Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Innovative Uses of RFID Tags

Posted by michael on Sat Nov 20, 2004 08:01 PM
from the you're-it,-forever dept.
Roland Piquepaille writes "When your newspapers write something about RFID tags, it's almost always about Wal-Mart or how these tags are threatening our privacy. But they often miss the important innovations brought by this technology. For example, in Florida, RFID drives highway traffic reports on more than 200 miles of toll roads. Or take DHL, which is tracking fashion with RFID tags on more than 70 million garments in its French distribution center. Elsewhere, in Texas, 28,000 students test an e-tagging system which promises better security for them. And what about RFID tags which could prevent surgical errors and have just been approved in the U.S last week? So, what do you think? Are these innovations promising a better future for us or not? For your convenience, this overview contains the essential details from the different articles mentioned above."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • RFID is cool! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nicholas Evans (731773) <OwlManAtt@gmail.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:04PM (#10877885) Homepage
    Last month at the local open source group's installfest, I was talking to one of the compsci teachers from a university. He had recently attended some sort of college fair or something, and someone (MIT?) had set up a nifty display using RFID chips.

    You see, they had disguised an rfid reader as a tablet, and embedded rfid things into little plastic discs. On the discs were images representing english, math, etc. Someone tosses a chip on the reader, and a load of information is displayed on the screen about that course. Nifty, nifty...
  • On/off switch... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pdboddy (620164) <pdboddy @ g mail.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:07PM (#10877897) Homepage Journal
    RFID tags *could* promise a better future. But, like anything that provides potentially personal information to anyone with the right scanning device, RFID tags could be abused on a scale never seen before.

    Have you seen anywhere at all that mentions anything about the ability to turn *off* an RFID switch?

    Not to mention the possible side effects of having a radio transmitting from inside a human body for long periods of time.

    Abuse by car insurance companies able to read your car's performance?

    The chance of abuse is too great...

    • Have you seen anywhere at all that mentions anything about the ability to turn *off* an RFID switch?

      This is the only thing that prevents RFID from having my approval, for whatever that is worth.

      I mean, if everything I own had its own RFID tag, nothing would ever get lost in my room!
        • Spam is bad. Rfid has nothing to do with spam. The only difference to using RFID to help spam is that you'll be getting targetted ads. But it has nothing to do with Rfid. Perhaps you should think about which chemist you go to if they send you spam.
    • Not to mention the possible side effects of having a radio transmitting from inside a human body for long periods of time.

      RFID chips don't use wavelengths capable of causing damage (radio waves don't have enough energy to punch pieces of your DNA out). Your privacy concerns are probably valid but from a health standpoint you have more to worry about the radiation from sleeping with your SO then you do from radio waves.
    • Re:On/off switch... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by gtkuhn (823989) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:16PM (#10877961)
      Having a tag inside a body doesn't seem to be the point. I imagine the tag would be in the plastic bracelet they give you (at least in the US, are those things used everywhere?). Anyway, this would eliminate misreading similar names and such human errors. Another good medical use might be having an RFID reader in the surgical instruments tray and tags on all the instruments. Lights or a readout could display when instruments are missing from the tray to prevent things getting left in a patient.
      • I don't think it was RFID (this is almost 3 years ago), but when my daughter was born, the umbilical cord clamp was actually a device much like what department stores use on clothing items. At the exits to the maternity ward were sensors that would trigger an alarm if you took your baby past the checkpoint. They warned people over and over that taking your child out to see everyone in the waiting room would cause chaos -- the doors to the floor would be automatically locked, the elevators disabled, etc. Som
          • Re:On/off switch... (Score:4, Informative)

            by pdboddy (620164) <pdboddy @ g mail.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @09:04PM (#10878181) Homepage Journal
            Well, here's an article [worldnetdaily.com] for VeriChip, which is implantable, and stores a persons health information, and is wirelessly writable.

            Here's another [worldnetdaily.com] about an implantable GPS system, currently the size of a pacemaker, but the inventors believe it can be shrunk down to as much as 1/10th the size.

            And, one last [worldnetdaily.com] one about Wal-Mart, tracking customers using RFID "from company headquarters some 750 miles away".

            So yes, RFID can do those things, and IS doing some of those things now.
    • Re:On/off switch... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Medevo (526922) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:19PM (#10877979) Homepage
      Not to mention the possible side effects of having a radio transmitting from inside a human body for long periods of time.


      First of all, there are two kinds of RFID chips, the active kind, that contain a power source and constant transmit and the passive kind that only activate when they are around the reader.

      Most of the tags in existance today are passive models, they are cheaper and have a virtually unlimited lifespan. They are powered by either a electric or magnetic field (depends on unit frequency). These models DO NOT CONSTANTLY TRANSMIT and would be unlikly to cause any problems to humans unless they were read a lot (1000+ times a day).

      The active kind are unlikly to be used alot around humans do to cost. The battery installed into them means that they usually only have a lifespan of around 5 years, and would have to be replaced then. Chances are after a cycle or two of battery usage, whatever the tag was doing will be replaced by a better technology.

      Medevo
      • Yes, most RFID tags are passive. But how long before they install RFID readers everywhere? And the passive ones are worse than the active ones, since they have a "virtually unlimited lifespan".
                • In your headlong rush to be clever you failed to notice, or deliberately avoided noticing, that bar codes cannot be read without being on the outside of something

                  RFID tags can be read by a bunch of folks for a bunch of reasons, but the "why" is relatively low. Wal-Mart could track your time in their store via the RFID tag in the shirt you bought there, but that'd only affect the portion of their customer base that buys shirts at Wal-Mart. They could do the exact same thing with random surveys and in-sto
  • by Richard_at_work (517087) <richardprice@nospAm.gmail.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:07PM (#10877906)
    this is what the standard slashdot rhetoric is:
    • P2P - ooh it has legitimate uses (tho you have to look hard to find them in actual usage), you cant ban it
    • RFID - ooh it can be used for bad things (but hasnt yet), ban it
    I welcome this article, as it points out the many positive uses of RFID technology, so heres hoping it might change some slashdotters minds. Personally, I see RFID as a hugely positive thing, with a great potential in front of it (for good or bad, but thats the same for P2P).
    • by Laurence Wood (819387) <laurence.woodNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:16PM (#10877960)
      I think the key is who is doing the bad things.
      With P2P its the people theoretically hurting artists and record labels. Record labels certainly aren't considered worth helping and artists are generally felt to live a good life. Whether this is true or not I don't want to get into.
      If RFID is abused as in the slashdot paranoia, it means a clamp-down on the freedom and privacy of the masses. I consider this a far worse fate than some obscenely rich people not getting much richer and artists having to perform live to make a living.
    • Nobody wants RFID banned. They don't want to be tracked by it. They don't want it used in insecure ways. RFID is fricking brilliant, it's just a travesty waiting to happen. Slashdot's concensus is "it's going to be bad, so be careful" not "burn them if they weigh the same as a duck."
    • Actually, all I see in the article are abuses of the system.

      The only one I might grant you as a good thing is tracking students. Not that it isn't an invasion of the privacy of students, because it is, but because as a society we've decided that that information MUST be available on-demand to parents, and if we've decided an invasion of privacy is important the least we can do is do it efficiently.

  • by TiMac (621390) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:09PM (#10877913)
    SPORTS!

    How about putting RFID tags in the end of footballs so that we can finally put an end to that oh-so-exact science of taking a timeout for a measurement?

    Seriously! They just toss the ball wherever the ref thinks it should be, and those chains aren't exactly placed perfectly either. How about something that can actually work for once?

  • E-tagging students to provide them with security listed as a good thing? Roland Piquepaille, get the fuck out, you know nothing of geeks.

    College is about drinking, sleeping late, cutting class and still passing because you are smart enough to do it all without getting caught. It certainly isn't about being tagged like cattle and herded from one carefully controlled, spoon fed 'educational experience' to another.

