RFID Privacy Forum
A Resource for the RFID Industry

I haven't read the book, but I hope it's not as uninformed as this blog entry. Richardson writes: "Criminals know that RFID readers that can 'skim' the information contained in the chip, can be easily found on the Web for less than $100.00. Once these RF reading devices are in their hands, they can steal you, your information and your privacy without your knowledge."

Richardson supposedly backs up this scary claim by citing a news clip on her local ABC station in which a reporter puts an RFID reader in her purse, then goes around "stealing" information from her colleagues. She provides a link to the station, but I couldn't find the video clip on the site, or even a related story. Richardson also provides a "view video" link that goes to YouTube, but again, I could not find the video she describes.

I don't know of any portable RFID readers that sell for less than $100, but let's get to the crux of the matter here: Richardson says the reporter successfully went around the newsroom, brushing close to co-workers and stealing their sensitive data. "Each audible beep meant she successfully hacked the unsuspecting target's private information—information her targets believed was stowed safely away," she writes.

Richardson never says what sensitive data was stolen. She simply insinuates that it's sensitive information. The reader might have been reading a random serial number in the access control card used to get into the building—we don't know.

As with many critics of RFID, they use the absence of fact to conjur up nightmare scenarios: "It's hard to imagine just how much sensitive information can be 'skimmed' at airports, shopping malls, grocery stores, sporting events, universities, etc., without anyone being the wiser. And how much damage (or how many doors) will that stolen data open everyone up to?"

She's right—it is hard to imagine, because sensitive data is rarely data stored on RFID cards in the first place. Often, in fact, reading RFID cards provides nothing more than random serial numbers. Some credit-card issuers do put credit-card numbers and expiration dates on RFID chips, but if that information is so incredibly sensitive, why is it printed on the face of the card?

In this Age of Ignorance about RFID, someone walking around with a reader going "beep" can be spun into a wild tale of identity threat and/or Big Brother watching your every move. But as consumers get more used to the technology, they realize that folks like Richardson are just scaring them to try to sell more books.

Fairness
Denise:

You may be doing the public a great service in writing about debt and the need for consumers to protect their information, but you need to do little research — and frankly a little thinking — before you attack a technology. There has never been a case of a person having their identity stolen because they used RFID and there hasn't even been any concerns that they will. The only concern is that the card info will be stolen and used fraudulently. It never seems to occur to anyone that banks wouldn't use RFID if it they thought it would lead to fraud because the bank's are at risk. It's great to stand up for the public but if you claim to want to educate people about a topic, educate yourself first.

Posted By: Mark Roberti 7/7/07 at 6:47 AM

Unfounded and unfair claim
A consumer sent me a link to your post about a recent article I did about a recent investigative news station’s report on RFID readers. I readily admit I am in no way an expert in RFID technology. For the better part of 15 years I have been working to educate the public on the need to be proactive when guarding their identities and credit reports. I am a freelance writer that tries to write informative articles on numerous subjects that may affect the public. Most often I write about identity theft and the broken credit reporting industry because many years of my adult life have been consumed with monitoring, correcting and fixing my credit identity. After viewing the WPLG newscast, I began researching what type of steps or products were available to consumers/businesses if they chose to be proactive –as opposed to reactive, when protecting their personal information. My article not only discussed the newscast but where and how consumers could find products to protect their personal information. The link to the video may have been removed from WPLG’s website, but I have found it on the DIFRwear.com site (a company I have no affiliation with).

My only motivation behind my articles (and book) is raising public awareness to issues that may impact others. I can’t condemn nor condone this type of technology –nor do I want to. I simply chose to apprise the public on steps they can take to in order to be proactive when guarding themselves from thieves and fraud. Oftentimes those of us, who have zeal to be involved in advocacy, realize we have little control of the overwhelming passion that drives us to use our life experiences to help others. I have been an advocate for many years and those that know of my efforts know that I have done so for many years –long before the publishing of my book. Your claims that I am simply trying to scare people are not so -I invite you to read some of my work and I think that will help you to see that your claim is unfounded -and unfair.

Posted By: Denise Richardson 7/4/07 at 7:35 AM

Add Your Comment:

Please enter your name or an alias and your email address.
Only your name or alias will appear in your post.

Name / Alias:
Email:	(will not be displayed)
Comment Title:
Comment: