US begins switch to RFID passports

[slaveplanet]

The US State Department has finalised plans to go ahead with passports containing radio frequency identification chips, reports eWeek.
 
Despite gaining support from only 1% of the US public, the State Department has finalised plans to go ahead with passports containing radio frequency identification (RFID) chips, reports eWeek.

The department plans to begin implementing the electronic passport programme in December with a pilot test of government employees who use official passports for work.

It will begin issuing the electronic ID to citizens generally early next year and plans to have all passports RFID-enabled by October 2006.

INet-Bridge
http://mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=1069

[texpatriot2004]

1. Despite the fact that US public doesn't support this. nm

[Pachamama]

2. This is very creepy....My current Passport expires in 2007....

:scared:

[xxqqqzme]

17. so does mine - I was

thinking of renewing early - best get on it! My son got his earlier this year so I guess he's good for a bit.

[Pachamama]

22. Great idea! Instead of waiting, get my 10 year passport now w/out a RFID

in it....

Thanks for the tip.... :hi:

[cascadiance]

57. If we apply for one now, will they "delay" getting it until December?

I've been thinking for a while on getting my passport back anyway. Mine's been expired for some time, and would like to get in before the wire on this. I've been told that it takes anywhere from 4-6 weeks to get it. So, I'm wondering if they will intentionally delay it. Maybe if I schedule a trip at the end of November and say I NEED it before then so that they would rush it through? Just trying to think of a strategy so that my attempt to beat the clock doesn't just make me a first guinea pig instead!

[Dogmudgeon]

3. RFID is hackable. What will the State Department do then?

The first time a Muslim hacks an RFID and gets past security, the fat will be in the fire.

Computer licenses will be the next innovation to protect us (and The Children™, too) from the bad men who hate us for our freedoms.

--p!

[hlthe2b]

4. I'm more concerned that it signals you are an American from

considerable distance in a crowd for anyone with a detection devise. Not that we aren't already prime pickins for terrorists who target Americans...

[funflower]

5. I don't get it. Is this to prevent counterfeiting of passports? Doesn't

seem to me it would prevent misuse of stolen passports.

[cassiepriam]

6. Next they implant the chips in our backsides.

Repugs will no longer have to worry about stealing elections, controlling all branches of govt and the media. Will make their job so much easier.

[rkc3]

56. Maybe that will be the mark of the beast the fundies worry so much about.

[cynatnite]

7. This bothers me on so many levels...

Lack of privacy, stealing identities, enemies tracking for the purpose of kidnapping, etc.

Can they be copied? Can they be hacked? Can they be disrupted? Will they disrupt something else?

[truthisfreedom]

8. wow, now i'm just like my cat.

[dxdem]

9. 'Bout time

I start keeping my new passport in a radio shielded "wallet..."

[chat_noir]

10. Poll here - RFID Journal

http://www.rfidjournal.com/

Will limiting the use of RFID ultimately help or hurt consumers?

Also, this opinion piece:

Spychips Book Fails to Make Its Case

Oct. 24, 2005—The new book Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move With RFID is meant to be both an exposé and a clarion call to the masses to stand up and oppose all uses of radio frequency identification. While it may reinforce the beliefs of those who think big business and big government are out to control their lives, the book fails to deliver on the publisher's claim that it will show "how this seemingly innocuous commercial maneuver will inevitably turn our society into a Big Brother nightmare." In fact, anyone drawing conclusions from the hard evidence presented in the book—as opposed to the theoretical propositions put forth by the authors—will conclude that RFID is not a threat to privacy.