    For all you Americans who don't want to suffer crap like that I suggest college in England wher
  • Did you know? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Capt'n Hector (650760) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:09PM (#10877917)
    Did you know that you can use nuclear bombs to terraform mars? Or use snake venom to make antidote? Or use P2P networks for legit purposes? Everything has good uses and bad, it's just that the bad far outweigh the good for RFIDs. Or rather, they're so powerful that people WILL abuse them. Just like nuclear bombs, P2P networks and, err, snake venom.
    • Re:Did you know? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Idarubicin (579475) <allsquiet&hotmail,com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @09:44PM (#10878385) Journal
      Everything has good uses and bad, it's just that the bad far outweigh the good for RFIDs. Or rather, they're so powerful that people WILL abuse them. Just like nuclear bombs, P2P networks and, err, snake venom.

      ...and electricity, and antibiotics, and recombinant DNA, and desktop publishing?

      I'm curious--how is the parent poster so certain that RFID's negative uses will outweigh the positive ones?

      • It's not that people are certain the negative uses will outweight the positives, it's the potential that they will. There's nothing in the law books preventing the abuse of RFID, and while some current laws protect use from a few gross abuses of RFID, the precedents have to be set first. Our personal information is traded and sold every day, usually without our permission or knowledge, and we don't benefit from it, the companies and corporations do. Why should we accept yet another way our information ca
  • RFID tags at my work (Score:4, Interesting)

    by scaaven (783465) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:10PM (#10877919)
    I work at a medical device company, and we're implanting RFID tags into the bases of our optical catheters so they aren't used for more than 72 hours. It's a liability thing, but it's just another instance of RFID. We track the product id of the catheter and the base station records the number and records how long it's been used in the body.
  • by totallygeek (263191) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:11PM (#10877922) Homepage
    I just cannot stand people like this [endtime.com] that fear RFID is a step toward "the mark of the beast". First, religious groups said that Social Security numbers [greaterthings.com] were evil, and now it is RFID targetted.


    Can anyone point to technology that religion embraced in its infancy? I really would be interested.


    Are you a good graphics designer [aloesoft.com]?

    • by zakezuke (229119) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:19PM (#10877980)
      Can anyone point to technology that religion embraced in its infancy? I really would be interested.

      The Printing press [wikipedia.org]

      • If I remember right, they were afraid that the printing press would disseminate crap (they were right) and corrupt peoples' minds.

        Don't assume that all religous people are of this opinion toward science/technology, though. I'm a fairly fundamentalist Christian and cautiously pro-technology. I hold to Neil Postman's [amazon.com] philosophy on technology: it's all in how you use it; it changes peoples' lives for good and ill, so neither fear nor hate it.

        Religious technophobia is a shame; I don't really understand
      • Um. No. Sorry. From the wiki link itself we see that the churches did not like the printing press at first -- mostly because it destroyed their near-monopoly on the written word.

        The supplantation of hand copied manuscripts with printed works was not received with unanimous encomium. Not only did the papal court contemplate making printing presses an industry requiring a licence from the Catholic Church (an idea rejected in the end), but as early as in the 15th century some nobles refused to have printe
    • Can anyone point to technology that religion embraced in its infancy? I really would be interested.

      The most obvious would be the printing press, in Europe (not just Western Europe--all of Europe). Markedly different from the acceptance of the printing press in other areas, such as Islamicate Ottoman Turkey. A distinction which, imho, has a lot to do with religious acceptance and usage of the technology.

    • by pdboddy (620164) <pdboddy @ g mail.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:42PM (#10878077) Homepage Journal
      Technology embraced in it's infancy? Other than the printing press?

      Anything having to do with construction (building churches, etc), communication (radio, tv, the internet) and transportation (bussing those seniors in for Sunday Mass).
    • I hate, err... 'just cannot stand' to get technical... ok, maybe I don't. But let's step back a bit and read what 'the mark of the beast' really is, at the core.

