By Natasha Lomas, 17 October 2006 17:00
NEWS
A plan to tag air travellers with RFID chips to improve airport security by monitoring passengers as they kill time after check-in in airport coffee shops and departure lounges has been slammed by silicon.com readers as "another ill thought out idea", "a solution looking for a problem" and even "dead in the water".
Electrical engineers working on University College London's 'Optag' project have designed a prototype RFID tag with a much greater range than a standard RFID chip - up to 20 metres. The new tags are to be trialled at an airport in Hungary next month and, if successful, could be rolled out to airports within two years, according to project lead Dr Paul Brennan.
But a smooth rollout is unlikely, judging by the overwhelmingly negative reaction of silicon.com readers - many of whom cast doubt on the effectiveness of the tagging technology as a security measure.
Simon, a reader from Cumbria, said: "So we'll have tags that are either intrusive and hard to remove (the "You are all criminals until you prove otherwise" approach), or will be easily removed by anyone wanting to subvert the system (like, err, terrorists?)."
He added: "And the tags WILL be easy to remove, after all, there will need to be loads of staff able to remove them at the boarding gates, so the tools/techniques will not be hard to come by for those that require them."
Another reader, an IT consultant from London, suggests the technology might actually be detrimental to airport security: "If they implement this and everyone gets used to using it then anyone untagged becomes invisible and is even more of a threat... Plus, if the legitimacy of your owning the device is never human-checked then security is reduced."
Reader AS Mills, from London, also has concerns about the tags' effectiveness, dubbing the project "dead in the water": "As a security 'deterrent' any device such as this RFID tag which can be removed by the wearer and switched to another person is totally useless for 'real' (ie terrorist or a released-on-remand prisoner) security purposes."
Mills added: "This is just yet another technology company trying to make a quick buck from taxpayers for a useless product!"
Director Nick Cole, from Scotland, agrees. "What another waste of time," he said. "RFID [is] a solution looking for a problem to solve... How will it track those who aren't wearing them or those who have 'borrowed' one from someone else?"
But other readers felt moved to offer more constructive criticism. "Why not use the new passports?" suggested one reader from Sheffield. "I've just got my new one and it has a biometric chip and a radio antenna - surely this could be used and people are always going to have a passport on them at the airport."
Meanwhile programme manager Roy Corneloues, who hails from "Eng-er-land!!!" and calls himself "an optimist!!!", suggests the tag should be built into the boarding card. "This will have a number of advantages over and above a person's location," he said. "For example, you should simply be able to walk up to a gate and board the plane if your tag is recognised. If not alarm bells sound [and] you are refused to travel any further, or for purchase of duty free."
And the mail bag of controversy would not be complete without a sprinkling of civil liberties fears. A reader from London said: "Why stop at airports? Let's tag everyone in the country starting with Dr Paul Brennan. Or better still, make it a global project.
"The problem I see is that it will be introduced no matter what the human right issues are... The other question we have to ask is, does it really increase security or is it just another step to passively monitoring people and accumulating information?"
A reader from the US also chipped in with a 'Big Brother' warning, saying simply: "How Orwellian can you get?"
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. Ben Adam
Seems the readers have decisively agreed to hex the passenger RFID tag in the airport idea. If readers visit MIT website, believe a similar system is mentioned... real time display of the location of every student participating in RFID transmitter project.
Could the same technology be applied to a different object to increase public safety? Anyone interested in protection against one of the most common armaments being used in some parts of the world, and commonly available in most?
Can we assume that most vehicles used as car bombs are stolen?
If every car were theoretically non-removably embedded with several RFID chips that transmitted the same unique sequence of symbols (ID tag/label), every car could be monitored by a networked matrix of receivers. All RFID chips on a car reported stolen will continue to transmit the unique sequence of symbols associated with that stolen car. The law enforcement network database would compare signals received with the unique symbol sequence signatures of confirmed stolen vehicles. Authorities near the locations of the stolen vehicles would be notified and real time assisted in seizure of the vehicles, probably before the vehicles could be taken by thieves to "chop shops", or "car bomb" development shops.
This application also has the Big Brother element, but this time, we are protecting the core of human dreams,... individual ownership of an automobile... and human lives.
Could we retrofit old cars without the RFID transponders? Or would we merely rely on inventory transition with time?
What about that initial assumption that terrorists use stolen cars? Maybe not. The technology can still be used to thwart car theft.
2. Christopher Quinton
Using RFID tags on people at airports is as idiotic as the questions you are asked when you check in for a flight, such as, "Have you packed your bags yourself?" "Are you carrying anything for anyone?"
What answer would a terorist give to such questions?
Quite, quite mad.
3. anonymous
What's the advantage of RFID?
..over the boarding card system we have now? - NOTHING.
So what if you can tell that Jim and Frank are still in the bar when they should be boarding - you'll probably have to make an announcement just the same.
What terrorist has got on a plane without a valid boarding card, RFID or not? The vast majority have been completely bonafide passengers - until they decide to set the bomb off.
Nothing will work until you can read peoples minds and intentions. In the meantime the 99.999% of innocent passengers have to suffer loss of freedom, trust and convenience. This is how we let terrorism win.
4. Paul Nedas
What the respondees neglect to consider (or don't understand) is that the RFID chip for this application would also need to store data for at least one other ID verification method e.g. retina or fingerprint. (Ed note. biometric ID has not been suggested. It could just store boarding pass information; e.g. name and flight number. The individual will also be carrying a passport - in some cases a biometric passport for security.)
Individual approaching security control would then have his ID verified by comparing fingerprint/retina obtained with record stored on RFID chip --- optimum speed because the data is held locally rather than accessing a remote database
5. Jurgen Schwietering
Are these paranoids really interested in saving life? Why not spend the money in projects that REALLY would protect life, like anti-smoke, anti-gun (US), anti-eating disorder, anti-alcohol, anti-stress, anti-smog etc...?
Time to wake up
6. IanR
More evidence that the Government and big business regard the public as cattle to be controlled, herded and milked with the minimum of fuss. Anything that makes that easier will be implemented one way or another. Its not about terrorism, never was.