This is a long opinion piece, because many of the authors' claims go to the heart of the privacy issue and, therefore, deserve to be examined in depth. For those of you who want to skip the details and just get the bottom line, here it is: The book does not include one single concrete example of someone whose privacy was invaded because of RFID. That's right. Not one. Even with the proliferation of RFID tags in access control cards, car keys and toll collection systems, the authors could not cite one instance where RFID tags tied to personally identifiable information was used to infringe on someone's privacy. (The authors do tell the story of a woman whose estranged husband subpoenaed her electronic toll records during a custody case to prove she was working late and not attending to their children, but the referenced article does not say whether the records were turned over.)

http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/1947/1/128/

For you DU researchers, check out:

Kathryn Albrecht
CASPIAN
RFID Fleischman-Hillard

[bbgrunt]

37. I just finished this book and find the above review

to be typical of those who stand to gain a great deal from the implementation of this technology in all aspects of our lives. The fact that it hasn't yet caused us to wake up to the potential disaster and loss of freedom to every amerikan is simply due to:

1) the fact that it is still in its elementary deployment stage and

2) most people are not even aware that it exists and how it can be used and

3) the industry is doing everything in its power to implement it clandestinely and secretly.

I would recommend that one reads this book. It can be a little over the top at some points, but the final chapters about freedom's greatest threat comes from its own government is VERY compelling.

[Mnemosyne]

11. What a crock! The supposed 9/11 hijackers got

their visas through a fast track process.

This will stop whom?!!

[pitohui]

55. it couldn't have been that much of a fast track process

since a number of them did not receive their visas until they were already dead for 6 months

[freepotter]

12. Tamper proof?

Aren't RFID chips affected by strong magnets? "Ah, gee! How did that happen?" :evilgrin:

[KamaAina]

18. Oh crap, I left my passport in the microwave

My bad.

[NuttyFluffers]

21. exactly! "my passport was pummeled with a ball point hammer..."

"the strangest shit just tends to happen when spy chips get into my vicinity. i try and try to protect them, but lo and behold... there were a lot of big flies and my passport got some honey on it..."

[kineneb]

35. yup, good strong magnet

Just like any kind of "magnetic media," reprogramming can be done by the application of a nice big magnet. Think credit card strip on steroids.

Oh, and just think what a field day the kiddie hackers could have with these things. Find the willing 14 year old and apply burger and fries.

[pokerfan]

42. A magnet won't do it

The data will most likely be stored in flash memory, like an SD or CF card. Think thumb-drive. ESD (electrostatic discharge might damage it or a strong RF signal at the proper frequency might fry the radio front end. But a strong magnet will prolly do nothing.

If you must carry your passport but don't wish to be detected, aluminum foil makes an excellent RF shield. Simply wrap it in several layers of foil and double fold all seams.

HTH.

[Tesha]

43. No, magnets won't affect them. Microwave ovens, on the other hand... (NT)

[Gemini Cat]

13. Damn.

Another stupid and invasive thing to do against the people.
What's that freedom I keep hearing they hate us for?

[400Years]

14. this should be proof enough that we don't live in a democracy

[AnneD]

15. OK, I am not a religous nut

but this is getting uncomfortably close to wearing the mark of the beast. I can see it being used to target Americans overseas (just what you need-a bulls eye).

[bunnywhiskers]

16. I hope they don't get mad

when I accidentally use a microwave oven to fry the RFID chip out of my passport.

[Pachamama]

25. Serious - does the Microwave do it? Does the Microwave survive?

Does the passport?

(I have this image of a blackened/burned passport in the area where the RFID chip is)....

BTW- How does one know whether a RFID chip is in their passport? Is there a lump? Is their a way to detect it? :shrug:

[bunnywhiskers]

27. I just finished this book

called Spychips by Katherine Albrecht and another author which is all about rfid chips and how scary they are. I had nightmares for a few days after I read this book. Anyway, in the book they do an experiment with a microwave oven and it does destroy the chips. Apparently it overwhelms the chip with a frequency so high that it fries the chip. It will leave a burn mark on your passport but your passport should still be acceptable unless a passport with a disabled rfid chip is invalid. That is the question. Is a passport with a fried rfid chip still valid?

[Pachamama]

28. Good question about the passport being invalidated if there is a burn mark

I know that when I've "read" the various text in my passport, there is language (legalese) that makes reference to its "mutilation" invalidating it etc. I wonder if the "burn mark" from a microwave is caused from the metallic in the microwave "cooking" or if there could be some way to in-activate an RFID w/ out the "burn mark".

