I worked in a SAIC facility for about a month as a contractor back in the 1990's we were given visitor ID badges and told to keep them on our person at all times. I clipped mine to my jacket and went about my busness installing air walls in a large meeting room. At one point I took off my jacket and hung it on a chair about 10 minutes later a guard came in calling my name and asking where my badge was I pointed at the chair across the room. I was told to put the badge on or in my pocket this would be my only warning. I was later told any unbadged IR signature in the building set off an alarm in the security office. I'm pretty sure it was an RFID I saw a delaminated badge once and there was a foil strip inside.
I had a badge like that. I still have mine. Lol I was taken to the ER on the job. And of course had it on me. The Dr put me on disability on the spot in the ER, so for security reason I was not allowed back in. So human services must have forgot to get my badge. I worked for a military weapons manfacturer in the office.
Someone commented on RFID in your shoes. Many may remember Will Smith in, "Enemy of the State," having RFID chips put in his shoes, as well as his pen, watch, clothing... That was when I began to pay attention to RFID.
Most manufacturer's put RFID into their products for inventory and product tracking/logistics. You'll find them inside your cordless drill, your..... lots of things. Notice though that they don't set off the anti theft alarms when you leave the store, but the ones the store themselves stick on do? Perhaps there's a reason for that.
@@bv6686 So, you totally missed the bit about the physical antenna dimension effecting the device range? If the thing was the size of a flea, it would only work over a distance of millimetres.
@@nas8326 Mate, if there was any significant current being "pumped through the air", people like me would have a number of or, an array of very well tuned antennas connected to rectifiers and tuned filters to harvest that energy, instead of paying the local utility for power. Don't you think? Like, if it were possible, a week's worth of reading on the internet would be ample time for the average person to learn what they needed to know to set about accomplishing that. How many domestic dwellings have you seen around your area/city/state with antenna arrays on the rooh? Aside from the HAM radio lads. Not trying to knock you mate, but, if you truly believe that to be the case, why aren't you building the antennas and saving yourself 10's of thousands of dollars worth of power bills over the next decade?
Rob, I can't tell you enough how glad I am to have found your channel. In the few months I've been watching, using your advice, I've taken myself from being an information commodity that's sold back and forth across the internet to someone who gets to choose what's out there and how it's used. Serious thank you for all your guides and recommendations.
Which reminds me of working on board cruise ships as a photographer. We used to apply sticky RFID tags on the 8x10" photos, so people won't steal them, for there were sensors at the entrances/exits of the photo gallery. Some photographers were pulling the leg of their co-workers by sticking such tags on theid backs and it would beep when they would approach the sensors at the exits/entrances. Upon purchasing the photos, we had to deactivate those tags by placing the photos on a deactivating mat. Now I realize the full potential of such technology, used in the wrong.
@@AlienRelics Those tags were being stuck on photographs. So, they sure looked like RFID tags to me. That is like this: www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/images/2008/02/25/rfid_tag_blue_security.jpg
@@kenhnsy I don't know what accusations of paranoia you were talking about, and I don't think I really care. I know what the dangers are, I've been immersed in something like that. there's all sorts of unsavoury people you might meet in the course of your day as an ordinary person in this life including people in positions of law-enforcement, people with power, Authority, things like that. Where do you want to believe it or not is irrelevant to me. Personally I get the feeling you're satanic and not just a rabble-rouser or somebody who just like to hear their own voice, so to speak.
I worked on beacon RFID and passive RFID used in Real Time Location Tracking (RTLS) of medical equipment and personnel moving throughout large medical buildings. Active RFID Pings out but passive just listens and collects all the MAC addresses then depends on CISCO heat mapping of the WiFi networks to triangulate location down to 6-15 ft. I don't like what I'm seeing on the collection side with public implementations that Big Tech is doing as their is no opt out. To track a wheelchair, I would slap an active RFID on it but it I want to track a doctor or nurse, I just need the MAC of their mobile device.
as you most likely unaware as you speak about ID cards: at least german, and I think many other EU ones also, IDs have built in RFID since they were first designed over 10 years ago, same goes for our debit cards, and all of our eu driver licenses do have them as our IDs ... so, what you imagine tomorrow is reality in the eu since yesterday
@humandxp No offense but if you think you know what's going on in the USA then you must have missed the part where every source of information in this country spreads only lies and half-truths. If you're getting good info about us then I need to know where you are getting your information from because all I see is pure bullshit from a bunch of lying criminals who need to removed from office.
@@Ever8eliever right....so where do you think they'll install a receiver to collect that data? At places of business in the card reader. Come now. It's not so easy to hide from the modern techs.
