For too many times I've seen wrong usage of terms like VLF, ELF and similar. As a matter of fact if you go and look over the web in articles connected with VLF, you'll see that almost everyone uses different term for something that is ELF, or SLF or vice versa. In some article you will read that 4kHz is ELF, while the other article you'll read that 4kHz it is VLF. So where is this 4kHz anyway? And what is difference between ELF, ULF and VLF?

Each frequency range has a band designator and each range of frequencies behaves differently and performs different functions. The frequency spectrum is shared by civil, government, and military users of all nations according to International Telecommunications Union (ITU) radio regulations. For communications purposes, the usable frequency spectrum now extends from about 3Hz to about 300GHz. There are also some experiments at about 100THz where research on laser communications is taking place but we won't discuss this now. This range from 3Hz to 300GHz has been split into regions. The good thing is that once this range has been split it remained that way and became standard. And it is up to you if you want to accept this standard or not. Frequency band standard is described in International Telecommunications Union radio regulations. And it looks as follows.

Designation		Frequency	Wavelength
ELF	extremely low frequency	3Hz to 30Hz	100'000km to 10'000 km
SLF	superlow frequency	30Hz to 300Hz	10'000km to 1'000km
ULF	ultralow frequency	300Hz to 3000Hz	1'000km to 100km
VLF	very low frequency	3kHz to 30kHz	100km to 10km
LF	low frequency	30kHz to 300kHz	10km to 1km
MF	medium frequency	300kHz to 3000kHz	1km to 100m
HF	high frequency	3MHz to 30MHz	100m to 10m
VHF	very high frequency	30MHz to 300MHz	10m to 1m
UHF	ultrahigh frequency	300MHz to 3000MHz	1m to 10cm
SHF	superhigh frequency	3GHz to 30GHz	10cm to 1cm
EHF	extremely high frequency	30GHz to 300GHz	1cm to 1mm

However, to simplify things about VLF a good idea would be to use term audio frequency range. Imagine doing a project covering 20 Hz to 20 kHz, it would be annoying to write ELF/SLF/ULF/VLF all the time. But again it would not be correct if you just write VLF because there is much more in that range. Right? Instead, simply use term 'audio frequency range'. As I said in the beginning there are already dozens of articles with wrong frequency designations and a good thing would be to correct and minimize mistakes.

On some documents that describe electromagnetic spectrum you might see terms like LW, MW and SW. In a lot of occasions you might see them mixed in the same context as frequency range we mentioned above. For example here is a quote from one webpage: ''...extends thru LW, MW, HF and VHF.'' This is wrong! We talk apples and oranges here. LW is not LF, and MW is not MF, therefore you can't put them together in same context with HF and VHF.

LW, MW and SW are frequency designations of AM broadcast radio stations, and thats about it. They have nothing to do with ITU's band designations we mentioned in the table above. Some countries don't even have LW, so you should not mix LW, MW or SW with HF, VHF etc. unless you are talking about AM broadcast stations. To be exact MW and HF should never be mixed together in the the same context. Here is the frequency table for AM broadcast bands:

Designation	Name	Frequency
LW	long wave	153 - 279 kHz
MW	medium wave	531 - 1620 kHz
SW	short wave	2310 - 25820 kHz

source: http://www.vlf.it/frequency/bands.html

What is the best RFID frequency?
Every RFID frequency has advantages and disadvantages. Higher RFID frequencies, such as the UHF (800-1000 MHz) and microwave bands are easier to shield and reflect, and thus have more difficulty penetrating dielectric materials such as liquids or the human body; however, over short distances it is possible to use UHF or microwave RFID tags with loop antennas (similar to 13.56 MHz) which can overcome this problem (see next question). Higher frequencies can also be transmitted more easily over long distances with small antennas. RFID systems at lower frequencies can be made very inexpensively and have less problems with materials, but generally require larger antennas and higher RF power (several Watts or more) to operate at distances greater than 12 inches or so.

What is Near-Field UHF?
All antennas, regardless of the frequency, generate electromagnetic fields that have both magnetic and electric components. Part of the electromagnetic field produced by an antenna is a radiating field which will propagate over long distances covering many wavelengths. This is known as the 'far field.' Examples include broadcast radio station antennas, and also cell phone antennas. At distances near the antenna, however, there exist other electromagnetic field components that decay much more quickly with distance and, as a result, are only active near the antenna. Depending on the resonant properties of the antenna and its geometric design, it is possible to design antennas (such as loop antennas or coils) which have a strong magnetic near-field component. UHF tags are now comercially available with loop antennas that can couple to this near-field. Although these 'near-field' UHF tags can only be used near the antenna (within a half-wavelength or so = 50 cm for UHF) such tags are of interest for applications which require penetration through liquids or dielectrics. There are also other tag designs which contain a 'hybrid antenna' which can operate with both the near-field and far-field components produced by the reader antenna. With few exceptions, most lower-frequency RFID tags operating at 13.56 MHz and 125 KHz are all near-field RFID systems, with the reading range roughly limited by the diameter of the reader antenna.

How small can you make an RFID Tag?
Although the electronic chip used in most RFID tags can be smaller than a grain of sand, a tag requires an antenna. The size of an RFID tag is generaly contrained by this antenna design. At higher frequencies the antenna is usually designed to be some small fraction of a wavelength, such as quarter-wavelength (roughly 4 inches at 900 MHz and 1 inch at 2.4 GHz); if the antenna is made smaller, then the reading distance of the tag will be greatly reduced. If long reading distance is not necessary, it is also possible to use inductive coupling for the UHF tags as well (near-field UHF), which can enable resonably small (1 cm) tags with loop antennas. In lower-frequency RFID systems, such as 13.56 MHz or 125 KHz, inductive coupling is used almost exclusively, and requires antennas in the form of coils, however at these lower frequencies the coils require a large number of turns. Small antenna coils wound on ferrite (to increase magnetic flux and range) are commonly used for tagging animals; these tags are the size of a grain of rice. Smaller tags can be made by electroforming the antenna directly onto the silicon chip, but the reading range is necessarily small.

What determines the reading range of a passive RFID Tag?
It is important to understand that there are many types of RFID technologies and each type has its own set of factors which determine range. At lower frequencies (125 KHz, 13.56 MHz), the tag antenna is electromagnetically coupled to the reader antenna, so the reading range of the RFID tag is determined by the sensitivity of the reader, the transmit power of the reader, the Q-factor of the tag, the power consumption of the tag IC chip, the size of the reader antenna, and the ratio of the tag antenna size to the reader antenna size. A crude rule of thumb is to say that the reading range is limited to 1.5 times the diameter of the reader antenna. At higher frequencies, such as UHF or microwave, the tag communicates through backscatter modulation, so the reading range is primarily determined by the reader sensitivity, the reader power, the power consumption of the tag IC chip, the radar scattering cross section of the antenna, the efficiency of the antenna, and the gain of the reader antenna and tag antenna. Some of these factors are regulated by the local governments. Present-day commercial UHF RFID systems have a range of 5-8 meters in free space using US power regulations, which allow 1 Watt of RF power and 4 Watts radiated power (EIRP).

