunch of these!

  • This sets a standard. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Obscenity ( 661594 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:02PM (#6819869) Homepage
    If we let companies use these tag's, we are saying to them "We are ok with this." And of cource in the future (near or far) they will click it up a notch. Sooner or later, they will invade more of our privacy, under the guise of "targeted advertising". Weather there is much privacy lost or not is not an issure, the fact than we are allowing this to happen shows the companies our mindset. We are not going to fight back aganst these kinds of intrustions. Or are we?
  • Yes but how does that help you after the RDIF tag leaves your [slashdot.org]
    body?
  • Sure, this will be legal until DMCA 2.0 comes out. Let's help the lobbyists name it: Digital Millenium Anti Inventory Tamper Act (DMAITA).

    • Nah, it will be like another set of pricacy tools. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by twitter ( 104583 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:12PM (#6819984) Homepage Journal
      Remember "private" phone listings? What a scam that was. The phone company sold your name and number to direct marketing creeps who then annoyed you day and night. To help you out, the phone company sold you an "unlisted number", which kept your friends and relatives from being able to contact you. The phone creeps could still get your number and you still got annoying sales calls. The phone company then sold you caller ID and creeps ID blocking. So the cycle rolled, with extra money for the phone company and the rest of the world as screwed as possible.

      I have no faith in a blocking tag. Retailers will set off alarms every time you leave a store if you block their signals and readers will be made to defeat them in time. All you will get out of this evil technology is more grief, just like the phone system. The root of the problem, customer data retention and sale, is what needs to be addressed.

      • "Retailers will set off alarms every time you leave a store if you block their signals and readers will be made to defeat them in time."

        I don't know about you, but if I paid for everything, and this anti-RFID watch thingy sets an alarm off and they want to check me, you can be DAMNED SURE i'm going to make a scene about it if I KNOW its the watch setting it off.

        On a side note, I was wondering, when I worked at Kohl's and Blockbuster, we had product that had security tags on them. You'd swipe them to turn

  • This is not meant to be a hostile tool," Juels said. "It balances consumer privacy and retail use in a profitable way...Tags are too useful to completely disable them."
    if these tags cost only 10 cents, why can't we completely disable them? it's not like were going to reuse them or use them at all outside of warehouses and stores, there doesn't seem to be any practical use for them in the home

  • Build security in from the beginning... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mnmlst ( 599134 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:06PM (#6819922) Homepage Journal
    What a concept! Near the end of the article is the quote about how hard it would be to add the blocking capability at a later time. I would hope these guys are looking at a LOT of security aspects to this technology before they unleash it everywhere. Interestingly, Business 2.0 is currently running an article on Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) and how they have just now really begun to get "wired". Naturally, they are using a lot of RFID technology to track their rail cars. As recently as ten years ago (when I interviewed with them) they were still using paper and pencil. Sometimes an engineer would stop a train and call back to the dispatcher on a pay phone. Bring on the RFID's. MOM, I want a train!
  • sure it would be legal according to the constitution... but the DMCA expressly prohibits this.
  • ...my anti-anti-rfid tag, uhh ... tag.

  • You'll pay and pay (Score:5, Interesting)

    by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:13PM (#6819996)
    One of the advantages being promoted for the tags is that you'll be ableto take a shopping cart, just run it through the checkout line, and the scanner and RFID tags will quickly add up everything in your cart. You can expect this technology to become as prevalent as bar codes are now. But with such a system and tags that are not disabled after you leave the store, you're likely to end up being charged again for your shirt, or watch, or underware or shoes or some item in your pocket with an embedded tag if you are close to the cart when it is scanned. It will become the new way of scamming the customers, soon to exceed the scan prices often being higher than the shelf price but never being lower.

    • Like they haven't thought of that. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Chuck Chunder ( 21021 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:32PM (#6820120) Journal
      These things contain unique IDs. A shop will only be scan out and charge for an item that it has identified as being in stock. Once it's been purchased and scanned out of the system if you go back to the store (or another store) you won't be charged because that store knows it doesn't have a product with that ID to sell.
      • Have you recently compared prices on the shelf tag to the price the cash register charges you? Even when both are using barcodes? It's amazing how often the shelf prices are more than the cash register prices. Lots more often than the other way around.
        You don't think the "computers" will make the same kind of "mistakes" and more with the new, user-confuser technology?
        • The same mistake, maybe, but I don't see why they'd make more mistakes. I certainly don't see them charging for stock they don't have (ie stuff you previously bought) as the major advantage to RFID is its stock management capabilities.

