Don’t want RFID chips in your driver’s license?
-Senator Adleson says
Sen. Tom Adelson ridicules those who object to human beings think to being tagging and tracked like livestock or inventory.
“I just like to think that when we get bill requests from people who line their hats with tinfoil that we look at those organizations before we carry the legislation.”
Is he saying that the inclusion of RFID technology in items such as our driver’s licenses is not worthy of concern? Or is it that, in his opinion, the drafters of the bill are unworthy of respect and therefore their work should be discounted?
Neither argument holds up very well and I don’t think Sen. Adelson’s theories about aluminum foil would entertain or impress these experts in the least;
The DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, the US Inspector General, or the OIG, The Electronic Privacy Information Center, IBM, the ACLU nor any of the other scores of other civil liberty and technology experts who have voiced opposition to using RFID for human identification.
In 2005 the Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee produced a report
“The use of RFID for Human Identification”
“Most difficult and troubling is the situation in which RFID is ostensibly used for tracking objects (medicine containers, for example), but can be in fact used for monitoring human behavior.
For these reasons, we recommend that RFID be disfavored for identifying and tracking human beings.”
In 2006 DHS’s Inspector General also expressed concerns; The Inspector General found that the new RFID bearing I 95 forms contained;
“security vulnerabilities that could be exploited to gain unauthorized or undetected access to sensitive data”
See :Additional Guidance and Security Controls Are Needed Over Systems Using RFID at DHS
53_Jul06.pdf. This OIG Report explains how
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified in a Congressional hearing against using Radio Frequency Identification technology to track individuals;
“Once a particular individual is identified through an RFID tag, personally identifiable information can be retrieved from any number of sources and then aggregated to develop a profile of the individual. Both tracking and profiling can compromise an individual’s privacy,”
HB 2569 is a very popular bill among those who are concerned with respecting and preserving our liberty and dignity. Your comments indicate that maybe you are not up to speed on RFID. Possibly you are unaware of the risks RFID poses when used for identification purposes.
There are many corporations who are literally banking on just the kind of uses that an uninformed person might brush off as “tinfoil hat” sounding.
Here are just two examples- Queralt and IBM;
Queralt Developing Behavior-Monitoring RFID Software
The core of Queralt’s system is the behavioral engine that includes a database, a rules engine and various algorithms. Information acquired by reading a tag on an asset or an individual, as well as those of other objects or individuals with which that asset or person may come into contact, and information from sensors …The engine then logs and processes the data to create baselines, or behavioral patterns.
Identification and tracking of persons using RFID-tagged items IBM Patent United States patent application 20020165758. Hind, John R. “Identification and Tracking of Persons Using RFID-Tagged Items.”.IBM 2002;
There is no argument about what it is that RFID does, that is straightforward enough.
The conflict boils down to the question of risk versus benefits and the answer that you come up with, depends on what you value.
The benefits to individuals that are coerced into bearing the devices, has been admitted to be exactly zero by the industries pushing for such use from the start.
The benefits to industry are obvious and the benefit of keeping such close tabs on the population for the government is worrisome to say the least.
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.
While Senator Adelson taunts those who advocate for restrictions upon governmental micromanagement of ordinary and law abiding people, he is missing entirely the fact that his own ignorance is showing.
Gov. Henry vetoes bill on high-tech ID card tags
So now what?
Call or email the legislators who carried the bill first and let them know you support them in asking for an override
Rep. Paul Wesselhoft
Phone (405) 557-7343
Senator Dan Newberry
Then call House members and ask them to support the override;