Meanwhile, today as I crossed over the Golden Gate Bridge and pulled out my "FastTrak" device for paying the toll on the bridge, I wondered if the static shield bag that its stored in could be used to store the passport in and thus keep the RFID chip from being "read"....

Any one know that detail? Should we all be getting the static shield bags? :shrug:

[bunnywhiskers]

31. That's a good idea

I took my wife's Fastrak device apart and it was powered by a battery which means that it is an active RFID chip, capable of storing more information and being read at much greater distances. So if the static shield bag blocks a Fastrak device, it should certainly block radio waves from a non-active chip embedded in a passport.

[Carolab]

19. Is this retroactive? I just got mine. n/t

[jazzjunkysue]

20. Glad my new one came this week. Whew! I'm good for another 10 years.

:scared:

[sarcasmo]

23. Looks like I have to sneak into Canada across the Minnesota border.

[0007]

24. How much is this going to cost us now?

[Rex]

26. Who cares what the US public supports?

If that mattered Boosh wouldn't be POTUS.

[jayctravis]

29. Think of the positives.

Don't carry your passport with you. It should remain in your home unless you're travelling abroad. If you're travelling, it's a good way for someone to locate you in an emergency.

And the blinky lights will look cool with many phone accessories.

[bunnywhiskers]

32. I hope you are joking

There is nothing positive about having an RFID chip in your passport any more than there is something positive about dying because you won't have to pay bills anymore.

Sorry, bad example

[RPM]

30. can i microwave it

will that kill the damned spot?

[kineneb]

36. flashed on speech from Macbeth "Out, damned spot!" n/t

[northzax]

33. it's only fair, actually

all countries that the US has no-visa agreements with (like the UK, Canada, etc) are required to have electronic passports by 2008, so it's only fair we do this as well. You give up your personal information to the State Department for a passport anyway, what's wrong with digitally encoding it? it's not something I carry around every day, and scanning allows the gubmint to know whenever you leave or enter the country anyway.

[bunnywhiskers]

34. Please

learn more about RFID technology. You may change your tune.

[northzax]

38. I know the technology that is going into the passports

since I know the company that makes it. It will have your digital photo, passport number and contact information, not transmitting but passively sitting there. My speedpass has more information, as does my EZPass, Credit card, Driver's license, Cell Phone, laptop, GPS device and others. Let's face it, I'm a walking transmitter, so is almost everyone.

Now, I wish the DoS had agreed to encrypt the information on the rfid chips, but it's hardly confidential informaiton, and place I travel outside of the US already knows my passport number, I used it to enter the country.

please explain why you are so scared of it? do you think someone is going to bother to track your movements, even more than they already can? Or are they going to steal your photo? why not simply take your picture? or passport number? why not simply pickpocket you? anytime you use your passport, the government already knows it, you are scanned on entry and scanned on exit. no one has made a realistic case about why, exactly, this is anything to be worried about? Will the knowledge that there is a chip containing information in your passport change your life in any way? I doubt it. so really, what's the problem? no one can say, besides some general liddush fear of new technology.

[bunnywhiskers]

39. I am scared shitless

When you go to a protest the government will be able to scan the crowd and create a list of all the participants. They will know your name, birth date, criminal record, political affiliation and whether or not you've had an abortion. They will know what you are wearing and what is in the car you are driving. They'll be able to check everything that you've ever bought and everything you still currently own. You won't be able to remove or turn off the tags, so you will have no choice. The scanning of cars and homes from the outside will reveal just about every product you own and such searches will be upheld in the courts as legal. Scanners set up around cities and communities are currently being installed and will be able to track our movements wherever we go. This kind of stuff scares me and I am always surprised when people tell me that RFID is a good thing and that I have nothing to worry about. Usually its along the lines of "If you're not a criminal and you've got nothing to hide then what are you worried about?" Well, I'm not a criminal and I've got nothing to hide but I'm still worried. I might be in the minority but this RFID shit scares the hell out of me.

