Radio frequency identification: ubiquity for humanity

The Authors

Lara Srivastava, ITU New Initiatives Programme Director with the Strategy and Policy Unit, International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Geneva, Switzerland.

Acknowledgements

© ITU. More information about the activities of the ITU's Strategy and Policy Unit can be found at: www.itu.int/spu. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the ITU or its membership. This paper is based on a full-length case study on RFID technology by Lara Srivastava available at www.itu.int/ubiquitous

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to discuss the burgeoning area of radio-frequency identification (RFID), which uses radio waves to automatically identify and track individual items.

Design/methodology/approach – The paper begins by outlining the benefits and utility of RFID technology, through an examination of its technological characteristics, current applications, state of the market and future trends. The paper focuses on consumer applications for RFID, such as sports, lifestyle and leisure, and personal safety. It then explores some of the important implications of the technology and concludes with considerations of a socio-ethical nature, including concerns related to individual privacy and human development.

Findings – The paper finds that RFID technology has tremendous potential to ease life and to improve the human condition. Still, further innovation and industrial deployment of this technology should be done in parallel with a careful exploration of all related aspects. No one can deny that the expansion of such “anywhere, anytime” communication technologies, for “anyone and anything”, will bring about increased convenience, greater access and a whole host of innovative applications and services. However, the capacity of these technologies to impact human lives (private and public) will grow correspondingly. This brings to mind the notion of the “Faustian Bargain” in the context of technological change: while a given technological advancement may improve many aspects of daily life, it also runs the risk of reducing the advantages of earlier developments or earlier ways of life. It is only through an increasing awareness of this risk that humanity (and societal progress) can be preserved in what has become an ever-expanding sea of technology and automation.

Originality/value – The study presents an overview of technological benefits while expressing a balanced approach as to the potential concerns and implications.

Article Type:

General review

Keyword(s):

Radio frequencies; Identification; Privacy; Data security; Networking.

Journal:

info

Volume:

Number:

Year:

2007

pp:

4-14

Copyright ©

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

ISSN:

1463-6697

Introduction

Technology today is a pivotal aspect of daily life – it use has become an afterthought, rather than a tool that must be actively employed. At the same time, the power of microprocessors has doubled about every 18 months over the last three decades. Building on “anytime and anywhere” information and communication technology, the appearance of “anything communications” will revolutionise the telecommunication landscape. But for information and communication access to be truly and seamlessly embedded in the environment surrounding us, however, the exponential growth of networked devices is required together with the creation of ubiquitous computing.

The late Mark Weiser outlined such a vision over a decade ago of a world in which technologies “weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it” (Weiser, 1991), declaring that the most profound technologies are those that disappear. Already, human beings are more often connected to a network than not, through personal computers and handheld devices, at work, at home and on the road. Indeed, the mobile phone is an early example of ubiquitous technologies and clearly there is much potential for this device to become more pervasive, increasingly personal, and multi-functional.

However, imagine a future in which not only mobile phones, but also all consumer products (from razors to toothbrushes) might be tracked using tiny radio transmitters, or tagged with embedded hyperlinks. Such labels will ultimately transform the way that products are distributed, sold and purchased, and perhaps eventually how people are identified and how they communicate. Delivering on the promise of “anything” communications is currently limited by the ability to collect raw data about where things are located and about ongoing changes in their status. Radio-frequency identification (RFID) provides just such a capacity. RFID is at the core of the aptly-named “internet of things” and is a key enabler of the ubiquitous network society. RFID refers to those technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify and track individual items. It may be seen to fall into the family of short-range wireless technologies, such as ZigBee and Bluetooth, but with a higher capacity for tracking and computing.

The workings of RFID

RFID is hardly new. RFID is the combination of radio technology and radar. An early application of RFID emerged during the Second World War: the “identification of friend or foe” (IFF) programme saw the first generation of identification tags into military aircraft. Following the development of radio and radar, RFID techniques were explored further in the 1950s. In the late 1960s, radio frequency began to be used for the identification and monitoring of nuclear and other hazardous materials.

