Down On the OPEN Forum
Tap into the expertise of leading small business bloggers.

The Technology Everyone Loves to Hate - RFID

Anita Campbell of Small Business TrendsAnita Campbell of Small Business Trends | March 24th, 2008 - 10:06 AM
(38) found this useful. Do you? Yes

RFID tagIf ever a technology had a public relations problem, RFID is it. Saddled with the moniker “spychips” and attracting conspiracy theorists in droves, it is dogged by an image problem.

And that’s a shame, because RFID is a marvelous technology.

As consumers, millions of us use RFID every day whether we realize it or not.

RFID saves lives when used in hospitals to keep track of infants, life-saving equipment and medical instruments. It can help us recover our pets if they are lost. Farmers use it to keep track of livestock.  And it makes our lives more convenient in many daily uses — everything from allowing us to use the fast lane on toll roads, to electronic security badges to enter and protect buildings.

What is RFID?

The easiest way to explain RFID — which stands for radio frequency identification — is to liken it to barcodes on consumer goods.  Imagine yourself in a supermarket. When a can of soup with a barcode on the label passes in front of the scanner, the cash register picks up information about that can. It can tell the price, the discount from the two-for-one special this week, and so on.

RFID is somewhat similar. When an object with an RFID tag attached to it passes within a certain distance of an RFID reader device, the device picks up information, too. It can tell what the object is and details about it, just like with the barcode.

The difference with RFID is that the item does not need to pass directly in front of a scanner. It only needs to be within a certain distance — anywhere from a few inches away to a few yards away. The reader picks up the information wirelessly via a radio frequency signal, instead of via an optical scanner. That means the tagged item just needs to be close by, not positioned carefully in front of a scanner or reader item by item — allowing more items to be “read” much more quickly than with barcodes.

RFID is different in other ways from barcodes and there are even differences among the various types of RFID tags. You can go here for a technical definition. But for most of us, the above description usually suffices.

Urban Myths by Conspiracy Theorists

Unfortunately, RFID just can’t seem to get away from its bad reputation. It is like the dirt cloud that accompanies PigPen, the character in the Peanuts comic strip, everywhere he goes.

RFID in recent years has been the subject of urban myths that stubbornly persist, despite being debunked over and over.

RFID has been claimed to be the ‘mark of the beast,’ a myth linked to extreme conspiracy theories. Even though that myth has been soundly debunked at Snopes.com, people continue to spread it.

Another urban myth is the false assertion that Big Brother government is watching us via RFID chips embedded in $20 bills. That led to the comedy of people running around microwaving twenty-dollar bills in an effort to prove they contained RFID chips — and leading some to wonder, ‘don’t these people have anything better to do?’. Not to mention being a waste of good money. That myth too has been debunked. Still, some believe it.

RFID’s Powers are Over-estimated

OK, so most of us will quickly dismiss the conspiracy theorists and the tinfoil hat types. But a deeper issue is the way RFID’s powers are seriously over-estimated and misunderstood by the public, media and elected officials.

The big concern of the public is privacy. And privacy is a valid concern.

But privacy is a concern that applies to a much broader range of consumer practices and not uniquely to RFID. Today with proliferating marketing databases and a Google index containing billions of pages, not to mention highly-publicized identity thefts, sometimes it feels like nothing is private anymore.

Who shouldn’t be concerned about privacy? That’s why consumers pay more attention to companies’ privacy policies and data security these days.

However, the issue with RFID is that people connect dots that don’t exist. RFID gets put under the microscope in ways it does not deserve.

For instance, a huge practical limitation to RFID privacy breaches is distance. Most RFID tags are activated only when they come into very close proximity to a special RFID reader. And most RFID tags can only broadcast within a very short distance, i.e., inches or feet. That means the item with an RFID tag has to be pretty close to an RFID reader. Yet, people often assume that if somehow you have consumer goods in your home with RFID tags, someone spying from miles away could make a list of everything you have. Or that your movements could be tracked hundreds or thousands of miles away.

As an aside, a technology such as GPS can in fact track a thing or, say a person in a vehicle, remotely from far away, by triangulating off of satellites. Yet GPS, for whatever reason, is not dogged by the same bad rap as RFID. (Read: What is GPS?)

Another protection is encryption. When RFID is used in payment applications or highly sensitive situations, the data is either encrypted or it simply transmits a numeric code back to a computer system. The computer system, not the RFID tag, contains the customer’s private account information. Even if someone managed to get within a few feet and could eavesdrop on an RFID signal, they would not get any identifying information. All they would get is encrypted data or a numeric code that is meaningless without also cracking into the computer system.

And if hackers are going to break into a computer system, why would they bother with RFID tags in the first place.? It would be easier to skip that step and go straight to the computer database.

Let’s face it. If someone wanted to track your consumer purchases or steal your identity, there are easier, cheaper and better ways to do that. For instance, what about store loyalty cards that record everything you buy? What about Amazon wish lists that can be publicly searched? What about plain old dumpster diving?

Overreaction Due to Misunderstanding

The result has been media reports that whip up fear; public relations debacles for organizations that underestimated the public’s misimpressions and failed to proactively address privacy concerns; and misguided legislative initiatives to “protect” the public from this so-called “spy” technology.

What Should You Do?

(1) If you are a consumer don’t fear RFID. There’s nothing inherently dangerous in the technology itself. It’s less of a threat to privacy than many other practices and technologies today. Look for responsible companies and do business with them, and don’t worry about which technology they happen to be using. And remember, you’re probably using RFID technology whether you know it or not, because RFID is used in so many ways today.

(2) If you are in a business or governmental agency that employs RFID in consumer-facing applications, or is considering it, don’t underestimate the public’s concern over privacy. Privacy is a big issue. Take precautions, such as encryption, or disable RFID tags before they leave the store, to protect privacy. Also, don’t assume the public knows what you know about RFID. Go out of your way to explain how you are safeguarding the public’s privacy. Be responsible AND proactive.

(3) If you are in a law-making position, seek to learn about the technology before enacting laws. Get some expert advice. Don’t hear from privacy advocates only. Seek out technologists to explain the technology’s practical limitations and safeguards, not just its theoretical powers. As one commentator pointed out recently, if laws under consideration today had been passed years ago, the public would never have enjoyed such conveniences as the EZPass toll payment system, which uses RFID. It would have been banned. And that would be a shame.

Posted in Inventory & Supplies, Technology

Posted:
10:06 AM on Mar 24, 2008
By: Anita Campbell

[ Digg it ] [ Facebook share ] Share This

8 Responses to “The Technology Everyone Loves to Hate - RFID”

  1. Neftali Baez-Feliciano | March 25th, 2008 at 11:44 am

    Enjoyed your explanation on the subject. I could not have explained it better and best of all I now have a link to forward over to my friends concerned about this technology.

  2. Why You Need Not Fear RFID | Small Business Trends | March 25th, 2008 at 11:55 pm

    […] Yet fear persists. To understand why you need not fear RFID, read my latest article at the OPEN Forum blog: The Technology Everyone Loves to Hate - RFID […]

  3. Amanda | March 26th, 2008 at 8:05 am

    Lots of great information which I was unaware of. To me, the benefits far outweigh the negative aspects of using this technology.

  4. Anita Campbell of Small Business Trends | March 26th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

    A new law in the state of Washington appears to have been wrought through misinformation, such as this statement:

    “The technology is called radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips and by some accounts, their uses haven’t even been fully realized. That’s why commercial industries are pouring billions - with the potential to gain as much - into the technology to track who you are, where you go, what you buy, and what you do with it.”

    I’d like to see their support for the above statement, which appears in a press release.

    No companies are pouring billions into RFID to “track who you are, where you go, what you buy, and what you do with it.” That statement shows that legislators acted without understanding the technology.

    Companies are investing in RFID but it’s for tracking pallets and cases in warehouses, or tracking movable equipment they use, etc. — not RFID tags for the purpose of tracking who you are, where you go, what you buy and what you do with it.

    Irresponsible. And sad that public money was spent on it.

  5. rob | March 26th, 2008 at 5:00 pm

    Some good info here, but also some errors.
    1) When it comes to distance, the potential distances are much larger (200 feet) if it is RFID attached to a battery (like in a cell phone). This is called ACTIVE RFID. PASSIVE RFID does not have its own battery, and gets its energy from the RFID reader. It could be read, based on wavelength, from 1 inch to 30 feet away. A passive RFID may be DESIGNED to be used in conjunction with a very short range reader (say an inch). But when exposed to a reader that has more power, that same passive tag may be read from much larger distances (several feet). Lastly, many RFID readers are used as relays in GPS/computer webs. They can be just one part of a much larger transponder system, so the distance of the RFID is not as important as is the system of readers and computers.
    2) Encryption. RFID can be encrypted, but often isn’t. The RFID they want to put into licenses is unencrypted and designed to be read at 20-30 feet. Most people concerned about this are concerned because unless you want to use a lead wallet, you can’t tell when data is being skimmed. We need true on/off buttons for wide acceptance.
    3) The main reason for concern, which you article does not address, is lack of choice. People will always be suspiscious of something that is foisted upon them. Why does a consumer HAVE to buy a tire with RFID in it? Why can’t they be informed that it contains RFID through a label? We can debate whether or not it is harmful. But its clear that people need to have the right to KNOW when something contains RFID, and the right to not have to keep it after purchase. To mandate its use in governmental identity documents will only breed distrust and resent. With all due respect, proving it is not in $20 dollar bills, or that it is not the mark of the beast does not address any of these other real issues. (BTW, people concerned with the mark of the beast are usually more concerned about the RFID tatoos they use for livestock, not chips in $20 bills)

  6. Anita Campbell | March 27th, 2008 at 9:47 am

    Rob,

    Regarding “active RFID,” I am very familiar with it. Active RFID tags are large and expensive. Passive RFID is what is used in the kinds of applications consumers are concerned with. So that’s what I focused my article on — passive RFID.

    Again, I go back to numeric codes and/or encryption. Most applications and are using one or the other, and eavesdropping and skimming are more theoretical concerns than practical ones.

    One really good thing about consumer attention on this issue, as I allude to in lesson #2 at the end of my article, is that governments and businesses are much more attuned to the privacy issues than say 5 years ago. As they should be — I am not suggesting that governments or businesses should run roughshod and be cavalier.

    However, I still feel that most of the issues are theoretical concerns, not practical concerns, and miss the bigger picture.

    Anita

  7. Alexis | April 21st, 2008 at 6:09 am

    RFID can easily imitate?

  8. Chris | April 23rd, 2008 at 10:12 am

    The benefits of this technology are possibly endless, however, the downside is that it can be used for nefarious purposes if placed into the wrong hands. It’s rather alarming to think of it like that - so I won’t, and I’ll look forward to more advances.

Add Your Comment

Close
E-mail It