What is chipless RFID?
It is important to understand chipless RFID is not one single technology, but rather it is a category of RFID that does not require the use of an IC chip. Some chipless RFID tags are designed to function as sensors (e.g. temperature or humidity) but others are dedicated to ID-only. Because no chip is used, the ID or sensor information is encoded in the analog electromagnetic signal of the tag, such as the resonant freuqency or harmonics. There are dozens of different chipless RFID technologies (too many to discuss here) ranging from very low frequency magnetic materials (such as library book security systems) to HF, UHF and microwave resonant, harmonic or backscatter systems (such as those used in retail anti-theft systems). Time-domain chipless tags are now also available, which echo back pulses transmitted from the reader. Although chipless RFID tags have less functionality than chip-based tags, the chipless technologies are generally 10X-100X lower in cost and can function at extreme temperatures, high radiation levels and other environments where chip-based technologies cannot operate.

What is the lowest cost RFID Tag?
We must first define what is an RFID tag. If we define a tag as a chip with an antenna on a paper or plastic substrate (with no adhesive or topcoat or printing), then this is known as an "inlay." Simple 96-bit UHF-frequency RFID tag inlays can be purchased today (2006) at a cost of approximately 10 cents (US $) at quantities over 50,000. The antennas for lower-frequency tags are a bit more expensive since the electromagnetic penetration depth is longer whcih requires a thicker metal layer; also, most tags at lower frequencies require a coil antenna, which generally requires a 2-layer metal process a cross-over linkfor the coil. If more memory or functionality is required, such as encryption, then the cost of the RFID chip itself can be significantly higher. RFID tags used for payment cards, for example, can store several kilobits of memory and support encryption and JAVA applications. There also exists other forms of RFID, such as chipless RFID which do not use a chip or can use special printed inks. Other families of RFID technologies are emerging as well which will have other cost structures. Some of these are shown in the figure below.

For more information, please contact us directly.

source:http://www.tagsense.com/ingles/faq/faq.html

Automatic Identification

In recent years automatic identification procedures (Auto ID) have become very popular in many service industries, purchasing and distribution logistics, industry, manufacturing companies and material flow systems. Automatic identification procedures exist to provide information about people, animals, goods and products.

The omnipresent barcode labels that triggered a revolution in identification systems some considerable time ago, are being found to be inadequate in an increasing number of cases. Barcodes may be extremely cheap, but their stumbling block is their low storage capacity and the fact that they cannot be reprogrammed.

The technically optimal solution would be the storage of data in a silicon chip. The most common form of electronic data carrying device in use in everyday life is the chip card based upon a contact field (telephone chip card, bank cards). However, the mechanical contact used in the chip card is often impractical. A contactless transfer of data between the data carrying device and its reader is far more flexible. In the ideal case, the power required to operate the electronic data carrying device would also be transferred from the reader using contactless technology. Because of the procedures used for the transfer of power and data, contactless ID systems are called RFID systems (Radio Frequency Identification).

Radio Frequency Identification - RFID

An RFID system is always made up of two components:

the transponder, which is located on the object to be identified,the detector or reader , which, depending upon design and the technology used, may be a read or write/read device.

Picture: The reader and the transponder are the main components of every RFID system

A reader typically contains a high frequency module (transmitter and receiver), a control unit and a coupling element to the transponder. In addition, many readers are fitted with an additional interface (RS 232, RS 485, ...) to enable it to forward the data received to another system (PC, robot control system, ...).

The transponder, which represents the actual data carrying device of an RFID system, normally consists of a coupling element and an electronic microchip. When the transponder, which does not usually possess its own voltage supply (battery), is not within the response range of a reader it is totally passive. The transponder is only activated when it is within the response range of a reader. The power required to activate the transponder is supplied to the transponder through the coupling unit (contactless) as is the timing pulse and data.

Operating principles of RFID systems

There is a huge variety of different operating principles for RFID systems. The picture below provides a short survey of known operation principles (The numbers refer to the relating chapters in the book).

The most important principles - 'inductive coupling' and 'backscatter coupling' are described more detailed below.

Picture: The allocation of the different operating principles of RFID systems into the chapters of the English eddition.

Inductive Coupling (3.2.1)

An inductively coupled transponder comprises of an electronic data carrying device, usually a single microchip and a large area coil that functions as an antenna.

Picture: Iductive coupled RFID-System

Inductively coupled transponders are almost always operated passively. This means that all the energy needed for the operation of the microchip has to be provided by the reader. For this purpose, the reader's antenna coil generates a strong, high frequency electro-magnetic field, which penetrates the cross -section of the coil area and the area around the coil. Because the wavelength of the frequency range used (< 135 kHz: 2400 m, 13.56 MHz: 22.1 m) is several times greater than the distance between the reader's antenna and the transponder, the electro-magnetic field may be treated as a simple magnetic alternating field with regard to the distance between transponder and antenna (see the chapter "Physical Principles – Transition from Near Field to Far Field" (4.2.1.1.) for further details).

A small part of the emitted field penetrates the antenna coil of the transponder, which is some distance away from the coil of the reader. By induction, a voltage Ui is generated in the transponder's antenna coil. This voltage is rectified and serves as the power supply for the data carrying device (microchip). A capacitor C1 is connected in parallel with the reader's antenna coil, the capacitance of which is selected such that it combines with the coil inductance of the antenna coil to form a parallel resonant circuit, with a resonant frequency that corresponds with the transmission frequency of the reader. Very high currents are generated in the antenna coil of the reader by resonance step-up in the parallel resonant circuit, which can be used to generate the required field strengths for the operation of the remote transponder.

The antenna coil of the transponder and the capacitor C1 to form a resonant circuit tuned to the transmission frequency of the reader. The voltage U at the transponder coil reaches a maximum due to resonance step-up in the parallel resonant circuit.

Picture: Operation principle of an inductive coupled system

As described above, inductively coupled systems are based upon a transformer-type coupling between the primary coil in the reader and the secondary coil in the transponder. This is true when the distance between the coils does not exceed 0.16 l, so that the transponder is located in the near field of the transmitter antenna (for a more detailed definition of the near and far fields, please refer to the chapter "Physical Principles").

If a resonant transponder (i.e. the self-resonant frequency of the transponder corresponds with the transmission frequency of the reader) is placed within the magnetic alternating field of the reader's antenna, then this draws energy from the magnetic field. This additional power consumption can be measured as voltage drop at the internal resistance in the reader antennae through the supply current to the reader's antenna. The switching on and off of a load resistance at the transponder's antenna therefore effects voltage changes at the reader's antenna and thus has the effect of an amplitude modulation of the antenna voltage by the remote transponder. If the switching on and off of the load resistor is controlled by data, then this data can be transferred from the transponder to the reader. This type of data transfer is called load modulation.

To reclaim the data in the reader, the voltage measured at the reader's antenna is rectified. This represents the demodulation of an amplitude modulated signal. An example circuit is shown in the chapter "Reader – Low Cost Layout".

Picture: sample circuit of the power supply and load modulator in a transponder

Picture above: If the additional load resistor in the transponder is switched on and off at a very high elementary frequency fH, then two spectral lines are created at a distance of ±fH around the transmission frequency of the reader, and these can be easily detected (however fH must be less than fREADER). In the terminology of radio technology the new elementary frequency is called a subcarrier. Data transfer is by the ASK, FSK or PSK modulation of the subcarrier in time with the data flow. This represents an amplitude modulation of the subcarrier.

Backscatter Coupling (3.2.2)

We know from the field of RADAR technology that electromagnetic waves are reflected by objects with dimensions greater than around half the wavelength of the wave. The efficiency with which an object reflects electromagnetic waves is described by its reflection cross-section. Objects that are in resonance with the wave front that hits them, as is the case for antenna at the appropriate frequency for example, have a particularly large reflection cross-section.