          I guess it probably comes down to consumer protection mechanisms too. It doesn't appear that overcharging is a problem here in Australia even though it is self regulated using a "Code of Practice for Computerised Checkout Systems in Supermarkets". Amoung other things if a go
      • That's an interesting way of doing it. Keeping an in-store database of what hasn't been sold, rather than a database of what has been sold. If you were to keep track of what's been sold, you'd need a massive infrastructure to coordinate that information (millions and millions of tags and thousands and thousands of retail locations).

        Of course, I'd still prefer some sort of field-programmable device where a flag in the tag could be set to indicate that it's been bought (like demagnetizing the anti-theft Elec

  • I wanna subscribe to your newsletter (Score:5, Funny)

    by serial frame ( 236591 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:15PM (#6820008)
    Wow, this is awesome !! This is one step closer to things like, watch-sized EMP death rays.

    I've always wanted an EMP in my watch.

  • Easy (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:16PM (#6820021)
    just place clothes in microwave, high power for 10 seconds

    no rfid :)

    just dont touch that zipper (ouch hottt)
    • just place clothes in microwave, high power for 10 seconds
      no rfid :)
      No clothes either... Unless you like the "burnt to a crisp" look in fashion. RFID tags would be incinerated in a microwave oven, likely setting the clothes on fire with it.

  • Price fixing? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Izago909 ( 637084 ) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .dogsiuat.> on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:16PM (#6820022)
    So a great part of the RFID hype is over preventing theft. When they are implimented, and theft rates drop, will they drop their prices too? They (corporations) claim that theft and other losses have a large effect on prices. Do you think they will prove themselves wrong?

    Along the lines of buildign a better mousetrap: How long will it take a theif to discover a way to neutralize these tags? What happens when a person walks out of a store with a cart that has 30% of the tags inactive? How will anyone know that s/he hasn't paid for everything?

  • RFID Silliness (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ticklemeozmo ( 595926 ) <justin...j...novack@@@acm...org> on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:18PM (#6820032) Homepage Journal
    Seriously, how long does it take to seperate whites from darks and if you are in that serious need of time, you have a scheduling issue.

    On a tin-foil-hat note: this is how freedoms are taken away.

    • "It's for convienence!"
    • "But it'll save time... no one is going to monitor what types of razor blades you buy."
    • "If you just swipe your finger, you'll check out quicker, save time and money 5% off to customers who use RFID!"
    • "I'm sorry, but it's a requirement that all people have RFID tags in their heads. well, people were cutting off their fingers to not be tracked by us. And anyone who doesn't submit to InstaTrace is considered a criminal."
    I hate to sound like a Montanian, but consider this when security and freedoms are concerned (I forget who said it, didn't bother googling).

    "When you draw a line in the sand, and step over it, it does not appear to be a big step from your last position, so you allow it. But if you continue to allow it, over time, you will realize (albeit, probably too late) that you do not have your original position in sight as you turn around."

  • Here comes my own IPO (Score:3, Funny)

    by defishguy ( 649645 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:20PM (#6820054) Journal
    I have just received my patent on an RFID Blocker Blocking Mechanism.

    It is a small 8.4oz radioactive device that is spot welded to any part of the merchandise which emits shrill radio signals in the 3Ghz spectrum culled from the choruses of 6 random songs from the 70s group ABBA. No device, person, or bat can overcome that!!!!

    After that it will be the RFID blocker blocker blocking mechansim!

  • Lame excuses for RFID (Score:4, Interesting)

    by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:21PM (#6820059)
    This method has an advantage over destroying the RFID tags after purchase because useful information on the tag could help consumers (e.g. laundry instructions)

    Man, these RFID people are getting desperate. First it was "it'll stop theft". Then it was "It'll keep food from getting spoiled/infected. And that'll keep food safe from....TERRORISTS!"(Don't worry, I missed that train of thought too, but the T word is like 'dot com' was a couple years ago, so...) Now it's "it'll help you do your laundry." If you can't remember how a certain shirt gets washed by the time the little printed tag wears out, you either need fewer clothing, or a brain. Besides, what's the washing machine gonna do, scream at you like your mom/girlfriend/wife/CowboyNeal would, for mixing the underwear with the christmas socks? How useful.

    Now, of course, I have one question- I assume there'll be maybe two bits for water temperature(cold, cold/warm, warm, hot), two bits for fragile-ness(delicate, knit, perm, regular), maybe two bits for color-compatibility(how much it bleeds) and color(dark, color, white, etc).

    The question is- can we get an Evil Bit added?

