For one thing, NFC devices are being used to read passive RFID (13.56 MHz ISO/IEC 18000-3) infrastructure tags, for example for interactive advertising or outdoor billboards.
Second you can destroy data from an NFC with an RFID Jammer.
Third, it has not been confirmed what will be used -- as RFID can interoperate with NFC -- for all we know, RFID is what Apple may implement!
Fourth, without being able to control all outgoing connections, ala Little Snitch or similar, there are all sorts of implications for tags which could be acted upon without your authorization -- we don't know enough about the implementation yet.
Fifth, NFC opens the door to all kinds of RFID tag privacy issues, plus it would now give a standalone RFID tag a network connection conduit...
Sixth, how do you explain ISO/IEC 14443: This standard is a popular HF (13.56 MHz) standard for HighFIDs which is being used as the basis of RFID-enabled passports under ICAO 9303. The Near Field Communication standard that lets mobile devices act as RFID readers/transponders is also based on ISO/IEC 14443.
Lastly, WHAT differences were you hoping to point out? You made no particular points!
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil, as Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Foundation shows:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman
Are you out of your mind!
Note: Please understand the difference between NFC and RFID! They are two different things! Your video is also about RFID not NFC.
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil...
Not all of us wear hats that can also be used to hold our electronic devices.
PS: Aren?t you afraid of posting on an internet forum? You email address and IP address is known to the government. They know where you are. If you pose a threat to their super-secret goal they could come after you? once and for all.
Haha, the first amendment is a good thing -- education is power -- from some of the replies here, one has to wonder if many would rather just stay ignorant?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron
Not all of us wear hats that can also be used to hold our electronic devices.
PS: Aren?t you afraid of posting on an internet forum? You email address and IP address is known to the government. They know where you are. If you pose a threat to their super-secret goal they could come after you? once and for all.
True they are very different, but I see no reason why NFC cannot cannot be used as for RFID. It is not passive so there is power cost but to get the security I would want, it would require more than just being able to read an ID, as in RFID. Also unless I am mistaken at least some RFID solutions can be used from 6-10 meters away whereas NFC is typically 20-30 cm. The restriction on distance is a good thing as far as I am concerned with security. Less spying ability (I would think). Also I think NFC could also be used to negotiate a more robust wi-fi network connection e.g., bluetooth that would then carry the load of negotiating other options for the user. Too me NFC enables some smarts that I don't see plain ole RFID providing and more importantly it can be dynamic.
You are right in that one could use Near Field for RFID however that is not the best use of RFID nor Near Field capabilities. The reason that you can communicate with RFID chips over long distances of several meters, is that it operates in the far field region of the RFID antenna. Have a look at the following page for the formula used in defining the near field and far field regions of an antenna.
In the far field your are dealing with travelling waves, radiation, hence you can communicate over several meters. Or if you have got more powerful RFID systems, active RFID, you may go to longer distances.
In the near field, you are dealing with the inductive coupling of two antennas. Actually in this case, since there is no radiation, we no longer use the term antenna. The antenna is now referred to as coil. And the near field communication is the changes in the inductive coupling between of the two coils (receiver and transmitter coils)
Current NFC devices have a maximum range of 20cm. Hence you cannot use them for wifi applications or anything of the sort. This is not a technology limitation but Electromagnetic fields limitation.
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil, as Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Foundation shows:
The unique twist is that it is STILL inherently insecure, it is STILL a spychip in essence, and you are STILL best served WITHOUT RFID/NFC!
If you carry a cell phone you are already trackable electronically. If you use a credit card you are tracked that way too.
Quote:
In review, for your final exam:
After the first link I didn't bother looking at the others as the first one was full of BS. It is nothing more than a web site designed to appeal to idiots and the paranoid. I'd seriously question your judgement as a person simply for implying that the links are credible in any way.
Quote:
RFID/NFC is nothing but a spychip -- having one in a phone isn't much different than being chipped like a dog, see:
For one thing, NFC devices are being used to read passive RFID (13.56 MHz ISO/IEC 18000-3) infrastructure tags, for example for interactive advertising or outdoor billboards.
Second you can destroy data from an NFC with an RFID Jammer.
Third, it has not been confirmed what will be used -- as RFID can interoperate with NFC -- for all we know, RFID is what Apple may implement!
Fourth, without being able to control all outgoing connections, ala Little Snitch or similar, there are all sorts of implications for tags which could be acted upon without your authorization -- we don't know enough about the implementation yet.