      A unique identifier of a person, used to control behavior (in this case, commerce), and those who refuse the identifier, ergo, the control, are "retired"

      The "mark of the beast", in this example, the RFID, is no more evil than the social security number. It is the USE of the number by a larger entity which has been 'evil'. The tattoos on people
  • Roland Piquepaille (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TrumpetPower! (190615) <ben@trumpetpower.com> on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:12PM (#10877930) Homepage

    So...how much d'ya figure he paid for this one?

    Cheers,

    b&

  • Check out this item [endtime.com], citing that:

    Audi AG employees have gone from six cards to one, thanks to Legic's smart card system. It merges parking, access control, time and attendance, and cashless payment ability at vending machines or in the cafeteria. In addition, the card has room for future biometric applications.

    This is in their Mark of the Beast Watch! World gone mad?!?!

    Want to make $ 500.00 [aloesoft.com]?

  • Dunno (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hackstraw (262471) * on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:15PM (#10877955) Homepage
    When your newspapers write something about RFID tags, it's almost always about Wal-Mart or how these tags are threatening our privacy.

    I don't know if newspapers signficantly differ from online news, but the Wal-Mart and privacy issues seem to be more of a /. thing.

    http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=rfid&bt nG=Search+News [google.com]
  • by NeuroManson (214835) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:24PM (#10877993) Homepage
    It cuts both ways. Back in the 70s and 80s, I recall seeing tons of conspiracy theories about how bar codes could be misused to observe whatever we did in our purchases.

    Additionally, there's the whole so-called conspiracy about how "shopping club" members who bought a frequent shopper club card was having vast and horrible statistics collected about how much Mountain Dew, et al, they were purchasing.

    Frankly, yes, it can all be used for wrong, but that depends on your definition of wrong. Do you spend sleepless nights wondering if your store is telling evil corporations how much Mountain Dew you drink?

    Chances are it's just the caffeine.
  • by jldrew (629581) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:47PM (#10878101) Homepage

    My job is with a company [theendresultco.com] that times races (i.e. runners) using RFID technology. We use ChampionChip [championchip.com] products, but there are a couple of similar, up-and-coming solutions (AMB [amb-it.com], DAG [chronometrage.com]).

    The whole system is really impressive and versatile. We time marathons with tens of thousands of participants (Boston, Twin Cities, Grandma's, Columbus, Indianapolis Mini) and the systems catch 99.99% of the runners. The chips are waterproof (for triathlons) and quite rugged.

    Using RFID technology is TONS better than the old methods (tags and/or popsicle sticks, and lots of watching). If any of you has ever had to line up in chutes after a hard race, you'd know what kind of chaos can ensue when someone falls or gets out of line. Anyway, RFID means that runners only have to cross the finish line... then they can pass out as they please.

    • I also work for a timing company that uses ChampionChip. And one thing that the above poster would agree with is a chip alone is useless, you need some sort of database or software to relate the chip to usable data.

      This is a major issue that people seem to forget about with RFID. A passive RFID chip can transmit just a serial number, but what does that mean? If I take my Mobil Speedpass and pass it over the ChampionChip system it reads it, sure, but otherwise it's useless data. There is no way the syst
  • Nuclear plants too (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jonathan Burns (717637) on Saturday November 20 2004, @09:11PM (#10878215)

    RFIDs are a robot sense. They tell robots where and what things are, where to look for them, and what to do when they find them. if find(rfid) and ! if find(rfid) are very convenient directors of robot behaviour.

    Not, of course, that robots can run around wholly unsupervised; but with automation to hand for filtering and first-level logistics, all sorts of responsible people like cops, nurses and safety staff can shrug off their robotic chores and get on with making decisions.

    We all ought to be playing with this stuff; but the app I really want to see is, nuclear power plants and fuel recycling plants, with every fuel and waste element and every component accounted for. This is one area with universal support for absolute security. We've held off development of civilian breeders for fear of terrorists getting access at some stage of the fuel processing cycle, among other reasons. But turning, say, a 99% safe cycle with 20 critical inspection points into a 99.9% safe cycle with 200 points, 180 automated, is surely not beyond out current means.

