[geeks] Passwords, etc

[Lionel Peterson]

>From: John Francini <francini at mac.com>
>Date: 2006/12/11 Mon PM 01:08:39 CST
>To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>Subject: Re: [geeks] Passwords, etc

>On 11 Dec 2006, at 13:08, Lionel Peterson wrote:
>
>> On 12/11/06, John Francini <francini at mac.com> wrote:
<snip>

>> An implantable device has a built-in obscurity factor (does he, or  
>> doesn't
>> he have an implant?), and pasive ID tags can only be read so far  
>> from the
>> "chip"/implant (on the order of inches, not feet or yards). To read an
>> RFID-type ID at anything resembling a great distance would require (I
>> imagine) a massive transmitter to "energize" the RFID tag enough to  
>> send a
>> signal strong enough to be picked up by a massively sensitive  
>> receiver at
>> any significant distance - oh, and I hope your massive transmitter  
>> doesn't
>> overload the front end of your sensetive receiver).
>
>But an implant could have a battery in it as well, which would give  
>it (potentially) more range, and need a far more modest trigger  
>signal, as said signal wouldn't have to power the unit as well.

Why would I, want a Long Distance/High Power RFID-type tag? WillI be "shooting skip" on my ID tag? ;^)

>> The unrealistic hype surroundig RFID is just amazing. I've been  
>> tempted in
>> the past to organize a challenge offering, say, $1,000 to anyone  
>> that can
>> successfully read a RFID tag a distance equivalent to the width of a
>> two-lane road. A half-prize could be awarded for being able to  
>> identify the
>> presence of an RFID tag accurately from the same distance. A double  
>> prize to
>> the team that can read the data off an RFID tag from across the two- 
>> lane
>> street using a self-contained/self-powered device (think batteries)  
>> that can
>> be hidden in a newspaper vending machine (18" square base, 36" tall).
>>
>> Gawd, work with these wretched little devices for a while and you  
>> become
>> very cynical about these privacy claims.
>>
>
>For the moment. But there's likely to be people working on ways  
>around these 'minor problems', because there's money to be made.

There's active and passive tags - active can do almost anything, passive are *very* limited in range/power...

>>> If it could be used by an office it could also be used by a
>>> government to collect information on your whereabouts at all times.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, thanks to the governments MASSIVE ARRAY of readers placed on  
>> every
>> street corner that sheeple are to dumb to avoid...
>
>Yes, I know it's tinfoil-hattery, but whenever someone thinks 'only'  
>of the benefits of one of these double-edged sword technologies, it's  
>important to also note how they could be used for harm.

There are much easier ways to keep tabs on citizens, like tracking GPS-enabled cell phones... You won't cover everyone, but you can see where the heard is..

I remember recently watching a web video about a fellow that walked around with a backpack full of electronics and *reported* that he was able to "find" dozens of bluetooth phones in a large crowd, and if he could find it, he figured he could crack into them and extract all kinds of goodness (info, make phone calls, etc.).

Of course he couldn't *actually* break into them, that was the "step 2" in his underpants gnome-esque plan for big trouble... [0]

Too many conspiracy plans seem to rely on the "reporter" saying things like "well, uhm, you know, we could..." they have no idea how, it is just this side of pure science fiction. No one (it seems) ever challenges these folks (like the two housewives who reported ont he way RFID was going to destroy western civilization) [1]

Lionel

[0] Famous south park bit, google "south park underpants gnomes"

[1] The Spychip... http://www.amazon.com/Spychips-Threat-Christians-Electronic-Surveillance/dp/1595550216/sr=8-13/qid=1165876708/ref=sr_1_13/104-6871171-7310353?ie=UTF8&s=books