[northzax]

40. when's the last time

you carried your passport to a protest? I'd be much more concerned about all the other tracking devices you carry every day than your passport.

[jbond56]

41. i think you are missing the point.

I can choose if i want an ez-pass. Almost all the devices you listed you get to choose to have. There is no choice when it comes to passports.

My question is why is the rfid tag needed? In my opinion it simply isn't needed. Why do you want to make it easier to be tracked?

[northzax]

44. you can choose whether or not to have a passport

you can't travel outside the country without one, but you can choose to not have one. Just as you can choose not to have a driver's license, you can't drive, but there's no rule that you have to have a license if you don't want to drive. but you have complete freedom of movement inside the United States without a passport. if this was a national ID card, that was mandatory to carry at all times while in the US, then I'd oppose it, but this is not that.

[bunnywhiskers]

48. Your passport is just one of millions of things

that are slated for RFID. If things go as planned you will have an RFID chip in your drivers license.

http://www.rfidnews.org/news/2004/10/13/aclu-urges-virginia-not-to-put-rfid-in-drivers-licenses/

And also in your shoes.

"From now on, that particular pair of shoes or carton of cigarettes is associated with you."

http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2005/10/10/you_need_not_be_paranoid_to_fear_rfid?mode=PF

Here in California we have passed a law making it illegal for non-U.S. citizens to acquire a drivers license. They still drive just the same but they no longer have car insurance and they don't have to know the rules of the road because there is no need to take the drivers test since they can't get a license anyway. This is somehow supposed to make us safer. This is a bullshit attempt to establish a national i.d. card. A national i.d. card with an RFID chip embedded in it. So if you attend an anti-war protest but you don't want the government to log your presence then you should probably leave your drivers license at home. While your at it you should take off your shoes and go barefoot as well. Just to be safe you should go ahead and take off all of your clothes and go naked. But then again you might have an RFID chip implanted under your skin

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5285815.html

In that case maybe you should just stay home and forget about the protest. I wish I was only paranoid and none of this was true or possible. Unfortunately it is all in the works and very well documented.

[northzax]

49. all of this is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand

which is RFID chips in passports. to scarre people about chips in passports, you offer shoes and sweaterrs. well, I bought a pair of shoes last weekend, also a sweater. I paid cash for both. good luck connecting my cash purchases to my passport, which I had to provide evidence of my identity to get.

last time I checked, you could pay cash for anything in this country, including the money order I sent in with my passport appication, they are completely different thingsm right? a pair of shoes I can pay pure cash for, sure, it can be tracked, if you want, but how are you going to link them to me, precisely?

by the way, DU knows your IP address, under supeona, I bet they'll give it up. and with a good hack, someone can find it out. what are you doing about that, since you're so concerned? my purchases are with cash, if someone wants to track me, I hope they have fun.

[bunnywhiskers]

50. Sorry, dude

They already have plans to put RFID chips in cash so it looks like you're out of luck on that one.

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,59565,00.html

When you're talking about RFID the "subject at hand" goes far beyond just passports.

Its not surprising that you are a cheerleader for RFID technology given, as you mentioned earlier, your involvement in the industry. There is a lot of money to be made with this fascist technology and I don't blame you for wanting to make a quick buck. I would think twice about it though. Is a global network of RFID chips and scanners really worth any money you might make off of it?

[northzax]

52. my involvement is tangential, and I have no financial interest

sorry, it's not that simple. simply because there are innappropriate uses for technology you cannot rule out every use for that technology. I'm not into blanket statements along those lines. THe discussion here is whether or not RFID chips are useful and appropriate in passports, not whether they are useful and appropriate to use in cash, shoes, clothing, food, elvis memorabilia or anything else.

