Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants start

2005-10-31 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 08:42:35PM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
 One thing to think about with respect to the RFID passports...
 
 Um, uh...surely once in a while the RFID tag is going to get corrupted or 
 something...right? I'd bet it ends up happening all the time. In those 
 cases they probably have to fall back upon the traditional passport usage 
 and inspection.

Actually, an RFID can be ridiculously reliable. It will also
depend on how much harassment a traveler will be exposed to, 
when travelling. Being barred from entry will definitely prove
sufficient deterrment.
 
 The only question is, what could (believably) damage the RFID?

Microwaving it will blow up the chip, and cause a scorched spot.
Severing the antenna would be enough for the chip to become mute.
Violetwanding or treating with a Tesla generator should destroy
all electronics quite reliably -- you always have to check, of
course.

Also, the ID is quite expensive, and a frequent traveller
will wind up with a considerable expense, and hassle.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants start

2005-10-31 Thread Major Variola (ret)
At 01:31 AM 10/30/05 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
They've said they'll fall back on the traditional
If we can't read the passport it's invalid and you'll need to
replace it before we'll let you leave the country technique,
just as they often do with expired passports and sometimes

What is the procedure (or are they secret :-) for passports which
become damaged whilst travelling out of country?

With a drivers license, if the magstrip doesn't work, they type
in the numbers.  But the biometrics are not encoded, its just
a convenience.  With a passport, they're relying on the
chip or no?

(Mechanical damage to the chip should work as well as
RF or antenna damage.  You will have to find the chip
and crack it, mere flexing of the paper carrier doesn't work
by design.)








Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants start

2005-10-31 Thread Roy M. Silvernail
Tyler Durden wrote:

 One thing to think about with respect to the RFID passports...

 Um, uh...surely once in a while the RFID tag is going to get corrupted
 or something...right? I'd bet it ends up happening all the time. In
 those cases they probably have to fall back upon the traditional
 passport usage and inspection.

 The only question is, what could (believably) damage the RFID?

EMP?  Could be tuned, even, since the RFID is resonant at a known
frequency.  There's a standard for excitation field strength, so all one
should need to do would be hit the chip with 50-100x the expected
input.  Unless the system is shunted with a zener or some such, you
should be able to fry it pretty easily.

Now put that chip-cooker in a trash can right by the main entrance to an
airport and perform some public service.

-- 
Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not
It's just this little chromium switch, here. - TFT
Dspam-pprocmail-/dev/null-bliss
http://www.rant-central.com



RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants start

2005-10-31 Thread Tyler Durden

One thing to think about with respect to the RFID passports...

Um, uh...surely once in a while the RFID tag is going to get corrupted or 
something...right? I'd bet it ends up happening all the time. In those cases 
they probably have to fall back upon the traditional passport usage and 
inspection.


The only question is, what could (believably) damage the RFID?

-TD


From: Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID  
implants starting in October 2006 [priv]]

Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:54:13 +0200

- Forwarded message from David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] -

From: David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 17:49:06 -0400
To: Ip Ip ip@v2.listbox.com
Subject: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants starting in
October 2006 [priv]
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Begin forwarded message:

From: Edward Hasbrouck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: October 28, 2005 11:07:28 AM EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants
starting in October 2006 [priv]


From: Lin, Herb [EMAIL PROTECTED]

*Front* cover?  Does that mean that if I hold the passport the wrong
way, the skimmer will have a free ride?


FWIW:

(1) The sample RFID passports that Frank Moss passed around at CFP,
which
looked like http://travel.state.gov/passport/eppt/eppt_2501.html, had
the RFID chip (which was barely detectable by feel) in the *back* cover.
The visible data page was/is, as with current passports, in the *front*
cover.  This is not compliant with the ICAO specifications, which
recommend having the chip in the same page as the visible data, to
make it
more difficult to separate them.  I can only guess that it was hard to
laminate the visible data without damaging the chip, if it was in the
same
page.  But it's interesting in light of the importance supposedly being
placed on compliance with ICAO standards.

(2) Moss had 2 sample RFID passports, 1 with and 1 without the
shielding.
He cliamed it was a layer in the entire outer cover (front and back),
but
it wasn't detectable by feel.

I have more threat scenarios for the latest flavor of RFID passport at:

http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000869.html



Edward Hasbrouck
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hasbrouck.org
+1-415-824-0214




-
You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

- End forwarded message -
--
Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which 
had a name of signature.asc]





Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] more on U.S. passports to receive RFID implants start

2005-10-31 Thread Bill Stewart

At 01:42 AM 10/30/2005, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:

Tyler Durden wrote:

 One thing to think about with respect to the RFID passports...

 Um, uh...surely once in a while the RFID tag is going to get corrupted
 or something...right? I'd bet it ends up happening all the time. In
 those cases they probably have to fall back upon the traditional
 passport usage and inspection.


They've said they'll fall back on the traditional
If we can't read the passport it's invalid and you'll need to
replace it before we'll let you leave the country technique,
just as they often do with expired passports and sometimes
do with just-about-to-expire passports if you're a
Suspicious-Acting Person like Dave del Torto.


 The only question is, what could (believably) damage the RFID?


If you want to damage the RFID of a passport you're playing with,
microwave ovens should do just fine.
I don't know if Rivest's RFID-blocker chips use the same
frequency or codespace as the passport RFIDs,
but you could also leave one of them in the back of your passport.


Now put that chip-cooker in a trash can right by the main entrance to an
airport and perform some public service.


I'd be surprised if you could put out enough energy to cook
the passport RFIDs of people walking by at normal speed
without also causing lots of other electrical problems.