critical time in the arena of consumer privacy

[Pat McCotter]

The other reason many businesses probably prefer to not disclose is that they don't want criminals and thieves to know what their security devices are. Would I want a thief to know what my security systems are? Please! This law would only help criminals because they'd know what stuff is easier to steal and what stuff isn't.

Security by secrecy is not security. When more than one person knows something you must assume it is no longer secret. If only one person knows something and that person is not you, you must assume it is not secret.

Wal-Mart store managers had no idea these RFID chips were on the HP printer boxes. How does that help the store?

If we really want to do something about this we should either individually or through a pool of resources buy a reader and test products. Then we would know. This could even be a consumer watchdog business. Hmmm... Where did I see those readers for sale?

[Pat McCotter]

Concerning secrecy and security quoting from Bruce Schneier:

In recent years, the U.S. government has pulled a veil of secrecy over much of its inner workings, using security against terrorism as an excuse. The Director of the National Security Archive recently gave excellent testimony on the topic. This is worth reading both for this general conclusions and for his specific data.

The lesson of 9/11 is that we are losing protection by too much secrecy. The risk is that by keeping information secret, we make ourselves vulnerable. The risk is that when we keep our vulnerabilities secret, we avoid fixing them. In an open society, it is only by exposure that problems get fixed. In a distributed information networked world, secrecy creates risk -- risk of inefficiency, ignorance, inaction, as in 9/11. As the saying goes in the computer security world, when the bug is secret, then only the vendor and the hacker know -- and the larger community can neither protect itself nor offer fixes.

You can read more on secrecy and security on Bruce Schneier's site.

[ravelkinbow]

If we really want to do something about this we should either individually or through a pool of resources buy a reader and test products. Then we would know. This could even be a consumer watchdog business. Hmmm... Where did I see those readers for sale?

That is a excellent idea!!

[Dreepa]

Pat can you post the link?
I agree it is a great idea!

[jgmaynard]

Wait a minute! They MUSt have patented these things, and under a patent, you MUST have a diagram and explanation of how the thing works on public file......
Ergo, if someone were interested in finding out just what was in the little boxes, it shoudl be a matter of public record. I can read schematics if peoples needs dat.

JM

[Lloyd Danforth]

Wal-Mart store managers had no idea these RFID chips were on the HP printer boxes. How does that help the store?

I don't know about that.  The RFID's are in the product for warehousing purposes.

I googled: RFID readers a month or so ago and found all sorts of readers.

[tracysaboe]

What are the legitimate reasons for stores tracking me outside their purview?

None. And more then likely they're not.

How does one keep the government from tracking people using the manufacturers' RFID tags?

That's a legitimate concern. How indeed.

Tracy, you may be surprised, but I agree with you. Manufacturers and stores should be allowed to use RFID. It helps in their cost-cutting efforts.

RFID readers will come down in price. RFID deactivators will be created and be priced low enough for the average person to buy and use.

What we need to be telling the government is that we don't want to be tracked. The government does not need to know our location unless we do something wrong. It does not need to spend millions of dollars trying to ostensibly track criminals by tracking everybody.

Agreed.

Tracy

[tracysaboe]

If we really want to do something about this we should either individually or through a pool of resources buy a reader and test products. Then we would know. This could even be a consumer watchdog business. Hmmm... Where did I see those readers for sale?

That is a excellent idea!!

This IS an excellent idea. This is how capitalist libertarian should be thinking. Got a problem? See a demand? Form a business. Advance your cause and make money while you're doing it.

I'm sure their are people out their who'd pay for such information.

Tracy

[Pat McCotter]

Wait a minute! They MUSt have patented these things, and under a patent, you MUST have a diagram and explanation of how the thing works on public file......
Ergo, if someone were interested in finding out just what was in the little boxes, it shoudl be a matter of public record. I can read schematics if peoples needs dat.

JM

No need to reinvent the wheel from the patent. Intel Research Lab @ Seattle gives a complete how-to file It includes a file called How to build a Handheld RFID Reader.pdf. You do not need to give an e-mail address to download the file.

[Pat McCotter]

RightTag products.

Feig Hand Held Reader

[ravelkinbow]

It would be cool to be able to go shopping with a reader in hand!

[Pat McCotter]

We just have to remember that there are different types of RFID chips. There are low frequency and high frequecny chips. You have to have a reader that will detect any of the chips that are apt to be placed in retail items. That increases the cost.

[ravelkinbow]

Very true, it would be cool to pool resources and give it to Caspian where they are already set up to watch dog this, they could compile a list of products to avoid.  The thing is you would have to do it a lot as more and more products get added to the list.  What to do when they all have them?!

[Pat McCotter]

Create a deactivator cheap enough for consumers.

[ravelkinbow]

That's the key a product cheap enough for even the sheep to want to use.