People use computers for criminal purposes, should be ban computers? of course not. but taking your point, that RFID chips may be misused at some future junction, we'd have to. And books, some people use books to spread bad information, even hurtful and evil information, should be ban them as well?

vague fears of some future evil shouldn't stop the practical applications of technology. Sure, everything could eventually be tagged. but there isn't enough computing power in the world to track them, is there? you'd need thousands of trillions of chips, as well as a remarkable advancement in technology to track them, communicate with them and sort them. have fun sorting that one out.

you are playing fast and loose with the facts, and throwing up multiple straw men because, frankly, you have no good arguement about RFID chips in passports. so, when in danger or in doubt, obfuscate.

[bunnywhiskers]

58. I'm not playing fast and loose with the facts

Travelers carrying around RFID passports are broadcasting their identity. That is a fact. Think about what that means for a minute. It means that passport holders are continuously broadcasting their name, nationality, age, address and whatever else is on the RFID chip. It means that anyone with a reader can learn that information, without the passport holder's knowledge or consent. It means that pickpockets, kidnappers and terrorists can easily -- and surreptitiously -- pick Americans or nationals of other participating countries out of a crowd. There are no plans to encrypt the data on the tags in passports. This is a dangerous, inappropriate device to be installing in U.S. passports. Terrorists overseas will be able to identify Americans by their passports when picking targets to bomb. "Which cafe do we lob the grenade into? Ping, ping, ping. There are 21 Americans in there." The tags could also be used to identify people who walk into an abortion clinic, a mosque or a political meeting. Security is always a trade-off. If the benefits of RFID outweighed the risks, then maybe it would be worth it. Certainly, there isn't a significant benefit when people present their passport to a customs official. If that customs official is going to take the passport and bring it near a reader, why can't he go those extra few centimeters that a contact chip--one the reader must actually touch--would require? The Bush administration is deliberately choosing a less secure technology without justification. If there were a good offsetting reason to choose that technology over a contact chip, then the choice might make sense. Unfortunately, there is only one possible reason: The administration wants surreptitious access themselves. It wants to be able to identify people in crowds. It wants to surreptitiously pick out the Americans, and pick out the foreigners. It wants to do the very thing that it insists, despite demonstrations to the contrary, can't be done.

[northzax]

60. did you happen to notice

in your extensive research on the issue, that the passport will include a shield to stop any access while the passport is closed? If the chip can't transmit information, then no one can read it in a crowd, right?

so the only time it will transmit is when it is open. I suggest keeping it closed, it's a lot easier to put in your pocket that way. And any time you open it, anyone within visual distance can see it's a US passport anyway, they're fairly distinctive.

[Nihil]

61. How thick does the shield need to be?

Will a layer of tinfoil inside a passport holder be sufficient?
How about edge effects? Does it need to totally contain the passport
(like a Faraday cage or computer RF shield) or will covering the main
flat surfaces suffice?

(Thanks in advance)

[northzax]

62. it's built into the passport, into the lining

so that it can only be read when open. You won't need to do anything except keep it closed...

[Megahurtz]

65. "Obfuscate"

That sounds like a damn good idea!:think:

[NoodleyAppendage]

45. 1% of Americans support it. Who? The RFID industry and spooks.

Welcome to the first step towards fascism...

B

[bikebloke]

46. Mine expires late 2006

As some countries won't let you enter unless you've got six months or more left of validity, I always renew early. Now I have an extra nudge. As soon as my new specs come in (I've been recycling frames for years, sending fashionistas into apoplectic fits).

[ZigSteenine]

47. SpeedPass and RFID

Oh how safe it is!! NOT

Free Gas

http://channels.lockergnome.com/news/archives/20050816_hacking_the_mobile_speedpass_for_free_gas_how_to_stay_safe.phtml

[bunnywhiskers]

51. RFID Tags in New US Notes Explode When You Try to Microwave Them

http://www.prisonplanet.com/022904rfidtagsexplode.html

[DrZeeLit]

53. I just got a new one in July 05. Airlines want "scannable" but that is

not RFID, is it?

So, that means I can go the 10 years w/o?
Or do you think... in a BIG money-making scheme... they'll require turning in the old one within a certain time frame?