Work on RFID began to blossom in the 1970s and 1980s when developers, inventors, companies, universities, and governments actively developed RFID applications in their laboratories. The technology underwent enhancements aimed at reducing cost and size, as well as power requirements and communication range. This set the stage for mass market RFID. In the 1999s, millions of RFID tags made their way into applications including toll roads, entry access cards and container tracking. The first mass-market deployment of RFID was in electronic toll collection (e.g. Oklahoma, USA, 1991). Since then, technical standards have emerged, together with new applications (such as RFID in athletics), and the technology is slowly becoming part of everyday life. RFID is being used as a generic term that can be used to designate the identification at a distance by radio frequencies. It has the key advantage of suffering very little from obstruction or interference (IDTechEx, 2004).

RFID technology can be described as a means of identifying a person or object using electromagnetic radiation. Frequencies currently used are typically 125 kHz (low frequency), 13.56 MHz (high frequency), or 800-960 MHz (ultra high frequency). RFID enables the automated collection of product, time, place, and transaction information.

An RFID system consist of two main components: a transponder to carry data (e.g. a tag), which is located on the object to be identified and an interrogator (or reader) to read the transmitted data (e.g. on a device that is handheld or embedded in a wall). Regardless of whether the interrogator is a read only or read/write device, it is always referred to as a “reader”. Many readers are fitted with an additional interface (i.e. middleware) to enable them to forward the data received to another system, such as a personal computer, the robot control system (Finkenzeller, 2003), and even the global Internet. Most tags are no bigger than a grain of sand (i.e. less than 1/3 mm wide), and are typically encapsulated inside a glass or plastic module. One of the smallest RFID tags was developed by the YRP Laboratory in Japan, and measures 15mm ( The Guardian Unlimited, 2003). The battery can last two years. Compared with tags, readers are larger, more expensive and power-hungry, though developments are already underway to shrink reader size along with tag size. Companies like Skyetech and Innovision are lead developers in this area, with the smallest battery-powered reader now measuring less than 12×2 mm.

RFID is much more than the next generation of bar codes. It creates a variety of interfaces that can connect computers directly to individual physical items, and even to people. For instance, all Gillette Mach 3 razor blades would have the same bar code. However, with RFID tags, each packet of these blades would have its own unique identifier that can be transmitted to suitably located readers for monitoring. At the moment, the Electronic Product Code (EPC) is the dominant standard for the data contained RFID tags for item-level tracking. The EPC can hold more data than a bar code, and becomes in some sense a mini database embedded in the item. Second, RFID allows data capture without the need for a line of sight, another significant advance over the bar code ( Logistics Management, 2004). This means that the need for physical manipulation or access to individual items (often stacked or piled) is virtually eliminated for purposes of identification and tracking. This is not the case with the bar code, which must be “seen” at close range by scanners in order to be identified. Some applications limit the read range of RFID tags to between 0.15-0.20 metres, but the majority have a range of around a metre. Newer tags in the UHF frequency bands could even have a range of 6-7.5 metres (AIM, 2004).

RFID tags have the potential of containing anything from item location and pricing information to washing instructions, banking details and medical records ( The Guardian Unlimited, 2003). RFID is also being embedded under the human skin for purposes of authentication, location and transaction ( RFID Gazette, 2004), and is under consideration as a mechanism for tracking bank notes ( Wired News, 2003) and passports ( RFID Journal, 2004).

RFID for consumers

Although they may not always be aware of it, individual consumers have already been using RFID: on toll roads, in offices, in hospitals, in libraries. Over the next few years, these small tags will be increasingly used to add further convenience to day-to-day living, from sports events to retail shopping. This section describes a selection of consumer applications of RFID.

Personal and goods safety

As RFID tags are location-sensitive, they can be used to enhance personal safety in general. In this context, not only have schools begun deploying RFID to keep track of pupils, but public leisure parks are using the technology to attract families concerned for the personal safety of their children and elderly relatives. Large shopping malls and department stores may not be far behind, particularly as many have begun using RFID readers and tags for tracking inventory.

