Subcutaneous RFID in hands....

[lysander]

...and so the question becomes...how long before this technology is applied first for police and military firearms...and second as a requirement for gun ownership?

Computer chips get under skin of enthusiasts
By Jamie McGeever
Thu Jan 5, 9:33 PM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Forgetting computer passwords is an everyday source of frustration, but a solution may literally be at hand -- in the form of computer chip implants.

With a wave of his hand, Amal Graafstra, a 29-year-old entrepreneur based in Vancouver, Canada, opens his front door. With another, he logs onto his computer.

Tiny radio frequency identification (RFID) computer chips inserted into Graafstra's hands make it all possible.

"I just don't want to be without access to the things that I need to get access to. In the worst case scenario, if I'm in the alley naked, I want to still be able to get in (my house)," Graafstra said in an interview in New York, where he is promoting the technology. "RFID is for me."

The computer chips, which cost about $2, interact with a device installed in computers and other electronics. The chips are activated when they come within 3 inches of a so-called reader, which scans the data on the chips. The "reader" devices are available for as little as $50 (29 pounds).

Information about where to buy the chips and readers is available online at the "tagged" forum, (http://tagged.kaos.gen.nz/) where enthusiasts of the technology chat and share information.

Graafstra said at least 20 of his tech-savvy pals have RFID implants.

"I can't feel it at all. It doesn't impede me. It doesn't hurt at all. I almost can't tell it's there," agreed Jennifer Tomblin, a 23-year-old marketing student and Graafstra's girlfriend.

'ABRACADABRA'

Mikey Sklar, a 28-year-old Brooklyn resident, said, "It does give you some sort of power of 'Abracadabra,' of making doors open and passwords enter just by a wave of your hand."

The RFID chip in Sklar's hand, which is smaller than a grain of rice and can last up to 100 years, was injected by a surgeon in Los Angeles.

Tattoo artists and veterinarians also could insert the chips into people, he said. For years, veterinarians have been injecting similar chips into pets so the animals can be returned to their owners if they are lost.

Graafstra was drawn to RFID tagging to make life easier in this technological age, but Sklar said he was more intrigued by the technology's potential in a broader sense.

In the future, technological advances will allow people to store, transmit and access encrypted personal information in an increasing number of wireless ways, Sklar said.

Wary of privacy issues, Sklar said he is developing a fabric "shield" to protect such chips from being read by strangers seeking to steal personal information or identities.

One advantage of the RFID chip, Graafstra said, is that it cannot get lost or stolen. And the chip can always be removed from a person's body.

"It's kind of a gadget thing, and it's not so impressive to have it on your key chain as it is to have it in you," Sklar said. "But it's not for everyone."

Sklar's girlfriend, Wendy Tremayne, has yet to be convinced. She said she probably would not inject the computer chip into her body unless she thought it was a "necessity."

"If it becomes more convenient, I may," said the 38-year-old artist and yoga teacher. "(But) I'd rather have an organic life."

 

[Alex45ACP]

Only a matter of time till these are mandatory at birth.

 

[cosine]

Umm, for locks and security reasons what's wrong with implementing a fingerprint reader for access to one's house and to log on one's computer?


Unless there is more, those would suffice for his applications. I for sure ain't implanting myself with an RFID chip.

 

[taliv]

as a gun nut, i realize guns are inanimate objects that can be used for good or evil. i further recognize that people without training or knowledge tend to focus on the evil and think banning them is a good thing.

as a geek, i realize that RFID and biometrics are simply tools that can be used for good or evil... and just because a bunch of wankers will inevitably propose idiotic laws, doesn't mean any given inanimate object carries the mark of the beast.

RFID doesn't track you. People track you.

Focus on the idiots, not the tools.

 

[Manedwolf]

Umm, for locks and security reasons what's wrong with implementing a fingerprint reader for access to one's house and to log on one's computer?


Unless there is more, those would suffice for his applications. I for sure ain't implanting myself with an RFID chip.

For the fingerprint reader, you can fool them with talc and scotch tape of a real fingerprint transferred to silicone or even play-doh.

For the RFID, someone with a hacked reader could bounce a much higher powered signal from further away and steal your personal info, digital pickpockets.

There's this other thing, I like. It's called a KEY. It's made of metal and it's been successfully used for well over a thousand years.

And what bothers me most about all this is that people aren't just willing to give up essential liberty for percieved security...but just for CONVENIENCE.

As this relates to guns, I'm sure the brady crowd is drooling at the idea of embedded RFID chips in the reciever of every new gun.

 

[cosine]

as a geek, i realize that RFID and biometrics are simply tools that can be used for good or evil... and just because a bunch of wankers will inevitably propose idiotic laws, doesn't mean any given inanimate object carries the mark of the beast.

I realize that, it's just that the inclination for these to be used wrongly is all too real and easy.

For the fingerprint reader, you can fool them with talc and scotch tape of a real fingerprint transferred to silicone or even play-doh.

Ahh, didn't know that.