  • by untaken_name (660789) on Saturday November 20 2004, @09:57PM (#10878447) Homepage
    *RING*

    Mister Jacobsen: Hello?
    Voice: Hello, Mr Jacobsen.
    Mr. J: Who are you?
    V: Mr. Jacobsen, our records indicate that you checked into the Inn 'n' Out motel last night with your wife.
    Mr. J: So? What's this all about?
    V: We verified that your charcoal suit indeed proceeded from your office to that hotel, but Mrs. Jacobsen's housedress moved around your home all evening.
    Mr. J: All right, who the hell is this?
    V: It's your cleaners, Mr. Jacobsen. Don't you think you really should have that suit cleaned? We'd hate to have to call Mrs. Jacobsen and ask her about it.
    Mr. J: No, no...that's okay...
    V: We have a full clean and press special going on today only. May we pick up the suit?
    Mr. J: *sigh* Yeah, it's at my office, corner of...
    V: That's ok, Mr. Jacobsen. We'll have someone there in a few minutes. Thank you for your business!

    *RING*
    Mr. J: Hello?
    Voice #2: Hi, Mr. Jacobsen! This is Eddie, from Lingerie Etc. We have a great special going on right now on black lace teddies.
    Mr. J: What the hell? So what?
    V2: Our records indicate that your last four mistresses all wore them. We just thought you'd be interested in our special pricing, in light of your recent...activities.
    Mr. J: Argggghhhhhhhh

    Yes, I'm scared of what the government *could* do with this technology. However, I'm even more scared of what the fucking marketeers will do. 1984? Hardly. More like $19.95.
  • by Animats (122034) on Saturday November 20 2004, @10:04PM (#10878484) Homepage
    Enforcement of privacy rules in the US is very weak, even where there are rules. A good example of non-enforcement is TrustE [truste.com], which claims to have an "enforcement" mechanism but no longer takes enforcement actions.

    TrustE's Watchdog Reports [truste.org] invariably results in a decision of "Issue Handled with no changes necessary to the Privacy Statement nor the Site". They get about a hundred complaints per month, but don't do anything. The last time TrustE made a site change anything was in 2002.

    In the early days of TrustE, their seal actually meant something. But they've totally sold out.

    There's also the Commerce Department's "Safe Harbor" list [export.gov]. No enforcement action has ever been taken under that.

    So don't believe any "privacy certifications" associated with RFID tag use. They're meaningless.

  • Roland (Score:3, Informative)

    by Lord_Dweomer (648696) on Saturday November 20 2004, @10:10PM (#10878511) Homepage
    Joy, yet another Roland Piquepaille story.

    For those who don't know, he posts a lot of rehashed news on his blog and then by some act of god (or Benjamin Franklin) gets his stories constantly posted to Slashdot, which gets him massive ad revenue.

    I recommend that nobody visits the links in the story to deprive him of this ad revenue.

  • by Unnngh! (731758) on Saturday November 20 2004, @11:47PM (#10878943)
    I can see the security guard at the front doors now: "Whoa, hold on there sir, you can't leave the hospital--you have the wrong spleen. That's right, the RFID tag identifies it as the wrong one. Just hand it over nicely, sir, and we won't have to involve the authorities..."
  • by ebusinessmedia1 (561777) on Sunday November 21 2004, @12:17AM (#10879068)
    Here's a fascinating application that I came across. This little company is making big waves in the music instrument manufacturing sector. They're doing some cool R&D on tracking technologies that combine GPS and RFID as well.

    http://www.snagg.com
  • by SpiceWare (3438) on Sunday November 21 2004, @01:01AM (#10879235)
    Houston Real-Time Traffic Map [houstontranstar.org]. It reports on freeways as well as the tollroads. There's electronic signs along the roads informing you of traffic conditions ahead. You can view the signs online, first check the "Message Signs" option in the Map Control box on the lower left, the click a sign on the map to see what its currently displaying.
  • Congress (Score:3, Funny)

    by man_ls (248470) <jkoebel.gmail@com> on Sunday November 21 2004, @05:34AM (#10879958)
    How hard is it to get elected to Congress?