Picture: Operation principle of a backscatter transponder

Power P1 is emitted from the reader's antenna, a small proportion of which (free space attenuation) reaches the transponder's antenna. The power P1' is supplied to the antenna connections as HF voltage and after rectification by the diodes D1 and D2 this can be used as turn on voltage for the deactivation or activation of the power saving "power-down" mode. The diodes used here are low barrier Schottky diodes, which have a particularly low threshold voltage. The voltage obtained may also be sufficient to serve as a power supply for short ranges.

A proportion of the incoming power P1' is reflected by the antenna and returned as power P2. The reflection characteristics (= reflection cross-section) of the antenna can be influenced by altering the load connected to the antenna. In order to transmit data from the transponder to the reader, a load resistor RL connected in parallel with the antenna is switched on and off in time with the data stream to be transmitted. The amplitude of the power P2 reflected from the transponder can thus be modulated (à modulated backscatter).

The power P2 reflected from the transponder is radiated into free space. A small proportion of this (free space attenuation) is picked up by the reader's antenna. The reflected signal therefore travels into the antenna connection of the reader in the "backwards direction" and can be decoupled using a directional coupler and transferred to the receiver input of a reader. The "forward" signal of the transmitter, which is stronger by powers of ten, is to a large degree suppressed by the directional coupler.

The ratio of power transmitted by the reader and power returning from the transponder (P1 / P2) can be estimated using the radar equation (for a more detailed explanation, please refer to the chapter 4 "Physical Principles" of the RFID-handbook).

source:http://rfid-handbook.de/about-rfid.html?showall=1&limitstart=

Top News

• Senators Take a Pass on REAL ID: Senators Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) and George V. Voinovich (R-OH) have introduced the Providing for Additional Security in States' Identification Act of 2009. PASS ID, should it become law, would replace the controversial REAL ID Act of 2005. The REAL ID Act has faced ongoing criticisms from state governments, technical experts, and privacy advocates. In 2007 EPIC and the Privacy Coalition organized a national campaign against REAL ID implementation. The PASS ID proponents say the bill follows the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission for improving the security of drivers licenses while avoiding the problems of REAL ID. For more information on National ID, visit EPIC National ID and the REAL ID Act page. (Jun. 16, 2009)
• Despite Privacy Objections, Enhanced Identity Documents Required for Travel: The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative went into effect today despite substantial privacy and security risks. The federal government now requires US citizens to present identity documents when entering the US. These documents incorporate RFID technology that jeopardizes the privacy and security of US travelers. EPIC has previously urged the State Department to abandon the proposal. Senator Leahy has also criticized the program. See also EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance. (Jun. 1, 2009)
• European Commission Sets Out RFID Privacy Guidelines: The European Commission has announced Recommendations and provided a Citizens Summary for the implementation of privacy and data protection safeguards for radio-frequency identification. RFID applications transfer personal data wirelessly between an embedded tag, typically in an ID card or product, and a reader. Many privacy concerns have been raised. The EC Recommendations reaffirm the privacy rights and obligations in the European Privacy Directives. The guidance directs organizations to perform privacy impact assessments, apply risk minimization techniques, and inform individuals about RFID. In the US, EPIC has urged strong consumer protections for RFID before the Alaska and New Hampshire state legislatures, the Federal Trade Commission and the DHS on the use of RFID embedded passports. For more information, see EPIC's page on Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Systems. (May. 13, 2009)
• EPIC Urges FTC to Establish Privacy Safeguards for RFID Tags. In comments to the Federal Trade Commission, EPIC reiterated recommendations (pdf) it made in 2004 to the consumer protection agency to address the risks to consumer safety of the unregulated use of RFID tags that reveal personal data. The FTC is hosting a "Transatlantic RFID Workshop on Consumer Privacy and Data Security" to discuss consumer concerns. The workshop follows an event, organized by the US Department of Commerce, promoting the benefits of RFID. Comments on RFID may be submitted to the FTC until October 23. (Sept. 22).
• Legal Battle May Disallow Publication on Cracked RFID Chip. Researchers from the Dutch Radboud University have cracked and cloned London's Oyster travel card, after cracking the Dutch Mifare Travel card. The latter would be used in a nationwide network for billing of public transportation. Both cards use the Mifare Classic RFID tags, which relies for its security on an algorithm that can be cracked with modest effort. The troubled card provides for contact-less entrance to public transportations and office buildings worldwide. The manufacturer of the chip, NXP, follows Dutch secretary of state Tineke Huizinga in claiming that publication of the results is irresponsible. While NXP is taking the researchers to court, the University issued a statement (Dutch) valuing scientific publication of security leaks and mentioning that the publication will help NXP to develop a better chip. The results will be published at the European computer security (Esorics) conference in Spain in September of this year.
• EPIC Urges Strong Consumer Protections in RFID Legislation in New Hampshire. In response to a request from the New Hampshire Senate, EPIC today expressed support (pdf) for HB 686, concerning radio frequency identification (RFID) technology. "The legislation would establish important safeguards for New Hampshire residents including: (1) penalties for illegal use of RFID technology; (2) a private right of action for individuals; (3) restrictions on the use of RFID technology by the State of New Hampshire with few exceptions; (4) prohibitions on electronic tracking of individuals without a valid court order or consent; and (5) prohibitions against forced implantation of RFID devices in humans." EPIC also recommended the NH Senate "also (1) address unique identifiers linked to databases containing personally identifiable information, and (2) label RFID readers and interrogators, as well as RFID tags and products containing tags." (Apr. 14)
• Homeland Security Releases Final Rule on Controversial Traveler System. The Department of Homeland Security has released the final regulations (pdf) for the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), a system that requires U.S. citizens and foreign nationals to present a passport or other documents to prove identity and citizenship when entering the United States from certain countries in North, Central or South America. Senators Leahy and Stevens authored a law that postponed the document requirements until June 2009 or until seven conditions are met, whichever is later. In response to the final rule, Senator Leahy said, DHS "still [has] given the American people no reason to believe they will meet the readiness conditions in the new law. […] In DHS's hands, WHTI is not an advance in security but smoke and mirrors with little real benefit and the potential for a great deal of collateral damage to our economy." EPIC has detailed (pdf) problems in the agency's plan for a travel card under this system, explaining that the tracking technology proposed would jeopardize the privacy and security of US travelers. (Mar. 28)
• EPIC Urges Alaska Senate to Protect Consumers From RFID Misuse. In testimony (pdf) to the Alaska Senate Judiciary Committee today, EPIC Senior Counsel Melissa Ngo supported Alaska's SB 293, which included prohibitions against unauthorized scanning and reading of RFID tags and against allowing RFID technology users' to require continued activation of RFID tags in order for consumers "to exchange, return, repair, or service an item that" contain RFID tags. However, EPIC recommended four changes to the bill: "(1) including regulations on the use of unique identifiers and the profiles that can be created; (2) including an enforcement provision with a private right of action; (3) stronger provisions on deactivation of tags, including the possibility of permanent deactivation; and (4) clearly and prominently labeling RFID readers or transponders." These additions would strengthen protections for consumers against misuse or abuse of data collected through RFID tags. (Mar. 17)
• EC Opens Public Consultation on RFID Recommendations. The European Commission has published draft guidelines on the use radio frequency identification (RFID) technology in member countries. Among other proposals, the commission recommends RFID operators conduct privacy impact assessments before deploying the technology and immediate deactivation of RFID tags containing personal data when goods are purchased. The public is encouraged to submit comments; the deadline is April 25. A final version of the recommendations is expected in Summer 2008. EPIC has experience detailing (pdf) the privacy and security problems that can accompany use of RFID technology. (Feb. 25, 2008)

Introduction

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is a type of automatic identification system. The purpose of an RFID system is to enable data to be transmitted by a portable device, called a tag, which is read by an RFID reader and processed according to the needs of a particular application. The data transmitted by the tag may provide identification or location information, or specifics about the product tagged, such as price, color, date of purchase, etc. The use of RFID in tracking and access applications first appeared during the 1980s. RFID quickly gained attention because of its ability to track moving objects. As the technology is refined, more pervasive-and invasive-uses for RFID tags are in the works.