Passports are NOT cheap anymore either. Wonder what they will jack up the prices to when the RFID ones start rolling?

Oi.

[pitohui]

54. it says "all passports" by december 2006

wouldn't that mean that you will have to replace your new passport as soon as next year, meaning an additional expense for you & presumably a nice bonus income for the state dept.

if you can hold yr passport for 9 more yrs after the requirement is implemented, that would mean "all" passports are not RFID

i think it means you get to pay twice in two years for something others only have to buy once every 10 yrs if their timing was lucky

the article is unclear if you ask me

[cascadiance]

59. I'm trying to get one now under the wire without this RFID...

I'm looking at a PDF document of the DS-11 Application for a passport here:

http://www.abriggs.com/passports/new_passport.php

and there is a disturbing paragraph that would indicate that they are already issuing these passports now. Note the following section on the fourth page of this document which says:

------------------------------------------------------

ELECTRONIC PASSPORT STATEMEHT

Early in 2005, the State Department will begin issuing a new type of passport containing an embedded electronic chip and called an "Electronic Passport". The new passport will continue to be proof of the bearer's United States Citizenship and identity, and will look and function in the same way as a passport without a chip. The addition of an electronic chip in the back cover will enable the new passport to carry a duplicate electronic copy of all information from the data page. The new passport will be usable at all ports-of-entry, including those that do not yet have electronic chip readers.

Use of the electronic format will provide the traveler the additional security protections inherent in chip technology. Moreover, when used at ports-of-entry equipped with electronic chip readers, the new passport will provide for faster clearance through some of the port-of-entry processes.

Issuance of this new passport will be phased in during an 18-month period. It is epected that by mid-2006 nearly all US passports will be issued in the new format. The new passport will not require special handling or treatment, but like previous versions should be protected from extreme bending and from immersion in water. The electronic chip must be read using specially formatted readers, and is not susceptible to unauthorized reading.

The cover of the new passport will be printed with a special symbol representing the embedded chip. The symbol "LOGO IMAGE" will appear in port-of-entry areas where the electronic passport can be read.

------------------------------------------------------


This would seem to indicate that this transition has started earlier this year and that many folks are already getting this newer type of passport.

Is this something that was erroneously printed and since the time of its printing there has been a delay in making these kind of passports?

Anyone have one of these newer passports yet?

The form indicates that for higher fees one can get your passport "expedited", which I'm tempted to do to get them before the December date mentioned in the article above. However, if they are already issuing these now, I might be just wasting my money. Also, there's mixed info I'm reading of you needing to "prove" you need it before a given date to get expediting. Part of me feels I should just be able to say something like "I'm thinking of taking a trip in early December to Canada before the holidays when I want to be back home for Christmas here. I need this passport before the end of November.

Just checking in what others think on what would be the best way to go about it. I'm tempted to go into the one stop shopping post office tomorrow morning and just get it over now. But I'd like to make sure I'm not going to waste money on expediting it, if there's not much chance at getting a "non-chipped" passport anyway. I also am born overseas by American parents, which might hold up my application if I go the "normal" time route too.

Getting this passport now isn't just motivated by this RFID thing. It is also motivated by us needing passports now to go over the border to either Mexico or Canada soon at the beginning of the year I think. Living in San Diego, I want to have the option to go into Mexico and will need a passport to do that shortly.

[coffeenap]

63. My husband's new one is due here any day--I will post when it comes.

:hi:

[Megahurtz]

64. So what's THEIR explaination for doing this?

Has anyone ever asked them, or would they say they don't have to answer this question?
Even if they said "it's to fight Terra" for example, I still want their explaination as to how it would do that.

Because I think that it's bullshit.
For one thing, it sounds like this would work out well for them in case they implemented The Draft. :scared:
My passport expires in 2010, but my 16 year old kid's passport just expired this last Sept.
If I remember correctly, they won't allow minors to get 10 year passports.

How convenient for them!
So they think that they really own all of us now eh?
It's getting closer and closer to Poppy's "New World order" everyday.:grr: