RFID Tagging: Final Report

Stephanie Allen, Gina Calcaterra, Michael Gray, Rahul Nair, Sumit Pahwa, Edward Robertson

MGT 6772

Outline

Technology Review– Active and Passive

Legal Issues on Privacy Successes and Failures

– Review of existing RFID implementations Consumer Concerns Business Case Big Picture and the Future of RFID

Technology Review - I

Active RFID– Tags have internal power source– Larger computational capability and memory– Sensors can be added on board– Long range – Several thousand can be read by a single reader– More expensive (several dollars to >$200)– Life cycle limited by power source

Technology Review - II

Passive RFID– Tags powered by transmitted reader energy– Short range– Limited multi-read capability– Very small onboard cache (~128 kb)– Virtually infinite lifetime– High powered reader is needed– Very low cost (~20 cents)

Active RFID Passive RFID

Area Monitoring Yes No

Cargo security Very sophisticated

Simple applications

Electronic Manifests

Yes No

Business process impact

Minimal Minimal to substantial

Active Vs Passive RFID

Uses of Active RFID

External Powered– MARTA buses– Rental cars

Self-powered (battery/solar)– Shipping containers

Future Federal mandates for cargo

– Storage containers Naval aircraft engines

Uses of Passive RFID

Inventory– Supply chain optimization– Near real-time stocking information

Retail– “No-wait” checkout– Alternative to credit cards

Personal– Smart appliances– Georgia Tech “Aware Home”

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/fce/ahri/

Privacy vs. Location: Case I

Case I: While RFID is still under control of retailer or wholesaler.

Easy Case. All reasonable consumers know that as they pass through the security gates that they are being scanned for stolen merchandise.

Case II: RFID in Waste or Recycling Receptacle.

More complicated. “having deposited their garbage in an area

particularly suited for public inspection and, in a manner of speaking, public consumption, for the express purpose of having strangers take it, respondents could have had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the inculpatory items that they discarded." (486 U.S. 35 1988).

Case III: Everything in Between

Clearly murkiest case. As of yet there is no clear precedent on this

issue and a lack of parallels in the precedent that does exist.

Legal Academics: Four prong “Box Test”

“Box Test”

The four prongs are: – the Political Prong– the Moral Prong– the Teleological Prong– the Deontological Prong

Political Prong

Impact on social institutions?

How might the recognition of such a right affect a judicial system?

What would the consequences be for the social and judicially endorsed principle of personal privacy?

Moral Prong

Is it "fair" to hold the use or possession of RFID containing product to constitute a waiver of privacy?

Is it fair to require that, as the price of enjoying the benefits of a context-aware sensing application in one's home, one must forgo a right to privacy that one would otherwise have?

Teleological Prong

How will the goal of maintaining the status of the home as the central case of privacy be furthered by distinguishing the privacy interests in the RFID tag data depending upon the room from which it originated?

Deontological Prong

For the purposes of the mutual access/joint control rule, does the presence of the RFID transceiver constitute shared access and control over an individual's bedroom?

Legal Conclusions

No legal liability for passive RFID devices. Test is an Academic Solution to an Academic

problem. Experts confident passive RFID is physically

incapable of breaching 10 foot parameter. However, analysis may unfold and emerge in

context of active RFID.

Push-Pull

Push– Retail – employee training costs, dubious value– Item-level tracking – software/hardware difficulties– Privacy an issue

Pull– Supply chain – value is worth the expense– Privacy not an issue (the customer asked for it)

Some correlation between Push & Failure, and

Pull & Success

Where RFID is not successful

Item-Level Tracking in the Retail Industry– This shows no promise anytime in the near future

Pallet and Case Level tracking. – Cost is too high for most manufacturers– RFID tags are not at the 90% reliability rate– RFID manufacturers are working to correct known problems.– No Standardization

Problems for Prada

After two years Prada is re-evaluating their Epicenter concept.

Employees refuse to learn how to use the technology and claim the store is just too crowded to give the personal attention

The smart closets rarely recognized the RFID tags and when they do the systems crash

The hand-held readers are placed behind the counters to keep tourists from playing with them

Customers aren’t comfortable with the RFID tags

Solutions (Benetton?)

Education– Tesco has dedicated a section of their website to explaining

RFID technology to their customers Standards

– Cooperation among RFID manufacturers and support technologies

Quality– Manufacturers need to work to improve known bugs such

as the inability to read RFID tags through liquid and metal Higher Volumes

– Cost will decrease as volume increases

Where is RFID proving to be successful?

Development of RFID Smart tags that allow consumers to do multiple actions and save time

Animal microchipping

Containing the spread of disease– Tracking SARS contacts

Why is RFID successful in these cases?

When the perceived benefit outweighs the cost of losing privacy, consumers are willing to bow down.

Payoffs of saving time and versatile uses for the consumer outweigh the privacy concerns (ex. Octopus card)

Privacy of the consumer is not directly threatened (animal microchipping)

Cases in which RFID has the potential to contain disease (tagging SARS contacts)

Solutions to Consumer Concerns

Kill tags at checkout The “Faraday Cage” approach Active Jamming “Smart” RFID tags

But the most promising solution being explored right now.....

Blocker Tags

Universal vs. Selective Low implementation cost Prototype released in February by RSA Laboratories

and MIT Advantageous over the “Kill Tag” approach, useful

aspects of RFID for consumers are retained Current concern: Are these solutions biased towards

the technology elite?

RFID business case - I

Build a solid team– Not just an IT problem– Involve customers and suppliers

Educate team and management Identify opportunities

– Identify all possible applications Evaluate benefits

– Visibility, customer satisfaction, process disruption, core-competency

RFID business case - II

Identify and analyze candidate deployments– Run the business (RTB) costs– Grow the business (GTB) costs– Transform the business (TTB) costs

Examine financial impact Create the blueprint

– Consider partnering a consulting/technology firm Find the bottom line

The Big Picture

Examine RFID in its entirety Do not play “follow the leader” Standards will change/be set Costs of tags and readers will change Tag capabilities will change Revisit/revaluate decisions periodically

Failure can affect relationships and/or brand image

The Future of RFID

Active RFID is a success today, and will continue to be in the future

Passive RFID is coming in a big way– Customer-driven in retail & personal use

Educate consumers Resolve privacy issues, both real and perceived Focus on what adds value for the customer first

– Cost-driven in business use Improvements to tracking hardware/software

Questions?

The Lunatic Fringe

Population tracking– Involuntary tagging for “national security”

purposes (similar to livestock tagging)

Tracking cash transactions– Euros have RFID– U.S. dollars have “metal strip”

“Mark of the Beast”– Biblical references in the book of Revelation