The explainer part of RFID is very good, and part of the worries are justified, but some arguments fall apart... because physics! As explained, an RFID tag biggest part is the antenna... and it needs to be a very specific size because of the mentioned frequency resonation/response effect. Again, as explained, the RFID transmitter portion sends a signal that both powers and detects a response from the tag. That's how the entire system works. The problem with the idea that you could make a clandestine RFID system that can be detected extremely long distances is twofold: 1. If you want to send signal long distance using lower frequencies, you need larger and larger antennas. For this, you can think about radio antennas, TV antennas, or something like the difference between 4G and 5G antennas. Higher frequencies also have a harder time going through dense objects - this is why millimiter range 5G has to be short distance line of sight; 2. If instead you wanna send it further away by upping the amplitude of the signal, that is power, than it also becomes a problem of either coil size, active device with battery to fit, or a combination of both. A passive device can't generate enough power, particularly if it's small, to transmit back a signal long distance. It's in the explainer itself: the passive RFID tag needs to be powered by the scanning signal and transmit back a response. It's powered by the signal because the antenna acts both as a transmit/receive antenna, and as a coil to induct power. Now, you have to think about wireless power tech. Qi Chargers. The entire reason why we still don't have long range high output wireless power systems is because of physics.... in order to transmit power wirelessly using coils, enough to charge a smartphone which is usually around tens of Watts, you need relatively big coils that are milimeters from each other. Fast wireless charging that are the latest in evolution are using multiple coils to reach fast charging standards. Worse, the more power involved in a wireless power system, the more loss through heat you end up with. This is why fast wireless charger bases usually have a fan or some form of heat dissipation. That is all to say that RFID tags are only possible because the passive tags require a teeny tiny ammount of power just enough to operate for miliseconds, send back a very weak signal, juuuust enough for it to reach the reader. It's a system that was carefully designed to hit the physical limits. If you need a tag to send back data long distance, it'll either need more power with either a big coil or by being active with a battery, or it needs to have a big antenna, or a combination of both. Making it then, way harder to conceal. But, the concern on just regular sized RFIDs is justified. You can have an array of detectors/listeners spread in a wide area that could collect data that way. Only it's also worth noting that it'll need to be tied to some mass surveillance database somehow, because you really can't hold a lot of data in a chip as small as an RFID chip. Which then leads to... it not being very feasible because we already have several other methods of collecting data and surreptitiously tagging people anyways. For instance, tracking people inside a store for commercial purposes? It's been done several times already using Bluetooth and Wi-fi from smartphones - including non consensually. You don't really need RFID dust to track people... most people already have beacon devices with them at all times. Instead of spreading RFID dust around, a honeypot for Wi-fi and/or Bluetooth should be enough for most situations. Now, if you need to tag an individual through some method that isn't reliant on a smartphone and other electronic devices... well, perhaps it'd be interesting to track RFID tags... but it's kind of a convoluted way of doing it, and there should be plenty other cheaper and easier alternatives. Special types of paints and chemicals, active trackers, biosignatures, etc. I was just reading about our external microbiome the other day... did you know we all basically have a microbiome floating around us at all times, one which is as unique to us as our gut flora? Yep. It's how dogs can track people by "scent"... it's not just smell as in how we conceptualize it, it's actually an entire microbiome floating around us that is rather unique to each individual. And yes, overtime it could be used as unique identifier. So, there you go. Hope I didn't leave even more people in despair... xD
I remember when rfid went mainstream in cars, that was about than 25 years ago. I was a Cadillac tech when that happened. It was a lot more reliable than the resistor keys (passkey1). It worked so well that the manufacturers eventually put them inside the wheels to monitor tire pressure. Of course, that also evolved into the key that just needs to be in the car when you push the start button.
Benetton retail outlets did this for a while, maybe they still do. The Clothing/suitcases/shoes would have RFID embedded without the customer necessarily knowing about it.
@@kenhnsy Benetton were doing this nearly 20 years ago. Tying the customer's identity to the RFID purchases and using third parties to track footfall through retail outlets and build up age/demographic profiles of customers. Type: Benetton RFID into your search engine of choice. The company weren't sorry for collecting user data, they were sorry they got caught..
Very interesting video, though a bit misleading. The common consumer rfid is lf 123.5khz; nfc/hf rfid 13.5Mhz; and 900Mhz is uhf rfid and is limited to commercial use as the readers are significantly more expensive. Industrial/high value inventory tracking and high security people tracking are the primary uses of the uhf rfid. The injectable rfid are lf 123.5khz and hf 13.5Mhz
The catch that rains on this parade: the range of passive RFID is not just limited by the power of the transmitter. It is also limited by the cross-sectional area of the target being read. Imagine this occurring in the visible light spectrum. You would have a card that, when illuminated with a certain color of light, would display a pattern of black and white contrast that a camera could read. If you make the light brighter, you increase the contrast, making it possible to read the card from further away. But eventually, at far ranges, even with a super bright light, you won't be able to discern the pattern, the camera just won't have enough resolution. Passive RFID works on the same principle. Military radar can detect giant metal aircraft from miles away, but good luck trying to resolve a coil of wire the size of a credit card. Even if it did show up as a dot, there wouldn't be any resolution to ID the chip. So yes, passive RFID can be read at distances of 30 ft, maybe even up to 100 ft under ideal conditions and with nothing in between. But that's not exactly a useful distance for tracking someone, unless you have an interconnected net of readers all over the place (e.g. airtags), but AirTags work in a different frequency range and require a more sophisticated Bluetooth connection to be made, which requires a power source. Passive tags do not pose a hazard to being tracked unless the person tracking you is 30 ft away, in which case that's just regular following. And if you want to prevent even that, you can simply slip your RFID cards in a foil lined wallet pouch
A problem with your long-range RFID scenario is that while yes you can build a powerful transmitter to activate the RFID tag, the transmit power of the tag itself is very limited. The tag has a transmitter, and that is limited by its size. Yes, you could activate the tag from a large distance, but the tag's output would be attenuated by distance, the building you are in, buildings around you, terrain, etc. It may work from the street, but doubtful miles away.
same question. probably, simple passive tag can hear the big military radar and answer something through usual networks around. So [threeletters] can search for special tag from a distance, and got not a mess from a millions tags, but answer of needed one via usual wifi etc echoes.
Everybody talk about rfid at work, so here's my worthless story: I worked at big auto-service company, which tried to use tags for tracking clients' cars in our buildings. They couldn't make it work fine enough and stopped tryin))
Thank you for your info on rfid. It’s like a college level course. I know more about it now than any time before now. And I understand what you said. I’m going to share it as well as I can.
One of the problems with your concern with ultra long range RFID with military grade antennas is the receiving side of things. It's easy to send out a very high power signal to the RFID antenna over a really long distance, but the RFID antenna can only send back a limited power response, and usually in all directions, meaning the inverse square law comes in to play. Thus, even if you've got a very sensitive receive antenna, you get drowned out by noise very quickly. Maybe you'd get some specialist antenna array on a RFID tag to do beam forming, but that gets bulky very quickly. I'm far more concerned about the ability of an actor to have many readers on drones and strategic points in traffic.
I think you have the answer to my question about how to locate my pet. Is it technically* possible at any helpful distance? Even 20'... I'll take whatever I can get. *Given the will, the means, and the time. (~134KHz) I don't need to use drone, (but I can.)
@@AutitsicDysexlia Honestly, there's not much point using RFID for location. The low frequency and requirement for passive power means it's hard to measure distance. I would look into using a BLE beacon. You'd need at least 3 for triangulation. You can make one with an ESP32. I haven't done this myself, and it'd probably need some development.
@emiliosilva6447 Yes, what I found out is that you could ping a passive chip by using a very large amount of power, and likely wind up with an FCC Swat team at your door... and it would likely fry the target. All theoretical- not something anyone has made work. So, the passive chips are utterly useless, and the active chips can't be implanted.
My husband woke up face down in a ditch in Mexico almost dead and beaten beyond recognition. A few months later when at the dentist he realized that he had something implanted in his tooth after being x rayed. It was one of those rice grain sized things and it had a US govt patent number on it. This was many years ago.
You want creepy?! How about RFID in our very currency (money)?! There was some serious talk about doing something like this some time ago and "they" may have even done it by now -- anyone know for sure? And then there's the issue of NFC (near field communication) devices like those Apple watches and phones with the "swipe" capabilities -- which is really just a slight twist on RFID with a lot more capability to keep and transmit more data. Not that Google or Samsung or any other big tech entity doesn't have their own version(s) or anything.
@@thecentralscrutinizer5105 Good to know. Though I am having a hard time believing it. It would seem $20's and lesser denominations still appear to be unaffected. So that's probably true! However holographic strips and "micro-dot" (antenna-less) RFID do appear to be in "their" newer C-notes. I just can't say what these "micro-dots" are exactly other than some form of passive RFID that can only be detected on contact since they don't have the usual huge (printed) antenna that most typical RFID devices have. Probably not very track able without antennas but still creepy.