Fifth, NFC opens the door to all kinds of RFID tag privacy issues, plus it would now give a standalone RFID tag a network connection conduit...
Sixth, how do you explain ISO/IEC 14443: This standard is a popular HF (13.56 MHz) standard for HighFIDs which is being used as the basis of RFID-enabled passports under ICAO 9303. The Near Field Communication standard that lets mobile devices act as RFID readers/transponders is also based on ISO/IEC 14443.
Lastly, WHAT differences were you hoping to point out? You made no particular points!
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil, as Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Foundation shows:
LMAO, he looks like he used the foil from his tinfoil hat. Beardy weirdy. Do you think he also hugs trees?
What could RFID be used for? Social networking? If not, why? If so, why? Other suggestions?
The data rate for NFC is low. It creates a very small looped, secure connection.
Practically speaking, NFC has a better rate of data throughput than bluetooth does. The classic variant does 106 kbps, and there are 2x, 4x, and 8x variants. The connection model for NFC is also extremely simple, so there isn't a ton of packet overhead the way there is with Bluetooth or WiFi.
But seriously: data rate is not very important for many types of bursty communications. If all you need to send is 64 bytes, or even 256 bytes, I can show you a 50 kbps radio that will outperform even the fastest 802.11n. A twitter post is less than 256 bytes, as is a text message, so there are plenty of applications that only use light data. Also, for what it's worth, the voice channel of cellular phones is streaming (not bursty), but I'm pretty sure it is lower than 20 kpbs.
Tin foil is hard to come by - hope you don't mind using aluminum for that hat.
Note to self: Buy Alcoa
It's amazing how paranoid Americans are about smartcards & NFC, technologies that are proven in the real world to increase consumer security massively. Everywhere in the world, thieves look for American credit cards because they are so easy to hack. Every time you give you card to a waiter in a restaurant, you are risking identity theft. Not so with smartcards or phone-based NFC. In terms of privacy and security, Europe & Korea/Japan are light years ahead of us, and they are far more "connected."
Richard Stallman is a nutcase, but we've known that to be true for over 20 years. Maybe if he took a trip to one of the countries that already uses lots of NFC, he would change his thick mind.
This is a case where you would want to use NFC not RFID since RFID tags typically only contain a small amount of data (not sure if it enough to insure a UUID?).
NFC is basically a rebranding of RFID @ 13.56 MHz. There's a little more to it than that, but not much. Most of the time when you read about "RFID" in the news, they are talking about a similar technology that operates in the 900 MHz area, and is mostly a contactless barcode.
The chip should be removable like a sim for those who don't want it or need to transfer it to another device or when disposing of an old device, changing bank accounts etc.
Best post of the day. Unfortunately, this doesn't match Apple's typical hardware profile, which is to keep things embedded and "simple". For the most part I agree with Apple's mindset, but not with something that can potentially be used for geo-tracking and profiling without physical contact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
So how many of you want google knowing your buying habit with an e-wallet feature built into a android device. Not only will they know your location and which websites you may frequent, they will have access to your buying habits so they can market to you even more focused than ever. Imagine you walking by a store that using e-wallet transaction and a advertisement pops up on your phone tell you they have deal on the product you buy all the time in the store you just walked by.
Hell I hat that googlemail read a transaction receipt that was email to me and then stated placing ads base on the receipt. BTW, I made the transaction on another computer which was not mine and the only way google new i bought this product is because of this email since I never bought this product in the past or will in the future. I stopped using googlemail after that.
Remember, gmail is NOT free, even as much as people will try to tell you that it is. You've found out the hard way, but it's also important that people understand when they use a service like gmail that they are giving not only their own information to google to use as they see fit, but also the information of anyone and everyone they are communicating with. Borderline evil.
Comments
I missed something I guess ("Blatant Trolling")
How does that make him a troll?
How does that make him a troll?
You should know the rules by now - anyone who says anything negative about Apple, even in jest, is a troll.
You should know the rules by now - anyone who says anything negative about Apple, even in jest, is a troll.
I just owned up to it right off the bat is all.
For one thing, NFC devices are being used to read passive RFID (13.56 MHz ISO/IEC 18000-3) infrastructure tags, for example for interactive advertising or outdoor billboards.
Second you can destroy data from an NFC with an RFID Jammer.
Third, it has not been confirmed what will be used -- as RFID can interoperate with NFC -- for all we know, RFID is what Apple may implement!