There's this other thing, I like. It's called a KEY. It's made of metal and it's been successfully used for well over a thousand years.

Yep, still works for me!

And what bothers me most about all this is that people aren't just willing to give up essential liberty for percieved security...but just for CONVENIENCE.

I agree. It's really disheartening.

 

[rick_reno]

Why wouldn't anyone want one of these? I want one - if for nothing else than to demonstrate my acceptance and agreement with whatever the authorities do. I'll be first in line to get my chip. It'll help in the "Global Strugge Against Extremism" (formerly known as the "War on Terror"). I'm pretty sure the terrorists won't accept the mark of the beast and will be easily identified. I'm also convinced it'll protect our liberty and freedoms, but I confess I haven't figured out how (yet) - but I'm sure they'll tell us how. It's got to be good for the children, as are most things.

 

[Kim]

No Thanks. As for the Mark of the Beast I think Neurobiology will find that area of the brain that allows for belief in God. I have heard some already talking about the human brain being hard-wired for belief in God. They will decide at sometime in the future that religious belief is a disease and will need to wipe it out to save human kind. That will be the Mark of the Beast. There will be a law passed that all must be treated for this disease. Most will want the cure. It will be a new medical breakthrough. If you do not accept you will be declared incompetent and killed. A new kind of Eugenics. One the large majority of the world will support. That is my sci=fi prediction. For the children and the World and to save human kind.

 

[Chrontius]

[quote="Manedwolf]
And what bothers me most about all this is that people aren't just willing to give up essential liberty for percieved security...but just for CONVENIENCE.

I agree. It's really disheartening.[/QUOTE]
Actually, it's about six billion times slower to 'pick' an RFID lock than a mechanical pin-tumbler one, making copying keys much more attractive.

Me? I may be a Cyberpunk fan, but the readrange on these is shorter than a finger, so if the button on your door lock is to be pushed, you have to move a hand closer to the sensor than is natural.

I want mine on a *ring* -- all the benefits, none of the drawbacks. And more easy to flash the firmware, too.

 

[Waitone]

Imagine: sheep going out of their way to justify the use of shears that they will use to clip themselves.

I like the idea of a tattoo, inside left forearm is a good place. For those who have a moral problem with tattoos, why not notch the ear or ears in a binary pattern. I figure you can get 8 notches per ear. 2>16th is what? Then with a little work with tri-state calculations . . . . .you know, notch, non-notch, and hole.

Idiots!

 

[Krenn]

I prefer more advanced challenge-response RFID tags, as opposed to ones that send the same code to any radio source that asks.

If I ever get a dog, I'm thinking of having a doggie tunnel next to the front door, activated by an RFID chip under its skin.

I'd probably insert a similiar chip into my wristwatch or key chain in case I needed a manual override for the tunnel.

actually under my skin? pass. unless I had a really serious medical condidition, and the hospitals had deployed the appropiate readers.

not certain how that would apply to guns and such... MIGHT make for a usefull inventory system, but I don't see how... maybe use it for some sort of mayday lockdown of the safeties...?

what I'd really like to see is the 3 yard+ RFID tags inserted in training arrows, frisbees, darts, and the like.

would make recovery MUCH easier.

 

[Wiley]

If one gets one voluntarily, that's ok by me.
By government mandate, NO!

Another thing that has to be understood is that the chip moves under the skin. My dog was chiped between his shoulder blades. Last time I checked it had migrated to between his front legs. A distance of about 18 inches.

 

[ZenMasterJG]

Originally Posted by Manedwolf
For the fingerprint reader, you can fool them with talc and scotch tape of a real fingerprint transferred to silicone or even play-doh.

This is true for most scanners, but some laptops now have a type where you slide your finger across a thin strip, and your fingerprint is scanned line by line. I've never heard of one of those being defeated with any of those methods. Hand-readers now also use the bone structure of the hand (i.e width of palm, lengths of fingers, distance between joints, etc,) instead of fingerprints, which is harder to defeat with playdoh, scotch tape, etc, but less unique then a fingerprint. Hell, maybe i'll stick a retina scanner on my front door.

 

[captain obvious]

Only a matter of time till these are mandatory at birth.

+10,000

 

[joab]

If your only tool is a tinfoil hat, all problems appear as conspiracies

 

[Byron Quick]

I wonder how long it will be before some bright burglar says,"Gee, all I need to get into his house is his hand. And I'll be able to get his financial information out of his computer. Neat!"


With proper safeguards to prevent unauthorized tracking, I would love to have them installed in all of my prized possessions. Once one of them is stolen, I provide the police with the encryption key, they activate the RFID, go arrest the scumbag, and return my property to me. I change encryption keys and go on about my business.

But they'll hold me down to inject one into me. There are plenty of freedom loving physicians out there. I'd then go immediately to one of them and have it removed. Then I'd go looking for the people who put it there to begin with to express my ire.

 

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Two words: "smart" guns.

The people in the article impress me as three-PSI airheads.