In a typical RFID system, individual objects are equipped with a small, inexpensive tag which contains a transponder with a digital memory chip that is given a unique electronic product code. The interrogator, an antenna packaged with a transceiver and decoder, emits a signal activating the RFID tag so it can read and write data to it. When an RFID tag passes through the electromagnetic zone, it detects the reader's activation signal. The reader decodes the data encoded in the tag's integrated circuit (silicon chip) and the data is passed to the host computer for processing.

RFID tags come in a wide variety of shapes and sizes. Some tags are easy to spot, such as the hard plastic anti-theft tags attached to merchandise in stores. Animal tracking tags which are implanted beneath the skin of family pets or endangered species are no bigger than a small section of pencil lead. Even smaller tags have been developed to be embedded within the fibers of a national currency.

While barcodes have historically been the primary means of tracking products, RFID systems are rapidly becoming the preferred technology for keeping tabs on people, pets, products, and even vehicles. One reason for this is because the read/write capability of an active RFID system enables the use of interactive applications. Also, the tags can be read from a distance and through a variety of substances such as snow, fog, ice, or paint, where barcodes have proved useless.

Currently, RFID tags are not widely used in consumer products because the price of the tags is still prohibitively expensive. However, as companies push for enhanced means of tracking products and profiling consumers, the increased demand and production of RFID technologies will drive down prices. Already, developments in RFID technology are yielding systems with larger memory capacities, wider reading ranges, and faster processing. In response, the market for RFID tags is growing explosively, projected to reach $10 billion annually within the decade.

History

RFID systems have gained popularity, and notoriety, in recent years. A driving force behind the rapid development of RFID technology has been the rise of pervasive commerce, sometimes dubbed the quiet revolution. Pervasive commerce uses technologies such as tracking devices and smart labels embedded with transmitting sensors and intelligent readers to convey information about key areas where consumers live and work to data processing systems. To gather this data, retailers can choose from a range of options.

RFID systems may be roughly grouped into four categories:

• EAS (Electronic Article Surveillance) systems: Generally used in retail stores to sense the presence or absence of an item. Products are tagged and large antenna readers are placed at each exit of the store to detect unauthorized removal of the item.
• Portable Data Capture systems: Characterized by the use of portable RFID readers, which enables this system to be used in variable settings.
• Networked systems: Characterized by fixed position readers which are connected directly to a centralized information management system, while transponders are positioned on people or moveable items.
• Positioning systems: Used for automated location identification of tagged items or vehicles.

These RFID systems enable business owners to have real-time access to inventory information, as well as a broader, clearer picture of consumers' buying habits. RFID technology also enables retailers and corporations to peek into the lives of consumers in ways that were, until recently, off limits. Products embedded with RFID tags can continuously transmit information ranging from an electronic product code (EPC) identifier, to information about the item itself, such as consumption status or product freshness. Data processing systems read and compile this information, and can even link the product information with a specific consumer.

This composite information is vastly superior-and more invasive-than any data that could be obtained from scanning bar codes, or even loyalty cards. Frequent shopper cards link consumers to their purchases, but this limited information gives retailers only a narrow view of a consumers' in-store purchasing trends. In contrast, RFID systems enable tagged objects to speak to electronic readers over the course of a product's lifetime-from production to disposal-providing retailers with an unblinking, voyeuristic view of consumer attitudes and purchase behavior.

The future of RFID technology

Currently, RFID technology is still too expensive to be used by retailers en masse. The cost per electronic tag now stands at about 30 cents apiece, but is expected to fall to as little as three cents in the next three years. RFID tags will probably not become pervasive until the per chip cost dips below one penny. Retailers will still have to purchase sensors to read the tags, which can cost $1,000 each.

In spite of the costs, some retailers are willing to pay the price for the insight RFID tags provide into the lives of consumers. Over the next few years, industry experts expect to see a broad range of RFID pilots, and even several fully integrated systems, launched. A handful of corporations have already signed on, and are moving ahead with plans to embed products with RFID tags. Recently, Microsoft Corporation announced that it would develop software that will enable retailers, manufacturers, and distributors to use RFID tags to track goods within stores and factories, as well as programs specifically designed to use the new retail tagging technology.

Other proposed uses of RFID technology include:

• Tracking apparel: Clothing maker Benetton planned to embed retail items with RFID tags. The implanted devices would enable Benetton to track individuals and inventory their belongings by linking a consumer's name and credit card information with the serial number in an item of clothing. Privacy advocates noted the potential abuses of a system, and Benetton agreed not to tag clothing with tracking devices-for now.

  However, Marks & Spencer, one of the largest retailers in the UK, announced that it will begin tagging apparel items with ultra high frequency (UHF) tags beginning in Fall, 2003. UHF tags are a new generation of RFID technology that provide faster data transfer speeds and longer read ranges. Marks & Spencer has already used tracking devices extensively in its food supply division.

• Tracking consumer packaged goods (CPGs): Gillette, Wal-Mart, and the U.K.-based supermarket chain Tesco are teaming up to test specially designed shelves that allow for real-time tracking of inventory levels. The "smart shelves" will be able to read radio frequency waves emitted by microchips embedded in millions of shavers and other products. Wal-Mart plans to test the Gillette shelf initially in a store located in Brockton, Mass. If the technology is successful, Wal-Mart also plans to join forces with Procter & Gamble to test a similar system with cosmetic products, and has encouraged its top 100 suppliers to use wireless inventory tracking equipment by 2005. So far, Wal-Mart executives say the company plans to use RFID chips only to track merchandise, and will remove the tags from items that have been purchased. However, Wal-Mart's decision to implement RFID technology will likely propel the ubiquity of the tags in CPGs.
• Tracking tires: Tire manufacturer Michelin recently began fleet testing of a radio frequency tire identification system for passenger and light truck tires. The RFID transponder is manufactured into the tire and stores tire identification information, which can be associated with the vehicle identification number (VIN). Critics argue the tags could ultimately become tracking devices that can tell where and when a vehicle is traveling.
• Tracking currency: The European Central Bank is moving forward with plans to embed RFID tags as thin as a human hair into the fibers of Euro bank notes by 2005, in spite of consumer protests. The tags would allow currency to record information about each transaction in which it is passed. Governments and law enforcement agencies hail the technology as a means of preventing money-laundering, black-market transactions, and even bribery demands for unmarked bills. However, consumers fear that the technology will eliminate the anonymity that cash affords.
• Tracking patients and personnel: Alexandra Hospital in Singapore recently began a new tracking system in its accident and emergency (A&E ) department in the wake of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) scare. Under this system, all patients, visitors, and staff entering the hospital are issued a card embedded with an RFID chip. The card is read by sensors installed in the ceiling, which record exactly when a person enters and leaves the department. The information is stored in a computer for 21 days. Officials say that the technology enables health care workers to keep tabs on everyone who enters the A&E department, so that if anyone is later diagnosed with SARS, a record of all other individuals with whom that person has been in contact can be immediately determined. Other hospitals in Singapore are expected to adopt similar technology.
• Payment systems: In 1997, ExxonMobil developed the wireless payment application known as Speedpass. Since then, six million consumers have utilized the payment option at 7,500 Speedpass-enabled locations. Now, a wide range of merchants and retailers are looking for ways to implement radio frequency (RF) wireless payment systems. Sony and Phillips are leading the way. The two corporations will soon begin field testing an RFID system called Near Field Communication (NFC), which will enable RFID communication between PCs, handheld computers, and other electronic devices. The companies envision that consumers will log on to their personal online portal by swiping their smart cart-embedded with a Sony or Philips RFID-which will be read by a RFID reader plugged into the USB port on the computer. Next, consumers would shop online, say, for tickets to a local event. The consumer would pay for the tickets online, download them to their PC and then transmit them with NFC technology to an RFID tag in their mobile phone. Then, at the event, consumers would wave their cell phone near a reader in the turnstile, and be automatically admitted.