Fourth, without being able to control all outgoing connections, ala Little Snitch or similar, there are all sorts of implications for tags which could be acted upon without your authorization -- we don't know enough about the implementation yet.
Fifth, NFC opens the door to all kinds of RFID tag privacy issues, plus it would now give a standalone RFID tag a network connection conduit...
Sixth, how do you explain ISO/IEC 14443: This standard is a popular HF (13.56 MHz) standard for HighFIDs which is being used as the basis of RFID-enabled passports under ICAO 9303. The Near Field Communication standard that lets mobile devices act as RFID readers/transponders is also based on ISO/IEC 14443.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication
Here's an NFC-focused security paper, which also talks about RFID a little:
http://events.iaik.tugraz.at/RFIDSec...20in%20NFC.pdf
Lastly, WHAT differences were you hoping to point out? You made no particular points!
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil, as Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Foundation shows:
Are you out of your mind!
Note: Please understand the difference between NFC and RFID! They are two different things! Your video is also about RFID not NFC.
No, mind is intact -- how about yours?
[?]
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil...
Not all of us wear hats that can also be used to hold our electronic devices.
PS: Aren?t you afraid of posting on an internet forum? You email address and IP address is known to the government. They know where you are. If you pose a threat to their super-secret goal they could come after you? once and for all.
Not all of us wear hats that can also be used to hold our electronic devices.
PS: Aren?t you afraid of posting on an internet forum? You email address and IP address is known to the government. They know where you are. If you pose a threat to their super-secret goal they could come after you? once and for all.
True they are very different, but I see no reason why NFC cannot cannot be used as for RFID. It is not passive so there is power cost but to get the security I would want, it would require more than just being able to read an ID, as in RFID. Also unless I am mistaken at least some RFID solutions can be used from 6-10 meters away whereas NFC is typically 20-30 cm. The restriction on distance is a good thing as far as I am concerned with security. Less spying ability (I would think). Also I think NFC could also be used to negotiate a more robust wi-fi network connection e.g., bluetooth that would then carry the load of negotiating other options for the user. Too me NFC enables some smarts that I don't see plain ole RFID providing and more importantly it can be dynamic.
You are right in that one could use Near Field for RFID however that is not the best use of RFID nor Near Field capabilities. The reason that you can communicate with RFID chips over long distances of several meters, is that it operates in the far field region of the RFID antenna. Have a look at the following page for the formula used in defining the near field and far field regions of an antenna.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_distance
In the far field your are dealing with travelling waves, radiation, hence you can communicate over several meters. Or if you have got more powerful RFID systems, active RFID, you may go to longer distances.
In the near field, you are dealing with the inductive coupling of two antennas. Actually in this case, since there is no radiation, we no longer use the term antenna. The antenna is now referred to as coil. And the near field communication is the changes in the inductive coupling between of the two coils (receiver and transmitter coils)
Current NFC devices have a maximum range of 20cm. Hence you cannot use them for wifi applications or anything of the sort. This is not a technology limitation but Electromagnetic fields limitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_fi...specifications
Apologies for submitting a very long post.
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil, as Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Foundation shows:
I know where you should put that tin foil.
Mark of The Beast... coming soon to an Apple store near you.
The unique twist is that it is STILL inherently insecure, it is STILL a spychip in essence, and you are STILL best served WITHOUT RFID/NFC!
If you carry a cell phone you are already trackable electronically. If you use a credit card you are tracked that way too.
In review, for your final exam:
After the first link I didn't bother looking at the others as the first one was full of BS. It is nothing more than a web site designed to appeal to idiots and the paranoid. I'd seriously question your judgement as a person simply for implying that the links are credible in any way.
RFID/NFC is nothing but a spychip -- having one in a phone isn't much different than being chipped like a dog, see:
http://spychips.com - how RFID will compromise privacy, security, freedom
and watch the free documentary movie that covers this topic:
http://freedomtofascism.com America: Freedom to Fascism
RFID/NFC is also inherently insecure, just watch:
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvi...easily_hacked/
Nothing in this world is totally secure, even a 1911 malfunctions from time to time.
What exactly is the attraction with these "check-in" apps? Is it the logical result of helicopter parenting? Helicopter everything? How horrible.
I have no idea, but they seem to be popular. (I have never used one myself though)
No, mind is intact -- how about yours?
For one thing, NFC devices are being used to read passive RFID (13.56 MHz ISO/IEC 18000-3) infrastructure tags, for example for interactive advertising or outdoor billboards.