@@thecentralscrutinizer5105 Again, I'd like to believe that but microwave ovens only excite water molecules at about 2.6GHz which causes them to heat up. So if there aren't any water molecules to excite or anything else that will react at that frequency then it won't fry anything. I love the idea but I'm afraid the only way to "cook" a RFID device is to place it in a very strong magnetic field -- not unlike what you might find in a medical CT scanner or something (which is not something most people have access to.)
@@WXSEDY ...and again, I've cooked more asic's in those things.... thats only thing those death ray ovens are good for, I'll never use one for... YIKES!!... food!
If you try to track RFID's with a military radar, you would be frying people that are inbetween.. You can already fry chickens by putting them in front of an aircraft directional radar (that's why they are not allowed to be on when on the ground)
If you are using a high power long-range transmitter and the signal hits a far away RFID chip at a normal power level, the chip will then transmit its response at a normal power level (slightly less than what it was hit with) and you'll need a very sensitive receiver to detect it, or a separate receiver that is closer to the chip. As Rob mentions, there is also the risk of getting replies from many chips at once.
"A custom-designed RFID tag could be tracked by military-grade radar, possibly hundreds of miles away. Remember that the RFID tag is unpowered" -A megawatt blast from hundreds of miles away will be in the milliwatt range by the time it reaches the tag, if the transmitter antenna is omnidirectional, thanks to the inverse square law. The tag, energized by a sub-watt signal, will yield a weak signal that will certainly not reach 100 miles. But, let's assume it's a focused 1 MW reader beam, and let's say 10,000 watts reach the tag. Let's also suppose that the 10,000 watts doesn't damage the device, that it's energized and produces an ID signal at 10,000 watts. Tags have omni antennas, so at 10,000 watts, the signal will spread out over the 100 mile journey and, thanks to the inverse square law, will be sub 1-µw by the time it reaches the megawatt reader, which renders it useless.
@@justanotherguy469 But, we do know. RFID device characteristics are well known. Speculating that your ID, or a $20 bill, in your pocket can be read by the military 100 mi away -low earth orbit, so a satellite- is paranoid conspiracy theory territory. That you accept, without question, that this could be possible, is part of the problem. The thought experiment is easy. An omni-directional (or, for a satellite, an earth-facing conical directional) antenna, blasts its megawatt signal from 100 miles away. 100mi radius, so -according to the inverse square law (1/d² = signal intensity fades with the square of the distance traveled), every device within the 31,416 square miles surrounding the antenna receive about 40 microwatts of signal. Say NYC is the target. It's about 300 square miles, over 8 million residents, plus 1-2 million more on weekdays, you're talking about probably tens to hundreds of millions of RFID devices. At 100 mi distance, each receives about 40 microwatts. If that's enough energy to power the RFID chip and send back a signal, it'll be in the picowatt range.
The size of a red blood cell is approximately 7000 nanometers. An article appearing in thefutureofthings dot com, titled “Hitachi Develops World’s Smallest RFID Chip”, reported Hitachi has developed 150,000 nanometer RFID chip with VPN abilities. And has a 65-nanometer version in the works. 65-nanometer is more than 100 times smaller than a red blood cell.
Watching your location inside of a building. YES, in Florida, while I was being investigated 🔎. I found RFID in my clothing. I can't say if it was Industrial RFID, or RFID being used as part of "THE" ongoing investigation. I can say, that after I would fall asleep, people were entering my house. I woke on more than one occasion to the sound of the door closing. Once when I left the house. I put my RFID detector on the counter in the kitchen. When I came back it was gone, and I never did find it. I had to purchase another one.
Everything is on this channel for free! All you need to do is to "binge-watch" and be a good student, writing your own .pdf notes on what you are watching. While you learn, could you share your notes, outlines maybe with time stamps and study process in the specific video comments for others to use?
The problem is i've read the patents that literally turn the human body into the antenna to send and receive signals thereby bypassing the problem of antenna size
Credit cards can be tracked also. If you have a tap here card, you are being tagged and tracked as you walk around, thus RFID blocking wallets. Now they are in the Passports. So RFID blocking passport carriers exist. NFC also can detect RFID. So basically you can setup an ambush to activate when a USA based passport passes by. Look it up.
If I was a particularly nefarious government, I'd pair unpowered transmitters (like passive rfid) with acoustic pickups and salt the cement used to build foundations with them. Hidden persistant listening that can't be destroyed without destroying the building. (Except maybe with an emp gun.)
