SENTIDO > SCIENCE > TECHNOLOGY

 

IS YOUR CEREAL BROADCASTING?
RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION (RFID) CHIPS ARE NEW DARLING OF RETAIL DISTRIBUTION
1 July 2004

How much do you know about your cereal, and how much does it know about you? What about your money, your passport, your boarding pass? These are just some of the items in your personal sphere which may soon be broadcasting radio frequencies, testifying to your habits and your movement. RFID, or Radio Frequency IDentification technology, is the reason why.

Why cereal? Because, it is thought by some retailers and distributors that beyond the ease of tracking for packages en route, there is a tremendous benefit to a box of cereal (or a carton of milk) being able to broadcast the need for a refill upon reading a certain near-empty level. Privacy advocates of course prefer that we simply decide for ourselves what our buying priorities should be and act independently.

Various private firms are currently researching, designing, producing and selling RFID chips similar to a grain of rice in size and shape, which can be implanted in human beings in order to verify their identity. This is not a far-fetched paranoiac vision of the future; it is actually happening, and the powers that be are excited about it.

Not all RFID devices would be rice-like capsules, or intended for implantation. Most, in the short term, will be used to track products through distribution networks. WalMart has signed on to implement the technology widely, mandating its use as a cost-saving measure, to streamline inventory processes and upgrade shipping methods.

The Pentagon has signed on as well, saying it's time to "quit fooling around" and take brave new steps. The Washington Post reports that “On Dec. 2 [2003], the Pentagon held a summit to discuss the possibilities of having its 43,000 suppliers use RFID. A pilot program will start around February and will most likely be with a large aerospace company.” Through the Pentagon, it is possible that 43,000 distinct enterprises will be introduced to this technology, if not required to adopt it.

For a timeline, the Post adds: “The Pentagon now expects its top 100 suppliers to be on board by January 2005, then the top 500 by July of that year and the remaining companies by 2006.” Clearly, the die is cast; this technology is here, and the ramifications of its widespread use need to be reckoned with.

European officials want to start using RFID to track bank notes, and to prevent counterfeiting. Casinos see RFID as a way to prevent cheating. Opposition to the technology argues that this technology opens onto a dangerous new terrain in which the individual purchases, the whereabouts and movements of individuals, their daily habits, even their political leanings, could be deduced from surveillance of the RFID chips that pass through their hands.

Because the technology can be used to track commercial activity, and due to fears about a future in which people might be required to identify themselves by radio implant, a number of organizations and websites have begun to speak out against the technology.

An online search will yield a number of “prophecy” sites and organizations who associate this technological breakthrough with “the mark of the beast” and the end of the world. In his 1993 film, Naked, director Mike Leigh famously put such an argument in the mouth of his protagonist.

The question for many people is whether this technology can be trusted, and to what degree it will render us dependent on its doings. Even the technologies that people are most fond of, their e-mail, their mobile phones, their cars, are often a nuissance that many people dream of doing without. CNBC's online poll showed that most people clearly have no intention of volunteering for an RFID implant, even though industry sells it as a way to escape kidnapping and identity theft.

But even the claim that RFID can prevent identity theft or reduce the damage done when it occurs is questionable. The devices are made to be read by handheld scanners, like supermarket checkout scanners. Some critics say they could be easily duplicated, hacked into or reproduced, and that security measures are not adequate to prevent that eventuality. An identity thief would then be able to stand in a public place, scanning arm after arm to acquire personal information, essentially expediting and simplifying the process of identity theft.

Would individuals with implants have to also acquire, maintain and constantly update personal firewalls? For now, no. So far, U.S. regulatory guidelines prevent any implants from containing anything besides an encoded serial number, which can be used to verify information stored in a more secure environment. But there are reasons to question what the eventual uses would be.

TSA wants to track passengers in airports. On this note, Constitutional scholars and activists say this is grave violation of individual liberties. Such a system would mean that in order to use air transportation, a passenger would have to acquire a boarding pass with an embedded RFID device, which would track her movements throughout the airport.

To take another leap, some say the technology would be ideal for domestic spying, one of the prime fears of anti-technopolists. Feeding that fear, Congress has already approved Pentagon spying within the US, under the argument that dissidents may traffic with terrorists and thereby create a state of war, justifying ongoing blanket surveillance.

Following suit, Pres. Bush has ordered extrajudicial inspection of financial records. This clearly meets the standard of those skeptics who say RFID in money leads to monitoring of commercial activity, personal finance, and related habits.

The Sydney Morning Herald reports that one vocal opponent of RFID has complained of ongoing harassment and thinly veiled threats. "Katherine Albrecht, founder and director of Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN), says she received an email from a GMA employee, requesting a copy of her CV 'for our sources.'" Why her CV? She apparently received a follow-up e-mail, mistakenly sent to her, which discussed the motive for the request, suggesting that executives at GMA sought to dig up personal information, possibly to discredit her.

All of these details on the periphery of the landscape onto which RFID is now venturing serve not as proof of any particular danger, nor of any malicious intent. Rather, they should serve to yield some perspective on the interwoven mesh of interests that can turn a useful idea into an invitation for abuses and an issue of Constitutional liberties.