After the announcements that Wal-Mart or the U.S. Department of Defense are going to put radio frequency identification (RFID) tags almost everywhere, many press articles raised alarm signals about this new technology, In "RFID security scares ignore facts," META Group analysts write that we all should understand RFID technology before debating whether or not its usage is putting our privacy in danger. [Note: scroll down three or four screens before getting to the article.]
Such stories ignore not only common sense and practicality, but also the basic physics that govern the potential of these tags. Both the public and the retailers considering tag use need to understand these basic facts before they can enter meaningful debate on the use of the technology.
"RFID tags recommended for product tracking cannot be used to track individuals through their lives via some sort of satellite-tracking mechanism due to limited read ranges," says META Group analyst Jack Gold, addressing a common urban legend. "The range of these tags is only a few feet at most, and they do not contain any personally identifiable information."
According to META Group analysts, another common mistake carried by the mainstream press concerns the costs involved by the deployment of the technology by retailers.
RFID systems are costly. A single tag -- bought in bulk -- may cost only a quarter, but the readers, the infrastructure to capture the data they gather, the analytical software to make sense of that data, etc., all are still costly. For instance, the cost of installing smart shelves for a single product at all the outlets of a major retailer could cost millions, and so far is unlikely to be economically justifiable given the potential weak ROI. Thus, it may be more practical to continue to monitor most shelves manually.
What is valid for people-tracking also applies to product-tracking, according to this report.
"While it has a place in warehouse management, RFID technology is too limited and costly to be used to perform real-time tracking of tens of thousands of pallets of material in a large warehouse," says META Group analyst Dwight Klappich. "It does not work, given the read distances, other environmental considerations such as metal racks, and the three-dimensional nature of a warehouse. The question remains why a company would want to pursue RFID for this when there are far more realistic solutions (i.e., warehouse management systems) that accomplish the real object of accurate inventory locating at far less cost and complexity."
"RFID cannot make a bad process good," adds META Group analyst Bruce Hudson. "It can only make a good process better."
So what do you think? Is RFID technology potentially dangerous for our privacy or not?
If you want to read previous stories about RFID technology published on this blog, please use the PicoSearch box on the right of your screen. One of the latest was "RFID Chips Everywhere."
Source: META Group, via ITworld.com, December 10, 2003
7:37:15 PM
|
|