    I want to serve the people, by passing laws to protect personal freedoms, privacy, free speech, and consumer rights.

    This is the feeler of interest for my campaign; the real campaign will take place in about 10 years.
    • by Lifewish (724999) on Saturday November 20 2004, @08:50PM (#10878112) Homepage Journal
      It's quite hard usually to judge the dangers, in a "stalkerey fun" sense, of new technology. The stalkers aren't particularly interested in being interviewed and no-one else is willing to run the experiment to find out.

      I'm in a university society called the Assassins' Guild [ucam.org], which is a cross between roleplay and live-action Quake Deathmatch. The game we play involves hunting down other people playing the same game until only one is standing, and is cooler than it sounds (hey, we have girls playing!). The thing that's interesting with respect to this discussion is the excellent testing ground this gives for new technologies vis-a-vis the tracking of indivisuals.

      Number one on the list is, surprisingly, static IP addresses on home-user machines. If you know your target's IP address, it is trivial in many cases to check whether he/she is in his/her room, and secondary information like lecture times (and hence the target's course) can be inferred.

      On a more sophisticated level, it is possible to examine the movement patterns of a target by the public workstations he/she uses (they have to be regulars on the #assassins IRC channel for this to apply), although this is more easily maskable using screen/irssi off a unix server. The holy grail would be to scan the mobile phone command frequency band - one would only need to know one's target's phone number to triangulate his/her position. I don't know of anyone who's done this, but I'll be attempting it myself over the holidays.

      RFID tags present an issue at a similar level, albeit with far greater possibilities for abuse due to their small size. If I were to have access to a reader (of the sort that, if this technology were to become widespread, would be available with no hardware hackery required), I would wait til the target were dumb enough to leave something outside his/her door and drop a suitably crafted tag in it. This would enable me to trail and ambush the target fairly easily when they didn't have any means of defense to hand.

      This would be a slightly overworked solution for the purposes of the guild (albeit an excellent way of dealing with one of the more skilled assassins) but would come into its own in the hands of an actual stalker. Imagine someone you can't flee, can't hide from. Imagine what could happen if this technology were abused.

      Imagine tags in designer clothes. An excellent way for criminals to know that yes, that coat is genuinely worth a hell of a lot. Imagine tags in young children. Do you really want paedophiles to know exactly when kids have run away from mummy's care? Imagine tags in students. Your grades are fine but you skipped too many lectures - you're out. Imagine tags in employees. Now your fundamentalist boss knows about your trip to the sex toys shop a block over from the office.

      Imagine tags in you. Imagine anyone who wanted to being able to track your motions. How secure does that make you feel?

    • Heh, in addition to the use of barcoding surgical instruments, what they leave out is, the original article assumes that the RFID in the instrument has been scanned into the database to begin with. I mean, surgical instruments being left inside people wouldn't happen if someone just counted the damn things beforehand, and then counted again afterwards to make sure they're all there. No scanning necessary.
          • This still does not eliminate the obvious falicy of the argument to begin with.

            The use of RFID in any capacity for surgury is a cruch that is not necessary.

            ID the paitent? How about doing a hand geometry check to see if the paitent on the table is the right one for the charts that have been brought up?

            Tools count? (I.E. don't leave surgical tools in the paitent you did surgury on) As the grandparent of this missive points out, it might be a good idea to take a count of how many tools have been brought to
    • Re:Good thing (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 20 2004, @09:19PM (#10878259)
      The P-III tag was sunk for good reason. THERE ARE NO LAWS PROTECTING THE PRIVACY OF YOUR CORRELATED NETWORK TRAFFIC .
      Of course, by "no laws", I don't mean the usual blend of common law and a few odd state laws that protect everything from letters to phone calls to internet, etc. What I mean is that the only "privacy protection" you now have on the internet is that there is no feasible way to track each packet from users of interest. In other words, you have some privacy because your traffic gets lost in a sea of user traffic, and there's no easy way to fish out just yours across sessions.