At Legoland in Denmark, for instance, parents can use RFID-enabled wristbands provided by the park's administration to monitor their children's whereabouts. Parents and guardians wishing to locate separated or missing children simply use their mobile phone to send a text message to an application labelled “kidspotter”. The latter rapidly replies by text message with the details of the child's last location, such as coordinates, name of park area, etc. (ITU, 2005a). In Japan too, the Rikkyo Primary School in Tokyo carried out an RFID trial in September 2004 to monitor the comings and goings of its students in real-time. The system records the exact time a student enters or leaves the campus, and restricts entry to school grounds. Since tags can be read by scanners from a distance of up to 10 metres, students are no longer required to stop at designated checkpoints. In this manner, parents can also check when children arrive and leave school premises.

RFID technology has also been used to protect expensive personal objects, e.g. cars, yachts, watches, musical instruments and so on. In Germany, for example, Philips Semiconductors introduced an RFID labelling system to protect recreational boats (of which there are 660,000 in the country) from theft through secure electronic identification. In the past, boats were simply identified by painting numbers on them, a system that was prone to fraudulent removal or modification. Since RFID tags allow the identity of a boat to be determined remotely, German authorities can check the status of a boat against their databases of stolen and registered boats, without the need for a search warrant. Musical instruments, too, can be protected from theft through the use of RFID tags. Many instruments cost over USD1,000 and some custom-built or vintage guitars, for instance, can cost more than USD50,000 each. Often, however, they are sold or pawned for a fraction of their worth. They are hard to track down, as many models look alike. RFID maker Snagg has created chips no bigger than a grain of rice designed for protecting instruments. Snagg's database is available to law enforcement officials, dealers, manufacturers of string instruments, and repair shops (ExtremeTech.com, 2004). Perhaps one of the more unusual use of RFID is in cemeteries and morgues, where the technology has been used to secure graves and even individual corpses (RFIDBuzz.com, 2005; Wired News, 2005).

Other than casinos and sporting events, RFID technology has made an appearance in multiple leisure and entertainment industries. For example, it is increasingly being deployed in libraries to automate the loan and return of library materials. The Vatican Library, which houses some of the world's most precious books, uses RFID to secure the books and monitor their whereabouts ( RFID Gazette, 2006).

Sports and health

In the sporting world, RFID tags have been used in marathons to track runners, allowing both participants and spectators to benefit from the combination of mobile SMS and RFID: the tag is known as the “ChampionChip” and is attached to the runner's shoe or wheelchair. As runners cross stationary mats along the racecourse, their time is recorded, and sent by SMS to interested spectators (ITU, 2004). RFID technology has also been used to determine with remarkable accuracy the winner in an Indy 500 car race by tracking cars as they pass the finish line.

Hands-free access systems using RFID for ski lifts have been introduced since the last 1990s. For instance, in 1999, Texas Instruments together with the Austrian company TeamAxess deployed an RFID system for access to ski lifts and slopes in Europe. Remote-operated gates equipped with readers can detect a valid ski pass and open automatically, thus leading to shorter line-ups and more efficient customer processing. The credit-card sized RFID-enabled ski pass can easily fit into a jacket pocket, and is scanned in place, thus obviating the need for manipulation (Texas Instruments, n.d.). The passes can also be used to locate skiers (e.g. in cases of injury, or for the location of children).

In the travel and hospitality industries, RFID tags are enhancing and facilitating customer service. Manchester City Football Club in the UK was the first football club in Europe to adopt RFID, thereby giving fans ticket-less access to football grounds and significantly reducing the time it takes spectators to enter the grounds (Deloitte Consulting, 2005).

RFID can also help in caring for patients in hospital. It can be used to protect newborn infants from abduction ( Information Week, 2005). In Germany, the Klinikum Saarbrucken hospital equips patients of all ages with tagged wristbands to monitor their condition and adjust drug doses correspondingly (ComputerWeekly.com, 2005). Similarly, in Taiwan, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital provides its surgical patients with RFID wristbands loaded with patient data. Plans are underway to extend the use of RFID chips to surgical premises and blood supplies ( RFID Journal, 2005). RFID offers the distinct advantage of enabling the accurate matching of blood samples/transfusions to the correct patient through non-line-of-sight data transmission, which can be carried out through and around the human body, clothing, bed coverings and non-metallic materials (see, for instance RF Design, 2004).

Shopping and dining out

Wal-Mart was the first to deploy item-based tagging using RFID for the purposes of streamlining their supply chain. Other major stores such as Tesco (UK), Metro AG (Germany), Home Depot (USA), and Mitsukoshi (Japan) are among the growing list of large retailers joining this new method of tagging products. This section looks at RFID in the retail world from the consumer perspective.