Second you can destroy data from an NFC with an RFID Jammer.
Third, it has not been confirmed what will be used -- as RFID can interoperate with NFC -- for all we know, RFID is what Apple may implement!
Fourth, without being able to control all outgoing connections, ala Little Snitch or similar, there are all sorts of implications for tags which could be acted upon without your authorization -- we don't know enough about the implementation yet.
Fifth, NFC opens the door to all kinds of RFID tag privacy issues, plus it would now give a standalone RFID tag a network connection conduit...
Sixth, how do you explain ISO/IEC 14443: This standard is a popular HF (13.56 MHz) standard for HighFIDs which is being used as the basis of RFID-enabled passports under ICAO 9303. The Near Field Communication standard that lets mobile devices act as RFID readers/transponders is also based on ISO/IEC 14443.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication
Here's an NFC-focused security paper, which also talks about RFID a little:
http://events.iaik.tugraz.at/RFIDSec...20in%20NFC.pdf
Lastly, WHAT differences were you hoping to point out? You made no particular points!
The best thing to do with RFID tags that you cannot destroy, is to wrap them in aluminum foil, as Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Foundation shows:
LMAO, he looks like he used the foil from his tinfoil hat. Beardy weirdy. Do you think he also hugs trees?
No, mind is intact -- how about yours?
Tin foil is hard to come by - hope you don't mind using aluminum for that hat.
Note to self: Buy Alcoa
What could RFID be used for? Social networking? If not, why? If so, why? Other suggestions?
The data rate for NFC is low. It creates a very small looped, secure connection.
Practically speaking, NFC has a better rate of data throughput than bluetooth does. The classic variant does 106 kbps, and there are 2x, 4x, and 8x variants. The connection model for NFC is also extremely simple, so there isn't a ton of packet overhead the way there is with Bluetooth or WiFi.
But seriously: data rate is not very important for many types of bursty communications. If all you need to send is 64 bytes, or even 256 bytes, I can show you a 50 kbps radio that will outperform even the fastest 802.11n. A twitter post is less than 256 bytes, as is a text message, so there are plenty of applications that only use light data. Also, for what it's worth, the voice channel of cellular phones is streaming (not bursty), but I'm pretty sure it is lower than 20 kpbs.
Tin foil is hard to come by - hope you don't mind using aluminum for that hat.
Note to self: Buy Alcoa
It's amazing how paranoid Americans are about smartcards & NFC, technologies that are proven in the real world to increase consumer security massively. Everywhere in the world, thieves look for American credit cards because they are so easy to hack. Every time you give you card to a waiter in a restaurant, you are risking identity theft. Not so with smartcards or phone-based NFC. In terms of privacy and security, Europe & Korea/Japan are light years ahead of us, and they are far more "connected."
Richard Stallman is a nutcase, but we've known that to be true for over 20 years. Maybe if he took a trip to one of the countries that already uses lots of NFC, he would change his thick mind.
This is a case where you would want to use NFC not RFID since RFID tags typically only contain a small amount of data (not sure if it enough to insure a UUID?).
NFC is basically a rebranding of RFID @ 13.56 MHz. There's a little more to it than that, but not much. Most of the time when you read about "RFID" in the news, they are talking about a similar technology that operates in the 900 MHz area, and is mostly a contactless barcode.
The chip should be removable like a sim for those who don't want it or need to transfer it to another device or when disposing of an old device, changing bank accounts etc.
Best post of the day. Unfortunately, this doesn't match Apple's typical hardware profile, which is to keep things embedded and "simple". For the most part I agree with Apple's mindset, but not with something that can potentially be used for geo-tracking and profiling without physical contact.
So how many of you want google knowing your buying habit with an e-wallet feature built into a android device. Not only will they know your location and which websites you may frequent, they will have access to your buying habits so they can market to you even more focused than ever. Imagine you walking by a store that using e-wallet transaction and a advertisement pops up on your phone tell you they have deal on the product you buy all the time in the store you just walked by.
Hell I hat that googlemail read a transaction receipt that was email to me and then stated placing ads base on the receipt. BTW, I made the transaction on another computer which was not mine and the only way google new i bought this product is because of this email since I never bought this product in the past or will in the future. I stopped using googlemail after that.
Remember, gmail is NOT free, even as much as people will try to tell you that it is. You've found out the hard way, but it's also important that people understand when they use a service like gmail that they are giving not only their own information to google to use as they see fit, but also the information of anyone and everyone they are communicating with. Borderline evil.