    • Man, these RFID people are getting desperate. First it was "it'll stop theft". Then it was "It'll keep food from getting spoiled/infected. And that'll keep food safe from....TERRORISTS!"(Don't worry, I missed that train of thought too, but the T word is like 'dot com' was a couple years ago, so...) Now it's "it'll help you do your laundry."

      Yeah, that little perk was the frosting on my cake, as it were. Here is a tidbit many of us may recall:

      SHOPPER 1. They changed Malibu Stacy!

      SHOPPER 2. She is bet

  • Spoofed RFIDs (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MoogMan ( 442253 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:24PM (#6820074)
    I think it would be cool to have a system where a device sends out all (or many) RFIDs to confuse a reciever.
    Another thought is that it could send out a bunch of random RFIDs thus (hopefully) protecting anonymity but keeping statistics useful?
    • From an article I've read before I believe RFID scanners rely on getting a single reply back, more than one and the reply signals can interfer so it asks for a smaller subset until it only gets one response.

      ie.
      Scanner pings for all tags in your cart:
      All 20 items reply
      Scanner pings for tags starting with 0:
      4 items reply
      ping 00 --> 1 item replies (#0042424242 bought)
      ping 01
      ping 02 --> 2 items reply
      ping 020
      021
      022
      023 --> 1 item replies (#0237777777 bought)
      024
      025 --

  • "One thing is for certain, there is no stopping them; the tags will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new radio-frequency overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their returned-goods and overstock caves."
  • If it's possible to detect the source of a blocking tags, you could just be attracting far more attention to yourself in a store. Instead of a machine monitoring you, you could have a security guard...

  • At last (Score:3, Funny)

    by isomeme ( 177414 ) <cdberry@gmail.com> on Thursday August 28, 2003 @08:53PM (#6820231) Journal
    Cool! I'll just incorporate a few anti-RFID tags into my tinfoil hat, and then let's see the CIA try their thought-control lasers on me!
  • ... and block the RFID machine from reading the label on that Discman you have under your jacket.

  • Sounds like fun (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2003 @09:36PM (#6820462)
    I'm actually looking forward to these things. They should be easy to get and hack. Imagine the look on the salespersons face when their scanners indicate that you are currently wearing four truck tires and a goldfish.

  • URL to Rivest RFID blocking paper (Score:5, Informative)

    by karl.auerbach ( 157250 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @09:52PM (#6820555) Homepage
    In case anyone wants to read the original paper on this it's at:

    http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/JuelsRivestSzydl o-TheBlockerTag.pdf [mit.edu]

  • History repeats itself (Score:4, Funny)

    by danila ( 69889 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @10:12PM (#6820656) Homepage
    This reminds me of the discovery of X-Rays. New glasses were sold that supposedly allowed you to see through clothes and then new clothes that supposedly blocked X-Rays...

  • Guns & Ammo (Score:3, Funny)

    by t_allardyce ( 48447 ) on Thursday August 28, 2003 @10:42PM (#6820782) Journal
    All I want to know is when the military can start RFID-ing bullets and dog-tags. Think of the body count logistics! And then they could prove that none of their bullets were used to kill innocent civilians.

    Oh wait forget it

  • How is RFID going to work in practice? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Friday August 29, 2003 @04:42AM (#6822062) Homepage

    The only way that I can see it working is if stores keep a record of all RFIDs that they have in stock, and then only charge you if the RFID matches when you walk out.

    How are they planning to actually administrate that? Scan all products on the way in? So they shove a pallet full of Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs though their stock door and a mondo scanner reads the RFIDs off of every box? Or do they scan a barcode or type in a code that just says what should be on the stack?

    What I'm interested in is the possibility of deliveries getting screwed up and RFIDs getting entered into the wrong systems. There's the problem with buying something at store X then store Y thinking that it belongs to them, but there's a problem for the stores as well. If you want to buy something and for some reason the RFID isn't on their system, how do they sell it to you? And should you buy it, knowing that the RFID might appear on their or store Y's system at some point?

    And given that the biggest theft problem that many stores (especially supermarkets) face is employee theft, do they need RFID scanners on all their doors? If stock does go missing while it's still on the system, what happens to those RFID numbers? Do they just sit in there indefinitely, or is there a plan for removing them? What happens when Joe Customer walks in wearing or carrying something that he's bought second hand from an employee or shoplifter who obtained a five finger discount?

    It won't take many of these incidents to put a hell of a dent in consumer confidence over RFID, quite aside from the privacy issue of stores knowing that you're wearing a rubber g-string and fishnet stockings under your suit pants.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein

Close