Clearly, the advantage to customers of a retail store deploying RFID is a speedier checkout. If every item in a consumer's shopping basket is tagged and the necessary reader is suitably installed, there should no longer be any need to lay the items on the belt and manually scan each one for purposes of determining the final bill. Eventually, when users will also be equipped with contactless payment cards, the onerous and dilatory checkout procedure could be eliminated. All items in the shopping cart would be automatically debited from the consumer's account upon exiting the store. Early contactless payment solutions using RFID are already being deployed around the globe, for instance for ticketing applications. Calypso is a good example of a global player in this area. Furthermore, in February 2005, Visa introduced a system using RFID to enable consumers to make purchases by simply waving their cards. Meanwhile, McDonalds have introduced a Mastercard wireless system using RFID to make their fast food even faster.

Retail stores are not the only ones to benefit from RFID technology. Restaurants can use item-level tagging to improve the customer experience and facilitate the billing process. Pintokona, a Sushi restaurant in Tokyo, has introduced RFID tags to track and price their plates of sushi that are presented on a rotating belt. Sushi freshness is a critical requirement for Pintokona, as dishes should typically be exposed no longer than 30 minutes. RFID tags associated with individual dishes contain the precise time of their placement on the rotating belt, thus facilitating their withdrawal on the expiry of the pre-determined period. The system also assists with the calculation of the bill, as each tag contains information such as price, sushi type, and chef (Srivastava, 2004).

A working prototype of what might be called a “smart watch system” has been developed by a University of Washington computer scientist, in collaboration with Intel. The watch is an intelligent, integrated, and responsive system, capable of prompting users who leave the house or workplace without essential items, such as keys, wallet, glasses etc … The wristwatch acts as an interface and is driven by a small personal server, easily carried in the pocket, which could eventually be integrated with the wristwatch itself. Important items in the household are embedded with RFID tags, and readers are installed in various locations, e.g. home, car, office etc… When the wristwatch passes a reader, the information is sent to a personal server that checks whether all critical (tagged) items are present. In the future, wireless location systems may also determine the location of the user (whether they are arriving or leaving), and use this information for decision making (Borriello et al., 2004).

Mobile RFID

The use of information stored on RFID tags in combination with sensor capabilities can enable computations and communication with peer objects, which can eventually create an environment in which the context of users and the status of “smart objects” can be continuously determined and monitored (Siegemund and Florkemeier, 2003). Mobile phones can serve as an important platform for users to communicate with smart objects and open up possibilities for location-based services.

In the near future, shoppers may be provided with personalised and location-based services while on the move using mobile phones. In particular, based on pre-defined profiles, consumers' mobile devices will receive alerts on current promotions and new offerings when entering designated shopping areas. Retailers, mobile operators and vendors have already begun trials of such services. For example, in 2003, the first trial of mobile RFID shopping was run in Tokyo, opening up an entirely new location-based shopping experience. In June 2005, retail stores and cafes in downtown Seattle began targeting visually and hearing-impaired by-passers with product and navigational information using RFID systems (Bostrom, 2005). In March 2004, Nokia introduced the Nokia Mobile RFID Kit for its 5140 and 5140i handsets[1]. These handsets combine mobile communication technology with RFID-reader capabilities for supply-chain applications and for mobile data capture on the field ( Information Week, 2004). Within a couple of years, the handset manufacturer intends to give consumers the ability to use their mobile phones to access data rich in information about consumer products sold in retail stores, through the use of RFID. Nokia is developing the RFID consumer phone jointly with Verisign. The potential applications of such mobile phones are manifold, including:

one-touch warranty registration;
allowing for quick ingredient look-up in supermarkets (of particular use those consumers with allergies); and
customer service and brand management (e.g. promotions).

In June 2005, in its research centre in Helsinki, Nokia started experimenting with an RFID bracelet phone integrated with location-based services, which could eventually alert users of promotional offers and other pertinent information (Silicon.com, 2005).

