RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Trei, Peter wrote: > Mike, Go to the literature. They are already scanning 20 - 1000 of > tags per second (most of the more realistic reports seem to be > below 50 tps). So it takes 10 seconds to scan my cart? That's > a hell of a lot better than 5 minutes or so by hand. I'll

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 01:05 AM, Thomas Shaddack wrote: They won't specify what *individuals* will get what tags, just that it's a $2,500 Prada handbag -- which still raises the crime concern. Why would anyone *want* to invest $2k5 to a lousy handbag? There are LOTS of more useful things

RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

> Mike Rosing[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Michael Shields wrote: > > > It adds up, especially in low-margin businesses. Groceries are a good > > example; unpacking every cart, scanning, and bagging is an expensive > > bottleneck. The process could be streamlined a lot if

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

> I can imagine some ways to deal with this. Have certain blocks of RFID > address space assigned to specific companies, who publish what products > they'll be used for. The same strategy AFAIK works for UPC/EAN barcodes, for assigning IMEI numbers to cellphones, for book ISBNs. For an example de

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote: > I can imagine some ways to deal with this. Have certain blocks of RFID > address space assigned to specific companies, who publish what products > they'll be used for. They won't specify what *individuals* will get what > tags, just that it's a $2,500

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Rosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, and it takes a second or 2 to find the bar code. That's got > to cost a few pennies doesn't it :-) It adds up, especially in low-margin businesses. Groceries are a good example; unpacking every cart, scanning, and bag

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 06:39:08AM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote: > You can't determine who the customer is if they aren't in your database, > so a centralized database would make sense. The bandwidth on that is > going to be a nightmare. I can imagine some ways to deal with this. Have certain blocks

RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Trei, Peter wrote: > You're not thinking this through. As the item goes through the door (in > either direction) the check is made "Is this individual tag on this store's > 'unsold inventory' list?. If so, raise the alarm. The tags are not fungible; > they each have a unique n

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

At 8:03 AM -0800 3/14/03, Steve Schear wrote: >Wonder what happens when one of the tags is placed in a microwave >oven. Its likely to do some instant damage without harming many tagged >articles, if they aren't left in long. I would think that the RFID >manufactures would WANT to design their tag

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

Think of the fun things one could do. - Never leave the house with mismatched socks again ! - Fashion Police ! Clubs could automatically enforce dress codes (No plaid allowed !) Smart Doors ! "Sorry sir! you weigh 300lbs and you are wearing only speedos, you are not allowed out side" Or my fa

RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

> Mike Rosing[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > They don't want to deactivate them. Go back and read the SFGate > > article I linked in my initial post. They want to recognize when a > > loyal customer returns, so they can pull up his/her profile and give > > then "personalized" treatment. > > And

RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Trei, Peter wrote: > They don't want to deactivate them. Go back and read the SFGate > article I linked in my initial post. They want to recognize when a > loyal customer returns, so they can pull up his/her profile and give > then "personalized" treatment. And what happens w

RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

> Mike Rosing[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > As Declan points out, the tags can be disabled at the counter. I would > think that since they have no internal power source, building something to > fry their innards would be easy, and you don't need a microwave oven. > > Just like they pass item

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 11:57:27AM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: | "If I build the mugger's little | helper, a PDA attachement that scans for real prada bags, then perhaps | the RFID tag will be removed at the counter after the first lawsuit." | | Nice! Possibly, it might not even be necessary for th

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:24:35AM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote: | On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Adam Shostack wrote: | | > On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:22:14AM -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: | > The other motivator is liability. If I build the mugger's little | > helper, a PDA attachement that scans for real prada

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

Brinworld my ass! From: Adam Shostack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Brinwear at Benetton. Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:51:03 -0500 On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:22:14AM -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: | Some research is being

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:22:14AM -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: | Some research is being done in RSA Labs to produce more | privacy-enhanced protocols for RFIDs, but it's a long way from | publication, and its unclear what would motivate a tag manufacturer | to include them. The biggest motivators I

RE: Brinwear at Benetton.

