News Focus
News Focus
icon url

easymoney101

03/06/05 11:28 AM

#27096 RE: F6 #26963

Time to get a new USA passport
Contracts were awarded today to Axalto and three other teams of
vendors for the addition of secretly and remotely-readable radio-
frequency identification (RFID) chips embedded in the photo and
information page (inside front cover) of all new USA passports.

In accordance with the timeline in the Request For Proposals , the
winning bidder was required to have built test kits on spec, in
order to be prepared to deliver them to the State Department within
one day of being awarded the contract, i.e. by tomorrow. Test sample
passports must be delivered within 10 days, and testing will be
conducted over the next three weeks.

The first RFID passports valid for actual use will be produced in a
pilot program limited to the State Department passport office in
Washington, DC, and limited to the special (maroon cover) passports
issued to Federal government employees, with the first such RFID
passports to be issued by mid-December 2004. The first regular (blue
cover) RFID passports will be issued "at a single, domestic passport
agency no later than Spring 2005," with the RFID passport issuance
equipment deployed thereafter to all other USA passport agencies.

"It is expected that all newly issued, full-validity, United States
passports will have embedded inlays (IC/antenna assembly in a
protective plastic envelope) by the end of calendar 2005."

In testimony to Congress during a hearing on RFID chips on Flag Day,
14 July 2004 , Barry Steinhardt of the ACLU described government
tracking as, "The most frightening use of RFID chips":

Most troubling of all are proposals to incorporate RFID tags into
government identity documents.

RFIDs would allow for convenient, at-a-distance verification of ID.
RFID-tagged IDs could be secretly read right through a wallet,
pocket, backpack, or purse by anyone with the appropriate reader
device, including marketers, identity thieves, pickpockets,
oppressive governments, and others. Retailers might add RFID readers
to find out exactly who is browsing their aisles, gawking at their
window displays from the sidewalk -- or passing by without looking.
Pocket ID readers could be used by government agents to sweep up the
identities of everyone at a political meeting, protest march, or
Islamic prayer service. A network of automated RFID listening posts
on the sidewalks and roads could even reveal the location of all
people in the U.S. at all times.

This may sound far-fetched, and I hope that it stays that way. But
if we at the ACLU have learned anything over the past decade, it is
that seemingly distant privacy invasions that sound right out of
science fiction often become real far faster than anyone has
anticipated. I give you this scenario as something that I think most
Americans would agree is something that should be avoided, and yet
is now entirely possible as far as the technology that is available
to us. That means that our future is now going to be decided by
policy.

Congress has, however, already mandated by law that USA passports
contain whatever RFID, biometric, and other devices and data are
recommended by the standards of the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO), and has pressured other countries to enact
these standards into their laws as well.

ICAO spokesperson Denis Chagnon has not responded -- despite several
conversations in which he has promised to do so -- to repeated
requests over the last three months for comment on when ICAO would
make its official decision on whether to adopt the requirement for
an RFID chip (referred to in ICAO document 9303 as a "contactless
integrated circuit") as an ICAO standard, or whether ICAO had
engaged in any discussions with any privacy or civil liberties
organizations or any of the signers of the joint Open Letter to ICAO
from Privacy International and other groups requesting such dialogue
and opportunity for participation in ICAO decision-making.

As Bruce Schneier and other security experts have pointed out, RFID
chips in passports serve no security purpose, only a surveillance
purpose. In an op-ed article last month in the International Herald
Tribune , Schneier wrote:

Unfortunately, RFID chips can be read by any reader, not just the
ones at passport control.... [A]nyone with a reader can learn that
information, without the passport holder's knowledge or consent. It
means that pickpockets, kidnappers and terrorists can easily -- and
surreptitiously -- pick Americans or nationals of other
participating countries out of a crowd.

It is a clear threat to both privacy and personal safety, and quite
simply, that is why it is bad idea. Proponents of the system claim
that the chips can be read only from within a distance of a few
centimeters, so there is no potential for abuse. This is a
spectacularly naïve claim. All wireless protocols can work at much
longer ranges than specified. In tests, RFID chips have been read by
receivers 30 feet -- 9 meters -- away. Improvements in technology
are inevitable.

Security is always a trade-off. If the benefits of RFID outweighed
the risks, then maybe it would be worth it. Certainly, there isn't a
significant benefit when people present their passport to a customs
official. If that customs official is going to take the passport and
bring it near a reader, why can't he go those extra few centimeters
that a contact chip -- one the reader must actually touch -- would
require?

The Bush administration is deliberately choosing a less secure
technology without justification. If there were a good offsetting
reason to choose that technology over a contact chip, then the
choice might make sense.

Unfortunately, there is only one possible reason: The administration
wants surreptitious access themselves. It wants to be able to
identify people in crowds. It wants to surreptitiously pick out the
Americans, and pick out the foreigners. It wants to do the very
thing that it insists, despite demonstrations to the contrary, can't
be done.

Normally I am very careful before I ascribe such sinister motives to
a government agency. Incompetence is the norm, and malevolence is
much rarer. But this seems like a clear case of the Bush
administration putting its own interests above the security and
privacy of its citizens, and then lying about it.

You could keep an RFID passport in a tin-foil envelope, but because
the RFID chip will be embedded in the photo page, it will be exposed
for reading whenever you have to display your passport for visual
inspection: checking into a hotel, cashing a travellers check,
exchanging foreign currency, checking in for an airline flight, etc.

The data on the RFID chip will not be encrypted. [I got this wrong
in my initial version of this article. See my follow-up article for
more on the lack of encryption, and what it means.] Only a
digital "hash" of the data will encrypted and digitally signed by
the issuing agency (the USA government), using keys supplied by ICAO
under a a no-bid contract with the USA Government Printing Office
(GPO).

Eevn if it were encrypted (which it won't be, under the current
contract) the data readable from the chip will constitute a unique
personal identification number, which will be entered into each such
passport holder's Acxiom or Choicepoint file the first time they
display their passport during a transaction with a company that
shares data with Acxiom or Choicepoint. And if the passport isn't
kept in an RF-protective envelope or sleeve, it will be vulnerable
to being read, and the location and time and circumstances (such as
which other passports are nearby) of the reading sent to and logged
by these or other data aggregation companies, not just when it is
displayed but each time you pass through a doorway equipped with a
hidden reader.

The State Department's passport offices would be swamped if they
required the replacement of all outstanding passports with RFID
passports, so that isn't likely to be required. Current passports
will probably remain valid, although holders of non-RFID passports
will probably be given second-class treatment at immigration
control, required to stand in longer lines like those who don't have
Registered Traveler credentials.

Still, it's worth a little extra time at airports and border
crossings to avoid carrying a tracking chip broadcasting your
identity to anyone querying it by radio, enabling the creation of a
lifetime data trail of your movements around the world.

New regular USA passports are valid for 10 years, and you can still
get one without an RFID chip through at least the end of the year.
I'll be getting a new passport before the end of this year, even
though my current passport doesn't expire for several more years, in
order to have a non-RFID passport valid as far into the future as
possible. If you value your safety and privacy, and are a citizen of
the USA, you should too."

Basically, it seems as if these RFID's are designed solely for
spying on the American Public. No benefit from these.

Spread this around, and contact the ACLU...

-Del 2477
http://www.hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000433.html


icon url

F6

06/17/05 9:03 AM

#29323 RE: F6 #26963

(COMTEX) B: Philips and TI to test RFID chips ( Datamonitor )

Jun 17, 2005 (Datamonitor via COMTEX) -- Rivals Royal Philips Electronics and
Texas Instruments said yesterday they would jointly test their RFID tags for
interpretability to help fast-track the adoption of an RFID standard slated for
global acceptance.

Essentially, the companies want to ensure their technical interpretation of the
Generation 2 RFID standard jibes. They said in doing so, it would build
businesses confidence that different RFID tags would work together under Gen 2
and, in turn, spur its usage.

"It's something that we believe is needed at this moment in time in this
industry," said Tony Sabetti, director of TI retail supply chain products.

Gen 2 is important because the International Standards Organization is currently
reviewing it as the global standard for RFID technology. Gen 2 has a number of
advantages over first-generation EPC Class 0 and Class 1 standards, including a
disabling feature
[F6 comment -- oh really? -- capable of being re-enabled after
being disabled? -- disabled (and re-enabled?) just how, exactly? -- remotely,
just like the RFID chips' other functions? (. . .)]
, security password and
superior performance that allows more RFID tags to be read per second.

Sabetti said Dallas, Texas-based TI may test its RFID chips with other
companies. "We've made it very clear to the industry that we're open to working
with people," he said.

TI and Netherlands-based Philips will begin testing their products later this
month and expect the trail to wrap up in October.

Gen 2 applies to the ultra-high frequency band centered on 900 MHz and was
ratified by RFID industry group EPCglobal last December, with the help of TI,
Philips and scores of other RFID companies.

This is not the first time TI and Philips have jointly tested their chips. They
initially got together in 1996 to test pre-EPCglobal RFID tags.

Copyright (C) 2005 Datamonitor. All rights reserved
URL: http://www.datamonitor.com

-0-

*** end of story *** (emphasis added)

[F6 note -- in addition to (items linked in) the post to which this post is a reply and (the many) preceding and following, see also (items linked in) http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=6675135 and (the many) preceding and following]