In Japan, the first trial of mobile RFID shopping was run in 2003 in Tokyo, opening up an entirely new location-based shopping experience (Srivastava, 2004). RFID technology in combination with mobile phones was used to locate customers wishing to receive information about the area. Targeted promotions, entertainment options, and customised shopping information could then be delivered to the customer.

Given the immense potential RFID holds for information and communication access and machine-to-machine communications, technology developers continue to explore its synergies with the increasingly ubiquitous mobile phone. The Near Field Communications Forum (NFC Forum) is using RFID to bridge the connectivity gap between all kinds of devices (such as the mobile phone) and electronic information transfer[2].

RFID and the human factor

As discussed above, RFID can offer levels of convenience (e.g. in the home or in the shop) that are miles ahead of current standards. The technology can facilitate daily tasks and increase the speed of transactions. Individual items, or people, can be located and identified in wide or confined spaces. The mass deployment of RFID is likely to have a significant impact on the quality of life. Like so many other technical innovations, it is yet another extension of the human endeavour to control time and space. However, no technological development is possible without effect on society – desired or undesired. The world as we know it will be transformed by the diversification of RFID use, and its expanded adoption across industries. For instance, applications of RFID technology in the health sector will aid in the care of children, the elderly and the infirm. This will not only go a long way towards the prolongation of life, but will make such lives more comfortable and productive. The development of ambient or ubiquitous networking environments (e.g. using RFID) will facilitate the practice of flexible working hours and reduce commuting time. This will in turn have positive spin-off effects on the quality of family life and on the environment.

Data protection and consumer privacy

During 2003, consumer boycotts were subsequently organised against two large companies planning to deploy RFID, Benetton and Gillette. Benetton subsequently cancelled its plans to implement the technology. In 2005, CASPIAN called for yet another worldwide boycott of Tesco after the supermarket giant announced its plans to expand trials of RFID (Vnunet.com, 2005). The group expressed concern that tags may continue to remain active once a product is purchased, and can therefore be scanned through clothing by third-party readers. This would also allow corporations to compile data transmitted by the tags to determine which products a consumer purchases, and when, and even where the product travels. The aggregation of these data could lead to the formulation of sophisticated consumer profiles including their income, health, lifestyle, buying habits and even location. This information could then be sold or made available to government agencies, employers, or other companies for marketing purposes and for use in the context of customer relationship management (CRM) databases (Information and Privacy Commissioner for Ontario, 2004).

The principal concern in the mind of privacy advocates and sociologists is the retention and control of identity by individuals after the implantation of an RFID chip. Some argue that “identity theft” will actually grow in importance rather than diminish. Access to an individual's unique serial numbers and information must be strictly controlled.

In January 2005, the European Union's Data Protection Working Party (set up under Article 29 of Directive 95/46/EC) published its first assessment report on data protection issues related to RFID (Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, 2005)[3]. The report identifies three main data protection areas related to the use of RFID. The first is the use of RFID to collect information linked to personal data. This link might be direct of indirect. A supermarket, for instance, might use RFID to identify consumers by their names and record their habits in the store, including the sections they visit, and the number of times visits occur without purchases. The second is the use of RFID tags for the storage of personal data. A good example of this use is in public transport, where an organisation could track the location of an identified individual carrying a contactless public transport card while he/she is within range of their readers. The third and final area is the use of RFID for tracking purposes, without “traditional” identifiers. This includes the following case: if a grocery store hands out re-usable RFID-enabled tokens for shopping carts, it can track the location of the cart as well as the content of the cart, thereby enabling the creation of a detailed database for marketing or dynamic pricing. This information could also be made available to third parties, all without the informed consent of the consumer.

Privacy concerns surrounding RFID deployment are only further exacerbated by the possibility of a “human bar code”, or implantable RFID tags for the tracking and monitoring of individual citizens. Far from science fiction, RFID implants have already been used for medical ( CNET News, 2005) and entertainment uses. For instance, VIP patrons in clubs such as the Baja Beach Club in Barcelona receive access to exclusive lounges and facilitated payment services if they volunteer for the implants (ITU, 2004).

Recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the USA has even approved and endorsed RFID implants designed by Applied Digital Solutions, and known as “VeriChips”, that are injected under the skin. These would contain a unique ID number that would be used to access medical records on a remote server maintained by Applied Digital Solutions ( The Register, 2004). The stated objective of these chips is to provide better health care and reduce medical errors. In some hospitals, projects to tag newborn babies are being implemented[4], and RFID implants have also been used to enhance security at prisons. In 2006, the CEO of Applied Digital Solutions suggested the use of RFID implants chips in immigrants, in order to track their movements. He also pointed to the use of chips “for enforcement purposes at the employer level” ( Networking Pipeline, 2006).

With the multiplying population of reading machines (unavoidable in a ubiquitous network environment), and the current rate of technological innovation (likely to increase, if anything), it will become essential to ensure that user data does not fall into the hands of unauthorised parties. Technical countermeasures to block the scanning of radio-frequency ID tags are already in the making. These “jammers”, like their mobile phone counterparts[5], respond to privacy concerns about tagged consumer items being tracked within and beyond a retailer's premises. The blocker tag is one early example: when placed over a regular RFID tag, it can prevent the reader from scanning information transmitted by the tag. It does this by sending the readers more data than it is capable of reading, i.e. similar to a denial-of-service attack ( Wired News, 2004a). Other examples include “tag killing”, which means rendering tags permanently inoperative at the time of purchase “clippable tags”, which would allow the consumer to tear off part of the antenna after purchase, and “watchdog tags”, which would provide the consumer more visibility concerning access to the tag's information.

Technical countermeasures alone, however, do not suffice. They must be used together with a combination of approaches, from market mechanisms to policy and regulatory initiatives. Without advocating the need for legislation to curtail the use of RFID at this early stage, the Progressive Policy Institute in its 2004 Policy Report on the subject (Hutto and Atkinson, 2004), does acknowledge the need for the industry to take privacy issues into account, notably customer choice and notice. It encourages retailers to take the following steps to ensure the smooth deployment of RFID:

label RFID-tagged items with recognisable logos;
indicate the location of RFID tags on tagged items; and
conduct public information campaigns, e.g. through informative flyers or signs clearly indicating the presence of RFID tags in-store.

In the public sector, in July 2004, the Japanese government outlined a number of “Guidelines for privacy protection with regard to RFID Tags”[6]. Under these guidelines, companies dealing with RFID tags and personal information are required to provide the following:

an indication that RFID tags exist on an item;
a right of choice for consumers regarding the use of tags;
information sharing about social benefits of RFID, etc.;
information sharing and consumer awareness;
information on the linking of information on tags and databases that store privacy information;
restrictions of information gathering and uses when private information is stored on tags; and
ensuring the accuracy of information when private information is stored on tags.

With respect to consumer choice, the guidelines emphasise the need to show consumers how to prevent their tags from being read. They outline a few sample methods, such as the use of aluminium foil, or the physical removal of tags. The guidelines also called for the appointment of an information administrator in the company who would be responsible for ensuring adequate implementation of these measures and for handling consumer complaints.

At the regional level, the European Commission launched a public consultation on RFID in March 2006, which is tacking issues such as data protection and consumer privacy[7]. The consultation process will result in a Communication by the Commission in the second half of 2006.

A growing environment of techno-surveillance

When a technological development is in its early stages, the consideration of possible abuses or undesirable effects is timely and crucial. The ubiquity of networking technologies, combined with the current political climate, raises concerns about citizen surveillance.

Even in the offline world, the monitoring of human behaviour has grown considerably, due largely to the use of credit cards, loyalty cards and cameras. Most citizens of industrialised countries now leave a sizeable trail of electronic data behind them as they go about their daily tasks. The dawn of the online world has made data collection cheaper and more efficient. The fact that online behaviour is tracked by websites is no longer a secret: cookies, which caused uproar several years ago, are now accepted as standard practice. Mobile phone records (calls, messages etc …) are often kept by operators for years, and there is minimal legislation in this domain. Surveillance cameras have become more sophisticated and can now be connected to the world wide web, thereby enabling owners to operate them remotely from their personal desktops. In January 2005, it was discovered that simple searches using Google could give anyone (not only camera owners) access to data from over 1,000 unprotected surveillance cameras around the world ( The Register, 2005). Moreover, advances in digitisation have meant easier storage and analysis of private and public data.