- NF

 

[Manedwolf]

Actually, it's about six billion times slower to 'pick' an RFID lock than a mechanical pin-tumbler one, making copying keys much more attractive.

And operating systems are secure. Just ask Microsoft.

Me? I may be a Cyberpunk fan, but the readrange on these is shorter than a finger, so if the button on your door lock is to be pushed, you have to move a hand closer to the sensor than is natural.

Ahh...that's with a LEGIT commercial reader as-sold. That's in the brochure. That's with the allowable minimum-power radio signal to bounce off of it to read it for that distance, to avoid confusion. Warehouse-type readers can hit chips buried deep in packaging as the palettes go past the reader.

Since when do criminals obey rules? You think someone can't rig up one with the ability to read the chips from some distance away, across the room, in the next store aisle, etc?

 

[Manedwolf]

This is true for most scanners, but some laptops now have a type where you slide your finger across a thin strip, and your fingerprint is scanned line by line. I've never heard of one of those being defeated with any of those methods. Hand-readers now also use the bone structure of the hand (i.e width of palm, lengths of fingers, distance between joints, etc,) instead of fingerprints, which is harder to defeat with playdoh, scotch tape, etc, but less unique then a fingerprint. Hell, maybe i'll stick a retina scanner on my front door.

Yes, moving the finger over the slit makes a composite image, that's all. It just means that it's impossible to get a fingerprint OFF a scanning panel to re-use later.

But if you moved a fake finger made of ballistic gel, silicone or even melted and molded gummi bears (as one Japanese scientist did) over that slit, it'd still take a composite picture of the proper ridges and valleys of a fake, correct fingerprint. I'd be willing to bet that it'd work.

To me, trusting that a scanner made by the lowest bidder in China to be put in your laptop is going to be as secure as multimillion-dollar-per-unit devices used at government facilities is just asking for it.

And I think it's quite telling that if you look at any sensitive government facility, things are not just left to automatic biometrics readers. There is a guard, with a phone, a gun, a pair of human eyes, and a human brain, which, if trained, is still the best security device there is.

 

[scubie02]

"Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth...He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast..."

 

[cosine]

Edited: Deleted my post. Thought better of it; not High Road material.

 

[Soybomb]

Actually, it's about six billion times slower to 'pick' an RFID lock than a mechanical pin-tumbler one, making copying keys much more attractive.

Me? I may be a Cyberpunk fan, but the readrange on these is shorter than a finger, so if the button on your door lock is to be pushed, you have to move a hand closer to the sensor than is natural.

I want mine on a *ring* -- all the benefits, none of the drawbacks. And more easy to flash the firmware, too.

At 2004's defcon in vegas people (Flexilis) read a rfid tag from 69 feet away. Never underestimate what you can do with more power and a big antenna. Clearly there must be some encryption or hash involved for anyone wanting use rfid for any security application.

 

[Manedwolf]

At 2004's defcon in vegas people (Flexilis) read a rfid tag from 69 feet away. Never underestimate what you can do with more power and a big antenna. Clearly there must be some encryption or hash involved for anyone wanting use rfid for any security application.

Yup. Hence what I said about digital pickpockets. Malls and sports stadiums would be paradise for RFID sweepers.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

But they'll hold me down to inject one into me. There are plenty of freedom loving physicians out there. I'd then go immediately to one of them and have it removed. Then I'd go looking for the people who put it there to begin with to express my ire.

I disagree with you here Byron. They will sell it by making it neat and trendy. Even now, bars in Europe require an RFID implant if you want to be a member of the trendy and elite VIP section. All the people who love to be cutting edge will get one and they will talk endlessly about how convenient and wonderful it is. Soon, their friends will get one too and gosh, it is easy!

One day, you won't be able to get credit, by groceries, or do a million simple things we take for granted now without one... I don't think any force will be necessary. People will get them because they make life easier and people love the easy way.

I worked wih RFID and biometrics for some time. Look at tolltags - that is RFID technology. It records where you went and when you went there; but already the mere convenience of being able to speed down a non-traffic jammed highway without having to throw change in the basket seduces hundreds of thousands of people to trade that privacy for ease.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

This is true for most scanners, but some laptops now have a type where you slide your finger across a thin strip, and your fingerprint is scanned line by line. I've never heard of one of those being defeated with any of those methods. Hand-readers now also use the bone structure of the hand (i.e width of palm, lengths of fingers, distance between joints, etc,) instead of fingerprints, which is harder to defeat with playdoh, scotch tape, etc, but less unique then a fingerprint. Hell, maybe i'll stick a retina scanner on my front door.

The big problem with biometrics is that they are very sensitive and fragile. Even slight electrical charges can fry the chips and people manage to build up enough static electricity in day to day life that when they touch the conductive surface of a biometric reader, they zap the chip. Most readers try to solve this by asking users to touch a metal bar and ground themselves before touching the chip; but the techonology is still novel enough that people like to poke the reader without following instructions and wait to see if they get granted access, the resulting curiousity kills the chip just as effectively.