      If P-III ID tags were enabled, the enormous processing power and computational state it would otherwise would require to track individuals would be eliminated. Transactions would be tracked across sessions. Now, that's a key term: "across sessions". Just what do I mean by it? And why is that so important?

      Consider, for example, that the police can observe your car on the street, and by consulting a computer, the cop will know it's your car, where you live, etc. But there's no way for the police to also know that 2 weeks ago, you were at the same intersection making a left. And that 34% of the time, you instead make a right. And that you usually blow through the light at 30MPH, even if it's raining. Your driving sessions are not tracked and correlated across sessions. The cop can see you just this instance, but we don't expect that we live in an old East German state where every little action gets recorded and reported to some authority.

      Similarly, on the internet you can visit a web page and (if you remember to flush your cookies and use DHCP), there's no easy way for the site to tell that it's you again.

      The key idea is that in accumulation small pieces of information add up, and infringe on a piece of liberty that we all hold dear: privacy. We reasonably expect that our actions, although observed and perhaps inspected in a given instance, are not tracked and correlated with all our previous actions.

      So, while you think the P-III unique ID was a cool technical idea, it in fact was:
      1. Trivially spoofed and evaded by some simple assembly, letting me implicate my neighbor with my traffic to, say, a pr0n site.
      2. For the unsuspecting, a tremendous leak of information. Remember, we naturally expect that although a given action is inspected/observed by others, and perhaps the state, we do not expect all our actions to be recorded.
      3. A one-sided deal, since online merchants gained more customer data, and in exchange for the loss of privacy, the customer gains nothing. (And no, I will not accept "better service" as a fair benefit in exchange--that's just advertisting talk!)

      Consider that if a corporation tracks every piece of individual information you "leak" throughout the day, it's called market research. But if an individual did this to another individual, it's called stalking .

      So, be thankful for us "privacy types". We and others see these social problems not as black and white, and perhaps a little grey, but as the complex hues they really are.

      * * * If you or other readers appreciated my explanation, I'd be happy to write more, and submit a short piece for consideration by the editors (such as they are) of Slashdot.

      I can be known by this key fingerprint: 2D57 1CCA 24C8 9AFE E35D F3B1 3665 B3F3 0E35 F221
      • an example.... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ecalkin (468811) on Saturday November 20 2004, @10:44PM (#10878659)
        I used to believe the PIII serial number was a good idea. It would have made network management a lot easier as tracking by computer name or ip address is not real reliable on some networks.

        That was then...

        I spend about half my time cleaning up spyware off of peoples computers. The people that write this crud would have looooved to get serial numbers. And they would have. Even with the systems that required a reboot to 'activate' the serial number. Most people don't even think twice about a random crash. Make the config change (bios or os), make it look like something bad happened and reboot (or just be patient and wait for it). Presto, on your way to a hugely correlated database. Yuck!

        I have the same problem with rfid. It's wonderful technology and if the rfid tags get burned out when you're done, great. But the *same* problem exits:

        People with a clue will Own the People without a clue.

        I keep on seeing all this neat stuff and then i ask the question: how can this be mis-used?

        Here is a wonderful example: There is a goal of putting rfids on bulk bottles of medicine (in the caps? which could end up on the wrong bottle? did it matter which cap went before?). ok, I see the advantage for inventory and quality control, as you really do want people the get the proper medicine. What about the dark side? If I'm am understanding this correctly, you can use sensitive scanners that allow for greater distances. Does your pharmicist want anyone to know when the next 1000ct bottle of Oxycontin gets there? (any maybe where in the store to look for it?) Does this mean rf shielded storage?

        If the problem people have with being phished is any indicator, RFID is just going to be a disaster.

        eric
    • A telling bit from one of the articles (emphasis mine):

      Hoping to prevent the loss of a child through kidnapping or more innocent circumstances, a few schools have begun monitoring student arrivals and departures using technology similar to that used to track livestock and pallets of retail shipments.