In this context, the growing adoption of RFID-based services has been a particular source of concern. RFID will make it much easier for companies and government investigators to establish the whereabouts of citizens, by accessing information on tags embedded in their clothing or other personal items. Today, investigators in civil and criminal cases regularly use records from E-Z Pass automatic tolls based on RFID to prove where an individual's car was located at any given time ( Wired News, 2004b). And it is, in general, possible for companies to use RFID tags to profile their own customers and share this information with governments or other agencies. This has important implications for human rights (Hurley, 2003). The use of such personal information needs to be carefully monitored and ideally limited in scope, as it is fundamental to the notion of human identity – its constitution and its preservation. The mechanism, purpose and extent of identification (be it RFID data, biometric data etc…) must favour the citizen and adhere to principles of transparency and individual choice, thereby thwarting the development of an Orwellian-like (Orwell, 1961) landscape of surveillance ( The Washington Times, 2003). However, at this time, attention remains focused on industrial development, rather than the consideration of such issues.

Furthermore, as information and communication technologies become increasingly ubiquitous, they will be able to learn even more about individual citizens, gathering information about their habits, preferences and behavioural patterns. Although the initial purpose of such data collection might be limited in scope, national concerns over security and terrorism (in particular since 11 September 2001), coupled with public acquiescence over time, will lead to the inadvertent surrender of more and more intimate personal information by citizens. Once surrendered, this information may be open to analysis and manipulation by an ever-increasing number of actors and agencies.

Users of today's internet already complete forms for various services (e.g. news alerts) using false names and addresses. People are increasingly afraid of revealing personal information when online. This climate of distrust may be exacerbated in a future in which all kinds of network appliances or items prompt users for personal identification. If data are constantly exchanged between things and people (in some cases unbeknownst to those affected), who will ultimately retain control over these data? Currently, most users can still choose whether or not to reveal their identity over the Internet. But in the future, tiny devices the size of a grain of sand might give the wind a pair of eyes, or fingerprint-activated doorknobs may recognise owners by a simple touch ( Wired News, 2001). If such a future is allowed to come about without the appropriate checks and balances, the flow of personal data will become arbitrary and uncontrolled, thereby increasing the possibility of citizen surveillance.

Surveillance, whether real of perceived, creates distrust and fear in ordinary citizens. It can therefore exacerbate anxiety in the exercise of choice and in decision making, no matter how minor. Since the making of decisions is crucial to individual self-fulfilment and self-expression, it is essential to the advancement of society (ITU, 2005b). In contrast, distrust and paranoia can detract from creativity and healthy social intercourse.

Furthermore, although technologies like RFID will serve to reduce the number of mundane tasks in our daily life, the complete automation of human activity is not desirable, as it may create an overly conformist and uniform society. Like an environment of surveillance, it may discourage self-expression and individuality. All deviations from uniform practice would be regarded with suspicion, and recorded for posterity. This is known as “social sorting” (OECD, 2004), which is now at the basis of an entire industry devoted to clustering various populations. The use of RFID to label individuals must be discouraged.

Like the mobile phone and SMS, which increasingly mediate human relationships, RFID might be yet another technology that threatens human intimacy. In an always-on world of networked devices, human relationships are becoming increasingly transient and ephemeral (Hurley, 2003). Emerging technologies like RFID tags, may become eventually become an afterthought in our daily lives, but human-to- human communication should remain in the foreground.

Conclusion

RFID technology has tremendous potential to ease life and to improve the human condition. Still, further innovation and industrial deployment of this technology should be done in parallel with a careful exploration of all related aspects. No one can deny that the expansion of such “anywhere, anytime” communication technologies, for “anyone and anything”, will bring about increased convenience, greater access and a whole host of innovative applications and services. However, the capacity of these technologies to impact human lives (private and public) will grow correspondingly. This brings to mind the notion of the “Faustian Bargain” (Postman, 1992). In the context of technological change: while a given technological advancement may improve many aspects of daily life, it also runs the risk of reducing the advantages of earlier developments or earlier ways of life. It is only through an increasing awareness of this risk that humanity (and societal progress) can be preserved in what has become an ever-expanding sea of technology and automation.

References

Article 29 Data Protection Working Party (2005), Working Document on Data Protection Issues Related to RFID Technology, Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, Brussels, 19 January, .