> alan[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Tim May wrote: > > > > Regarding TEMPEST shielding - there is another, complementary approach > > > > for > > > shielding: jamming. There are vendors selling devices that drown the > RF > > > emissions of computer equipment in noise,

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

At 12:21 PM 03/12/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote: They are entitled to set their alarms to trigger on CDs in my laptop case, books from other stores, etc. But they are not contractually entitled in any way to cause me to reverse my direction and return inside their store for a meaningless examination

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 12:56:15PM -0800, Tim May wrote: > Various lengths of metallic conductors are already inside various > banknotes. This is NOT the same technology as RFID. I don't disagree > about it being a concern, and an area for study and experiment, but be > careful not to leap to con

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

At 4:24 AM -0800 on 3/12/03, alan wrote: > Open up > a place to "clean your clothes" of all those little RFID tags Oxpecker.com seems to be for sale, for a price... :-) Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Fa

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

> > Hadn't knew about mu metal. Thanks. :) Could be a nice thing for EM > > shielding, especially of things like transformers. > > Don't go jumping into the abyss without some knowledge. Right. Later I found mu-metal is just a fancy name for Permalloy which I worked with some time ago. > (ObCrede

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

"1972-73 doing Josephson junction experiments with superconducting quantum-interferometric devices, aka SQUIDs" Isn't that a little early for SQUIDs? -TD _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Tim May wrote: > > Regarding TEMPEST shielding - there is another, complementary approach > > for > > shielding: jamming. There are vendors selling devices that drown the RF > > emissions of computer equipment in noise, so TEMPEST receivers get > > nothing. Are there any publ

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 12:07 PM, Thomas Shaddack wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Mike Rosing wrote: I think you're over reacting. RFID tags only have a range of centimeters. You'd need a huge current to power them from more than 1 meter, and that's just not going to be out on a beach in a

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 11:22 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 01:53:55PM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: Nice post. I guess it's just a matter of time before someone is charged with disabling the RF signature of one of these tags. I'd guess that here in the US, the rule wil

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote: > This is incorrect. I interviewed one RFID tag maker who said up to 15 > feet in free space. Presumably a beefier transmitter or a more > sensitive receiver would allow longer ranges. I stand corrected, the one by Matrics looks very nice indeed: http:

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Mike Rosing wrote: > I think you're over reacting. RFID tags only have a range of centimeters. > You'd need a huge current to power them from more than 1 meter, and that's > just not going to be out on a beach in a hidden way. I heard these ones have range up to 1.5 meters. A

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

>Don't know about those tags, but my laptop used to set off the library > electronic detector. Some laptops carry a RFID tag, as "asset control" or how'sthatdamnedthingcalled. Newer Toshibas(?) have their configuration EEPROM chip (what is used today instead of CMOS RAM) as eg. AT24RF08 (chec

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 10:51:15AM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote: > I think you're over reacting. RFID tags only have a range of centimeters. > You'd need a huge current to power them from more than 1 meter, and that's > just not going to be out on a beach in a hidden way. This is incorrect. I intervi

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 01:53:55PM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: > Nice post. > > I guess it's just a matter of time before someone is charged with disabling > the RF signature of one of these tags. I'd guess that here in the US, the > rule will be "if you bought it you can disable it, but prior to

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

> I guess it's just a matter of time before someone is charged with disabling > the RF signature of one of these tags. I'd guess that here in the US, the > rule will be "if you bought it you can disable it, but prior to that you're > not allowed to jam it." We will see. All depends on how detecta

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Thomas Shaddack wrote: > Seems the trend is here. We can thank Benetton for providing us with > a playground for live tests of the capabilities and limits of the system. > > We have several ways for countermeasures. > > Passive countermeasures are shielding or tag destruction.

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

...one wonders if there's already some common electronics that emit in the same range as the scan, or if when "defective" (wink wink nudge nudge) will jam such a signal. -TD From: Thomas Shaddack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: cypherpunks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: B

Re: Brinwear at Benetton.

Seems the trend is here. We can thank Benetton for providing us with a playground for live tests of the capabilities and limits of the system. We have several ways for countermeasures. Passive countermeasures are shielding or tag destruction. We can locate the transceiver, then enclose it in a Fa