What You Can Do to Protect Your Privacy

While corporate giants tout the merits of RFID technology, civil liberties advocates point out that the ability to track people, products, vehicles, and even currency would create an Orwellian world where law enforcement officials and nosy retailers could read the contents of a handbag-perhaps without a person's knowledge-simply by installing RFID readers nearby. Such a fear is not unfounded. Currently, some RFID readers have the capacity to read data transmitted by many different RFID tag. This means that if a person enters a store carrying several RFID tags-for example, in articles of clothing or cards carried in a wallet-one RFID reader can read the data emitted by all of the tags, and not simply the signal relayed by in-store products. This capacity enables retailers with RFID readers to compile a more complete profile of shoppers than would be possible by simply scanning the bar codes of products a consumer purchases.

Even the RFID industry itself is aware of the threat to privacy posed by the development and installation of tags in commonplace items. Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN) recently located internal public relations documents which detail how RFID developers plan to offset public opposition to the technology. The documents, prepared by Fleishman-Hillard, a communications consultancy, suggest that RFID industry leaders are planning a public relations campaign designed to counter opposition to the pervasive use of RFID technology. The documents detailing how such a campaign may unfold begin by outlining obstacles that hinder the widespread implementation of RFID technology. These obstacles include the facts that: "consumers are very concerned about invasions of their privacy," are "cynical about the government and private sector's commitment to protecting privacy," and are "inclined to believe that businesses have little incentive to protect consumers' personal information." In response, the documents cite the need for the development of a proactive plan that would "neutralize opposition" and "mitigate possible public backlash." One method of doing so suggested by the documents is through the creation of a Privacy Advisory Council made up of "well known, credible, and credentialed experts" who may be "potentially adversarial advocates." The documents cite EPIC as an example of such a potential council member. Although EPIC has been approached by others on this issue, EPIC will not serve on such a council or consult for other companies.

The proposed uses of RFID tags pose exponentially greater risks to personal privacy. Many technology experts predict the development of a seamless network of millions of RFID receivers strategically placed around the globe in airports, seaports, highways, distribution centers, warehouses, retail stores, and consumers' homes, all of which are constantly reading, processing, and evaluating consumers behaviors and purchases. In addition to undermining a consumer's ability to enjoy a lifestyle in relative anonymity, critics of the technology counter that the information gathered by RFID readers could be obtained by the government for surveillance or monitoring the activities of citizens, or even misused by hackers and criminals. Even more, the ever-expanding use of RFID chips would leave no aspect of life safe from the prying eyes of retail and corporate giants. Chips integrated into commonplace products such as floor tiles, shelf paper, cabinets, appliance, exercise equipment, and grocery and packaged products would allow even our most intimate activities to be monitored.

Opponents of RFID tags have proposed measures to side-step the chips' relentless information-gathering, ranging from disabling the tags by crushing or puncturing them, to simply boycotting the products of companies which use or plan to implement RFID technology. One way to destroy the tags is to microwave them for several seconds. Another method is to obstruct the information gathered by RFID readers by using blocker tags. When carried by a consumer, blocker tags impair readers by simulating many ordinary RFID tags simultaneously. Blocker tags can also block selectively by simulating only designated ID codes, such as those issued by a particular manufacturer.

In an attempt to soothe consumers' fears, companies have argued that most items tagged with RFID chips can't be tracked beyond an operating distance of about five feet. However, while this may be true today, industry experts say plans for building far more sensitive RFID signal receivers are in the works.

As RFID technology becomes more advanced, consumers may ultimately lose all ability to evade products implanted with chips. Corning researchers have developed tiny, barcoded beads that are invisible to the human eye. The microscopic beads can be embedded in inks to tag currency and other documents, and even attached to DNA molecules. They can also be added to substances like automobile paint, explosives, or other products that law enforcement officers or retailers have a strong interest in tracking. Researchers say the technology could be ready for commercial use in three to six years.

EPIC Resources

• EPIC Response to Request for Analysis of New Hampshire's HB 686, Concerning RFID Technology (pdf) (April 14, 2008)
• Melissa Ngo, EPIC Senior Counsel, Testimony on "SB 293 and RFID Technology" before the Alaska Senate Judiciary Committee (pdf) (March 17, 2008).
• EPIC Guidelines on Medical Use of RFID Technology (PowerPoint) (2005)
• EPIC Guidelines on Commercial Use of RFID Technology (pdf) (2004)
• EPIC's VeriChip page
• EPIC's Children and RFID Systems page

News

• Elementary school nixes electronic IDs, by Alorie Gilbert, CNET News, Feb. 17, 2005.
• Flap Forces Halt to Student-Tracking Experiment, by Eric Bailey, Los Angeles Times, Feb. 17, 2005.
• Brittan ID program dropped, by Kymm Mann, Appeal-Democrat, Feb. 16, 2005.
• Parents ignore mobile phone health issues, Reuters, Feb. 14, 2005.
• School RFID Plan Gets an F, by Kim Zetter, Wired, Feb. 10, 2005.
• In Texas, 28,000 students test e-tagging system , by Matt Richtel, The New York Times, Nov. 17, 2004.
• Tiny Antennas to Keep Tabs on U.S. Drugs, by Gardiner Harris, New York Times, Nov. 15, 2004.
• Schools test IC tags to track students, by Kanko Ida, The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 4,2004.
• Legoland RFID Tracks Lost Kids, Collects Data, by Kelly Shermach, CRM Buyer, Oct. 28, 2004.
• Schools in Japan turn to high-tech tags for security, by Kenji Hall, CNEWS Canada, Oct. 9, 2004.
• How RFID Will Help Mommy Find Johnny, by Laurie Sullivan, InformationWeek, Sept. 15, 2004.
• How we are becoming a micro-chipped population, by Mika Belle, Boise Weekly, Aug. 11, 2004.
• Chip allows parents to track children, by Sam Diaz, Knight Ridder News Service, Aug. 7, 2004.
• Japanese children to be RFID'd, National Business Review, July 8, 2004.
• RFID chips on kids makes Legoland safer, by Will Sturgeon, Silicon Reports, June 24, 2004.
• Privacy and AutoID, RFID News, May 2004.
• Privacy protection is not a luxury, RFID industry told, by Jo Best, Silicon.com, May 11, 2004.
• Wal-Mart turns on radio tags, by Matt Hines, ZDNET.com, April 30, 2004.
• RFID deadline hits a wall, study says, by Matt Hines, CNET News.com, March 31, 2004.
• Tracking tags may get congressional scrutiny, by Alorie Gilbert, CNET News.com, March 24, 2004.
• RFID goes to war, by Alorie Gilbert, CNET News.com, March 22, 2004.
• RFID Revolution: Are we close?, by Matt Hines, ZDNET.com, March 3, 2004.
• California lawmaker introduces RFID bill, by Alorie Gilbert, CNET News.com, Feb. 24, 2004.
• 'Smart shelf' test triggers fresh criticisms, by Alorie Gilbert, CNET News.com, Nov. 14, 2003.
• Big brother or the mark of the beast?, by Becky Blanton, Sierra Times.com, Oct. 28, 2003.
• Three R's: Reading, Writing, RFID, by Julia Scheeres, Wired, Oct. 24, 2003.
• RFID Ripples Through Software Industry, by Ephraim Schwartz, InfoWorld, Sept. 26, 2003.
• Microsoft to Develop Software for Radio Tags, Reuters, June 10, 2003.
• Retail future: painless checkout, knowing scanners, by Paul Hoskins, Forbes, May 14, 2003.
• Sony, Philips to Test RFID Platform, RFID Journal, May 8, 2003.
• Benetton takes stock of chip plan, by Winston Chai and Richard Shim, CNET News, April 7, 2003.
• Glowing Beads Make Tiny Bar Codes, Technology Research News, April 3, 2003.
• Wal-Mart to remove ID tags, by Joanna Glasner, Wired News, March 26, 2003.
• A Radio Chip in Every Consumer Product, by Claudia H. Deutsch and Barnaby J. Feder, NY Times, Feb. 25, 2003.
• Opposition to RFID Tracking Grows, RFID Journal, Jan. 20, 2003.
• Michelin Embeds RFID Tags in Tires, RFID Journal, Jan. 17, 2003.
• RFID tags: Big Brother in small packages, by Declan McCullagh, CNET News, Jan. 13, 2003.
• Major retailers to test "smart shelves," by Alorie Gilbert, CNET News, Jan. 8, 2003.
• Gillette Confirms Purchase of EPC Tags, RFID Journal, Jan. 6, 2003.
• Radio Frequency ID: A New Era for Marketers?, by John Stermer, Consumer Insight, Winter 2001.

Previous Top News

• Spotlight: 'Enhanced' Licenses Drive Backwards on Security, Privacy.EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance Project turns to Homeland Security's plan to transform several states' driver's licenses into federal identification cards, so-called "enhanced" driver's licenses. The proposed cards would cost more more than current licenses, transmit data to remote readers, and contain citizenship status. The Government Accountability Office recommended (pdf) against RFID chips in ID cards, stating that this could allow for the "tracking and profiling" of individuals. Spotlight on Surveillance report. (Dec. 19)
• California Bans Forced RFID Implantation. The California Senate yesterday passed SB 362, which forbids companies from requiring employees to implant RFID chips in their bodies. Earlier this year, North Dakota also banned (pdf) forced RFID implantation in humans. Wisconsin passed similar legislation iin 2006. Colorado, Ohio, Oklahoma and Florida are also debating such legislation. (Aug. 31)
• EPIC Warns Federal Agencies About RFID in US Travel Cards. In comments (pdf) to the State Department and Homeland Security, EPIC recommended against the use of "long-range" RFID technology (which transmits personal data to remote tracking devices) in the proposed "PASS card" for travel between the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. EPIC explained that the tracking technology would jeopardize the privacy and security of US travelers. Earlier this year, Homeland Security abandoned (pdf) a similar proposal for US-VISIT travel documents, following comments from EPIC (pdf) and the Government Accountability Office (pdf). See EPIC's page on US-VISIT. (Aug. 1)
• ANEC & BEUC Issue Joint Policy Paper on RFID. European consumer groups ANEC and BEUC have issued a joint policy paper (pdf) in response to a March communication (pdf) by the European Communication on RFID policy. ANEC and BEUC recommended that the Commission begin "impartial and comprehensive information campaigns on the RFID technology, its potential benefits and risks," to help consumers choose whether to use RFID. The groups also suggested the formation of "a European committee dealing with ethics should be created and consultedâ€ù concerning any RFID or near field communication (NFC) technology applications." The European Commission is considering proposing legislation in 2007 to ensure privacy safeguards in the use of RFID technology. (July 30)
• The American Medical Association (AMA) Releases RFID Report. The AMA's report Radio Frequency ID Devices in Humans came as a result of a resolution "RFID Labeling in Humans." The report focused on the ethical consequences surrounding the use of RFID implants in humans. The report outlined potential risks with the technology: physical risk to patients; confidentiality; patient privacy; effective informed consent; and security of the information contained on the device. The report recommends that the medical community support investigation of the technology to be able to make informed medical decisions regarding the use of these devices. (July 18)
  
• NIST Issues RFID Guidelines. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has issued its "Guidelines for Securing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Systems" (pdf). NIST detailed how to address, in the context of an RFID system, the basic principles of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data. NIST urged retailers, federal agencies, and other organizations to evaluate the potential security and privacy risks of RFID technology and use best practices to reduce them. "As people possess more tagged items and networked RFID readers become ever more prevalent, organizations may have the ability to combine and correlate data across applications to infer personal identity and location and build personal profiles in ways that increase the privacy risk," NIST said. (Apr. 30)
• North Dakota Bans Forced RFID Implantation. North Dakota has become the second state to ban (pdf) forced RFID implantation in humans. Wisconsin passed similar legislation last year. Voluntary implantation is still permissible. However, the two-line bill does not address what is considered "voluntary." (Apr. 12)
• UK Airport Tracks Passengers With RFID. The United Kingdom's Manchester Airport has just completed a six-month trial where 50,000 people were tracked with RFID technology. The airport authorities have requested that the pilot test be implemented permanently. If so, RFID-enabled boarding passes would be issued to all passengers. Those who print out boarding passes at home will have RFID tags attached at the airport. (Apr. 11)
• Washington State Pilot Tests RFID-enabled licenses. Washington State and the Department of Homeland Security are jointly testing a project where the state driver's licenses and identification cards will be accepted for use under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, which regulates travel between the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. The Washington State ID cards would include proof of citizenship and other sensitive personal data beyond what current licenses hold. The licenses will include long-range radio frequency identification (RFID) technology, which EPIC has repeatedly warned (pdf) is a privacy and security risk. The Department of Homeland Security's Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee also has recommended against (pdf) the use of RFID in ID documents. For more information, see EPIC's August 2006 Spotlight on Surveillance on the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. (Mar. 23)
• European Commission Issues Communication on RFID Policy. The European Commission has held an RFID forum in Brussels and released a communication (pdf) on steps toward a policy framework. "[A] clear and predictable legal and policy framework is needed to make this new technology acceptable to users," the Commission said. "This framework should address: ethical implications, the need to protect privacy and security; governance of the RFID identity databases; availability of radio spectrum; the establishment of harmonised international standards; and concerns over the health and environmental implications." The Commission outlined ideas for such a framework and asked for comments. (Mar. 15)
• EPIC Urges State Dept. to Drop Plan for Flawed ID System. In comments (pdf) to the State Department, EPIC warned that a proposed "PASS card" for travel between the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean would jeopardize the privacy and security of US travelers. The PASS card is based on long-range wireless technology, "vicinity" RFID, that would enable remote tracking of individuals. The card also lacks basic access controls and security features that were eventually incorporated in the electronic passport. For more information, see EPIC's August 2006 Spotlight on Surveillance. (Jan. 8)
• Two Reports Criticize Security, Privacy Holes in RFID Technology. The federal government has increasingly required radio frequency identification (RFID) tags for identity documents, even though an expert panel has opposed the adoption of the wireless technology. The draft report (pdf) has yet to be finalized for official release. In another report (pdf), researchers revealed serious security vulnerabilities in RFID-enabled credit cards that would allow for fraud. (Nov. 1)
• European Commission: More Privacy Safeguards for RFID. The European Commission is calling for stricter privacy controls for radio frequency identification (RFID) technology. The increasing use of RFID technology "will raise tremendous challenges for sovereignty, individual liberties and economic independence. It will be necessary that citizens keep control of how the information concerning them is utilized and updated and how the tags can be deactivated," EU Information Society Commissioner Viviane Reding said (pdf) at the EU RFID 2006 Conference. The Commission is considering proposing legislation to ensure privacy safeguards in RFID use. (Oct. 16)
• California RFID Bill Nears Approval. The California legislature has recently passed the Identity Information Protection Act, which requires that state-issued IDs that contain remotely-readable RFID chips must contain adequate security features to prevent them from being read by unauthorized parties. The bill now goes to Governor Schwarzenegger for approval. California civil liberties groups are urging residents to write the governor, encouraging him to sign the bill. (Sept. 1)
• DHS Inspector General: More Security Needed for RFID. According to a report (pdf) recently released by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General, the Department's use of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology leaves critical information open to unauthorized access. RFID chips store data and broadcast it via radio waves in response to another radio signal. The small, remotely-readable chips are being placed in immigration documents, passports, and are may soon be used to track cargo and passenger baggage. The report also found a lack of systematic inventories of RFID technology and consistent policies, and identified security concerns regarding user access permissions, password management, and auditing in the Department's RFID databases. (Aug. 25)
• RFID Passport Hacked. A security researcher in Germany has shown that he can clone the radio frequency identification (RFID) tags that the United States and other countries will be placing in passports later on this year. Lukas Grunwald, at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas, demonstrated that he could, with readily available technology, access the information on the RFID chip, copy it, and place it onto another document containing another RFID chip. (Aug. 10)
• Government to Test E-Passports in San Francisco. The Department of Homeland Security will begin testing e-Passports on Sunday at San Francisco International Airport. The e-Passports contain Radio Frequency Identification chips, which transmit information wirelessly. Testing conducted last year revealed that RFID-enabled passports impede the inspection process, according to documents (pdf) recently obtained by EPIC under the Freedom of Information Act. EPIC has urged (pdf) the agency to abandon the use of such technology in passports because of significant security and privacy issues. (Jan. 13)
• EPIC Uncovers Government Documents that Reveal Passport Problems. According to documents (pdf) obtained by EPIC under the Freedom of Information Act, a government report found signiifcant problems with new hi-tech passports. Tests conducted last year revealed that "contactless" RFID passports impede the inspection process. At a meeting of a Privacy Advisory Committee today in Washington, EPIC urged (pdf) the Department of Homeland Security to abandon the use of RFID technology in E-Passports and the US-VISIT program. (Dec. 6)
• Government Report: Federal Agencies' RFID Plans Flawed. In a report (pdf) released last week, the Government Accountability Office found that thirteen government agencies are using or plan to use Radio Frequency Identification tags. However, only one agency identified any legal or privacy issues with the use of the tags, which can be read remotely. The agencies plan to use RFID to track employees' movements and in ID cards. This report comes a month after the State Department reversed plans to include RFID tags in American passports because of security and privacy concerns. (May 31)
• State Department Backs Off RFID Passport. The State Department said today it will not go forward with a controversial plan that would have made personal data contained in hi-tech passports vulnerable to unauthorized access. The agency said it will impose new security techniques, require encryption for data transfers, and ensure that passports contain a metallic layer. The announcement comes amid pressure from EPIC, other civil liberties groups, technical experts, and air travellers who said the original proposal was deeply flawed. (Apr. 27)
• California Considers Prohibition on RFID's in State ID Cards. "Tag and Track" devices, known as RFIDs (Radio Frequency Identification tags), are being considered for use in government documents. California State Senator Joe Simitian has introduced "The Identity Information Protection Act" which would prohibit the inclusion of RFIDs that can be read remotely without the person's knowledge in state identity documents, such as driver's licenses, student identification badges, and medical cards. (Apr. 8)
• EPIC Presses Agency to Abandon Plans for RFID Passports. EPIC and other civil liberties groups have filed comments (pdf) to urge the State Department to scrap its plans to require RFID passports for all American travelers. The proposal is flawed because the Department lacks legal authority to require RFID travel documents. The State Department has also failed to show the benefits of the passports. Furthermore, it has failed to conduct a meaningful assessment of RFID technology or to consider more reliable technologies. (Apr. 5)
• EPIC Urges Privacy Safeguards for RFID, Copyright Technology. In comments to the Article 29 Working Group, an association of leading European privacy officials, EPIC has recommended strong safeguards for RFIDs and techniques to track the use of digital works. EPIC's Comments on RFID (pdf) recommend a prohibition on " chipping" people and warn that unencrypted RFID passports pose significant security risks. EPIC's Comments on Digital Rights Management (pdf), submitted in collaboration with the Yale Law School Information Society Project, focus on the intersection of copyright protection and user's privacy. (Apr. 1)
• California School Drops RFID Tracking Program. Brittan Elementary School in Sutter, CA, has abandoned an experimental RFID program after InCom, the company which developed the technology, pulled out of its agreement with the school. Last week, EPIC, along with the Electronic Frontier Foundation and ACLU-Northern California, urged the Brittan School Board in a joint letter (pdf) to terminate the program that used mandatory ID badges to track children's movements in and around the school with RFID technology. The letter argued that the program breached children's right to privacy and dignity by treating them like cattle or pieces of inventory. See the press release. (Feb. 16)
• EPIC Urges to Stop RFID-Tracking Scheme for School Children. EPIC, along with EFF and the ACLU-Northern California, urged the Brittan School Board in a joint letter to terminate an experimental program using mandatory ID badges tracking children's movements in and around the school with RFID technology. The letter argues that the program breaches children's right to privacy and dignity as human beings by treating them like cattle or a piece of inventory, and that the RFID badges jeopardize the safety and security of students by broadcasting their identity and location information to anyone with a chip reader. For more information, see the EPIC Children and RFID Systems page. (Feb. 8)
• Security Flaws Revealed in RFID Enabled Products. Students at Johns Hopkins University have discovered serious security flaws in the Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips which are used to protect cars from theft and prevent fraudulent use of Speedpass keys. The research shows that even RFID systems considered to be secure remain vulnerable, which only highlights the need to prioritize anaylsis of privacy and security prior to implementation of RFID technology. The potential for exploitation of the security deficiencies serves as a warning to all industries and governments that would hastily assemble RFID enabled systems in order to identify and/or track people as they cross borders. (Feb. 1)
• EPIC Proposes New Framework for Regulation of RFID in Health Care Settings. In a presentation to a committee of the Department of Health and Human Services, EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg recommended the establishment of a new Four Tier Framework for RFID Regulation for medical information. The framework builds on EPIC's earlier Privacy Guidelines for RFID Technology. EPIC said that privacy rules should apply to most RFID applications and that additional safeguards will be necessary given RFID's unique tracking capabilities. EPIC proposed no privacy restrictions on the use of RFIDs in bulk products not associated with specific patients, but urged the prohibition of RFID implants. (Jan. 11, 2005)
• EPIC Recommends Privacy Protections for RFID. In testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, EPIC Policy Counsel Cédric Laurant urged Congress to adopt a framework of fair information practices to govern collection of personal information through RFID. The testimony follows detailed comments (pdf), including EPIC's Privacy Guidelines for RFID Technology, filed at a Federal Trade Commission Workshop on RFID. (July 14, 2004)
• EPIC Surveys the RFID Industry. EPIC recently surveyed developers and manufacturers of RFID technology, as well as retailers who have begun to employ RFID in the supply chain and in the retail setting. EPIC asked how they used RFID tags in the retail environment and requested details about how they were enabling customers to disable tags (a process known as "tag killing") or remove tags from retail merchandise. See survey. (June 23, 2004)
• EPIC Urges FTC to Safeguard Consumers' Interests at RFID Workshop. In testimony to the Federal Trade Commission on radio frequency identification technologies, EPIC called for the adoption of strong Privacy Guidelines for RFID Technology to protect consumers against potential abuses of the tracking technology. (June 21, 2004)
• Federal Trade Commission to host a public workshop on RFID in June. The workshop will explore the uses, efficiencies, and implications for consumers associated with RFID technology. It will address both current and anticipated uses of RFID tags and their impact on the marketplace. (April 12, 2004)
• San Francisco library foregoes hearing and votes to fund RFID tracking. The San Francisco Library Commission voted to approve funding for the implementation of RFID chips in books and on other library materials before holding a hearing on the matter, which the Commission had promised to do. The ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are among the groups that oppose the RFID tracking at the library without implementation of privacy safeguards. (Mar. 2, 2004)
• Metro AG scales back tracking technology. In the face of heated contention, the German Company Metro AG back-peddled away from their ambitious plans to start using RFID chips in supermarket loyalty cards for Extra Future Store. The supermarket had hoped to use the tracking system to verify ages of customers so that DVD trailers could be tailored accordingly. (Mar. 1, 2004)
• The discount retailer Target announced plans to use RFID on all shipped pallets. Citing cost reduction, inventory accuracy and theft concerns, Target announced that it would implement RFID technology into all pallets of merchandise shipped to regional distribution centers. The company assured customers that they have no plans to use RFID transmitters to track customer purchases at this time. (Feb. 24, 2004)
• A California design firm uses RFID to make Prada shopping very personal. California design company Ideo played a part in creating the Prada "experience" for return Prada shoppers. When a shopper enters the store carrying a frequent shopper card with a RFID chip, a store clerk instantly knows the shopper's preferences, past purchases and vital statistics before the shopper even starts to look around thanks to the clerk's handheld RFID reader. Once in the dressing room, which the card allows shoppers to reserve ahead of time, the RFID reader suggests coordinating pieces to match the items that the shopper selected, which are all displayed on a video screen. (Feb. 1, 2004)
• Coalition Recommends Privacy Practices for RFID. EPIC and a coalition of privacy organizations have released a position paper on the use of RFID in consumer products. The paper, which was delivered at a RFID Policy Workshop at MIT, recommends a framework of Fair Information Practices for data collected by the technology. (Nov 17, 2003)
• Secret RFID testing amid denials. Wal-Mart and Procter & Gamble recently admitted to secret RFID testing of consumers who interacted with Lipfinity brand lipstick in an Oklahoma Wal-Mart store earlier this year. Triggered by a RFID tracking device imbedded in the lipstick packaging, consumers were videotaped when they had contact with the product. The revelation contradicts repeated assurances by Wal-Mart that it was not conducting such tests on consumers. (Nov. 12, 2003)
• Marks & Spencer has begun using RFID in the U.K. The retailer Marks & Spencer, a U.K.-based retailer, has already begun using RFID technology in clothes and in returnable food delivery trays. The retailer hopes the technology will increase stock accuracy and thereby facilitate product accessibility for shoppers. While the RFID tags are attached to certain items, Marks & Spencer assures that the tags can be removed from clothing, and the collection of information about shoppers will be restricted. The implementation of the RFID technology is just in the trial stages, according to the company, and the success of the program will be assessed after a month. (Oct. 16, 2003)
• U.S. Department of Defense Requires RFID tags on all DoD Purchases. The DoD plans to require RFID tags on all products purchased by 2005 in order to "improve [the Department's] business functions and facilitate all aspects of the DoD supply chain," according to the Department. The DoD plans to use the Electronic Product Code (EPC) technology which is under development by the Uniform Code Council. This move is predicted to hasten the deployment of RFID tags and lower the cost by increasing visibility and demand for the technology. However, while the producers of the tags expect a huge financial benefit, the cost of the implementing the technology will fall on suppliers, who will likely then transfer the cost to consumers. (Oct. 13, 2003)
• RFID Developers Public Relations Plans Revealed. Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering has located a number of internal public relations documents that discuss how Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) developers plan to "neutralize opposition" to the technology. The documents, prepared by Fleishman-Hillard, suggest that: "Political climate and shifting public perception require a proactive plan that…mitigates possible public backlash" to RFID adoption. (Jul. 7, 2003)
• Benetton: No Microchips in Clothes (Yet): Italian-based clothing company Benetton announced that it has not put Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags in its clothing, despite some reports to the contrary. The company said it will undertake a study of the tracking technology, "including careful analysis of potential implications relating to individual privacy." Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering had organized an anti-RFID boycott of the international clothes manufacturer and vendor. For more information, see Junkbusters' page on RFID. (Apr. 7, 2003)

Resources

• Digital Security research group from the Dutch Radboud University: page on RFID (July 2008).
• Cryptography analysis of the secret Cypher that the Mifare Classic RFID chip uses (July 2008).
• Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Consultation Paper, "Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in the Workplace: Recommendations for Good Practices" (March 2008).
• ANEC & BEUC, "Consumers' Scenarios for a RFID Policy: Joint ANEC/BEUC Comments on the Communication on Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in Europe: Steps Towards a Policy Framework" (July 2007).
• National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Guidelines for Securing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Systems" (Apr. 2007).
• Commission of the European Communities, "Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in Europe:Steps Towards a Policy Framework" (Mar. 15, 2007).
• Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, Working document on data protection issues related to RFID technology (Jan. 1, 2005).
• Food and Drug Administration, "Radiofrequency Identification Feasibility Studies and Pilot Programs for Drugs - Guidance for FDA Staff and Industry - Compliance Policy Guides" (Nov. 16, 2004).
• Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner, Tag, You're It: Privacy Implications of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Technology (Feb. 2004).
• Materials submitted at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology RFID Privacy Workshop (Nov. 2003).
• International Conference of Data Protection & Privacy Commissioners, Resolution on Radio-Frequency Identifiation (Nov. 20, 2003).
• Cynthia Leonardatos, Paul H. Blackman, & David B. Kopel, Smart Guns/Foolish Legislators: Finding the Right Public Safety Laws, and Avoiding the Wrong Ones, 34 Conn. L. Rev. 157, (Fall, 2001).
• Timothy P. Terrell, Anne R. Jacobs, Privacy, Technology, and Terrorism: Bartnicki, Kyllo, and the Normative Struggle Behind Competing Claims to Solitude and Security, 51 Emory L.J. 1469, (Fall, 2002).
• CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) is an information clearinghouse and resource for community and national action opposing consumer tracking devices, such as loyalty cards and RFID tags.
• CASPIAN has proposed federal legislation known as "RFID Right to Know Act of 2003," which calls for mandatory labels on RFID-equipped products so that consumers can identify and make informed choices about purchasing products installed with tracking chips. CASPIAN issued a press release outlining the proposed legislation on June 11, 2003.

ref:http://epic.org/privacy/rfid/