[IP] An exchange over RFID chips and privacy fears [priv]
Begin forwarded message:
From: Declan McCullagh <declan@xxxxxxxx>
Date: July 30, 2004 1:04:49 AM EDT
To: politech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Politech] An exchange over RFID chips and privacy fears [priv]
Previous Politech message:
http://www.politechbot.com/2004/07/13/rfid-defense/
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: What's so bad about RFID?
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 11:22:10 -0400
From: Jim Harper - Privacilla.org <jim.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: 'Parks' <parks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 'Declan McCullagh'
<declan@xxxxxxxx>
Hi Drew-
Sorry for the delay in replying.
In my paper, I've tried to do some hard-headed, practical thinking about
RFID to displace some of the fanciful imagination that is dominating
current
discussions. Your laundry example provides a case-in-point for the
benefit
of really thinking it through.
Let's say RFID gets traction in the laundry business. Even at five
cents a
tag, they had better make the tags reusable because if they don't that
would
burn up about 5% of what they're getting paid for the entire article of
clothing. Especially because it's reusable, the tag is going to be
something the laundry clerk can manipulate with his or her hands. It's
going to be the size of current paper tags, or larger. (The current
smallest version is about 16mm diameter. Making it smaller will make it
more difficult to work with, so I doubt you see further
miniaturization.)
Thus, if the tag isn't removed for reuse at the laundry, you will find
it
when you go to put the shirt on, and remove it just like you do the
current
paper tags.
I suppose laundries could ask customers to accept smaller, permanent
RFID
sewn into shirts so they could process laundry more efficiently, but
they'll
have to make the sale to skeptics like yourself.
So, the laundry example starts out sounding spooky and ends up sounding
fairly boring, don't you think? I'd be happy to hear more info if
there is
something that I'm overlooking.
I won't go through all of the other concerns you raise, but RFID does no
more to increase potential tracking of your purchases through the
payment
system than bar codes already do.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Jim
Jim Harper
Editor
Privacilla.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Parks [mailto:parks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 7:28 PM
To: Declan McCullagh; jim.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: What's so bad about RFID?
Declan, Jim
There are probably plenty of uses where RFID can be used that don't
infringe on privacy. RFID is proposed as a tracking for laundry
<http://www.industrialnewsroom.com/news/automatic_id>. Supposedly they
would remove the tags when they are through - but suppose they don't?
The
problem IS with surreptitious tracking.
WalMart wants to put these tags on products (like clothes) and then
subtract them from the inventory when purchased. However, they might be
used as an anti-theft device which would alert them when someone walks
out
with one they didn't purchase - so they would detect RFIDs at the door
too
(ALL THE DOORS!) If you pay with a credit card, its associated with
that
purchase, so if the RFID tags are not removed, they would know who you
were
because you walked through their RFID detector at the door. This isn't
rocket science and with the plethora of cameras already there (do they
use
face recognition technology or even sell your face to security
databases?)- its obvious they are interested in security. Who could
blame
them? Oh, then Homeland Security wants to keep track of purchases
(remember
the case of the Teddy Bear Alert from busybody at WalMart?) of certain
types of material so they might put your info on-line real time.... not
hard to imagine at all. Whatever happened to the presumption of
innocence?
There is no end to the mischief and loss of privacy that business and
government can inflict on "We the Peons." BTW, DoD wants RFID on
everything.
I read that New Zealand is thinking of installing RFID on license
plates to
tax driver's mileage. Fuel economy drove down that tradition tax base.
Why
couldn't they just increase the tax on gas if that's what motivates
them?
It seems rational to assume they are interested in OTHER uses like
tracking
citizens or automatically issuing citations derived from embedded speed
sensors which detect RFID signals. RFID is more Big Brother
technology. No
one asked me if I wanted it... - Drew
--
"Did you really think we want those laws observed?", said Dr. Ferris. We
WANT them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a
bunch
of boy scouts you're up against.... We're after power and we mean it
....
There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has
is
the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough
criminals one MAKES them. One declares so many things to be a crime
that
it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants
a
nation of law abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But
just
pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or
objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers-- and
then
you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system Mr. Reardon, that's the
game,
and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
--Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
More on RFID:
http://www.industrialnewsroom.com - look up automatic_ID for current
proposals for RFID usage.
Two previous Politech messages:
http://www.politechbot.com/2004/07/13/rfid-marathon/
http://www.politechbot.com/2004/07/13/japan-rfid-kids/
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/