‘Guess you know that the Soviets did exactly that during the construction of the new American embassy annex construction in Moscow decades ago. The American State Dept. abandoned the building knowing it could never be ‘de-bugged’. You’d think the security geniuses of the American Federal Gov’t would have totally expected what the Soviets did....
Some of my heavy motorcycle clothing triggers anti-theft door alarms. There must be a RFID tag in the sleeves because when I lift my arm above the sensor device, it doesn't alarm. The RFID must be sewn inside the material.
it would be nice if you did more SSB HF Pactor 4 videos. we can talk in a zombie apocalypse! but serious Im a captain (500t) with a 55ft carbon ketch and you would find a lot of the opensource boat stuff pretty cool like pipilot by sean d'epannier my good friend as well as a lottttt of other microboard projects. Rtl_dlt chipsets can do a lot of stuff as well. You being a sailor it would be a cool video subject to add to your channel
@@thefogisgone3662 Nope. None in there. None in my hospital wristbands either. I was actually surprised by how many things didn't have one that I thought might. I've been scanning lots of stuff.
Thank you for the education Rob. No matter which way you slice it, all adds up to evil creepy deviance, as far as I am concerned. The "dust" concept is straight up evil.
When I was under crazy insane extream survailance , I noticed the aircraft would move when I would move my bottle of prescription painkillers , and this was indoors , the technolgy is so insane I sound insane when I talk about it , like when my headlights flashed for no reason that I could eplain when a plane flew over ,its like they remotely turned on or off the gps anti theft device ,
The fly Drone is a big stretch. The image used is from a documentary on possible future tech but the tech needed to make it work at that scale is far off even for the military
@@justanotherguy469 you're right it is typically being surpassed by at least next gen by the time it gets handed off to the public sector. But the tech for such a small Drone would require materials that are currently classed unobtainium and the control systems would require atomic transistors even for a fly by wire system.
Have you ever thought of providing a building schematic of an RFID zapper device? I have seen plans for that from the German CCC, involving the modification of an old style (non LED) camera flash, basically replacing the flash tube/bulb with a wire coil (I don't remember whether it's got to have an iron core or not) with relatively thick wires and only very few windings in order to emit a small EMP that could kill any RFID tags. However, I'm not so sure whether it would be good to use such a device in the vicinity of other electronic devices, or if it would fry those also...more research needs to be done on this privacy protecting grassroots technology!
A large powerful military radar is of no use to track RFID. You can prove this yourself if you have 'range' issues with your home Wifi. Upgrade the Router/ base station to a larger power, for example, improve the antenna. That's like your military grade radar. And now your laptop will hear the base station loud and clear at a greater range, but it can't talk to it because it doesn't have enough power to make the distance back. So the link is not established. Same hold true for RFID, passive or active. You need a reasonable balanced power system at both ends of the link.
You are expecting a complete radio transmission back. That is NOT how it works. It uses backscatter like RADAR. If it didn't work then military radar that works at 200+ miles wouldn't work. Radar targets do not emit RF. They just reflect backscatter.
@@robbraxmantech So we're in agreement that Radar targets do not emit RF, they just reflect the radar energy. So, focusing on RFID, suppose we have two RFID tags 100 miles away from the radar and 20 feet apart from each other, and you want to know about one of those targets. How will you know which target is which, given they will both respond to the radar energy ? The RFID devices must emit, or encode the reflected energy in such a way as to atleast give their identification information so you can know which target is which. therefore the RFID targets are not simple radar reflectors; they are more than this. Since the reflected energy must be encoded by the remote RFID before it is sent back, and that RFID is 100 miles away, and RF works the same as light and follows the Inverse square law principle, it would take more than a miracle to have that tiny encoded signal through a far from ideal antenna by necessity of small size, to make it back across 100 miles. In the context of 'expecting a complete radio transmission back' this is exactly what is needed because a reflected radio transmission without any identification information, as you said, an under the skin RFID for a pet for example, tells you nothing other than you've got a dog, which you already know because your standing beside it. What you want the RFID is to give you the owners name and address, or at the very least a unique code number that references an owners details on a database. So the RFID must, to be useful, emit some unique identifier, which means it must by virtue of having a chip in it, process the energy received from the antenna before retransmitting it, and we know the antenna power is used to activate the internal circuitry. If the RFID was a reflector of radar power, none of this additional circuitry would be needed. What does this additional circuitry do ? It holds the information to be encoded in the devices reply. This is why RFID's are 'programmed' before being put in the dog, or more basic ones, just attached to clothing. But how would one clothing shop know that a responding RFID tag is theirs and not another shops - unless there are ways to program the devices. So lets turn the example on its head of 2 RFID tags 100 miles away, to 100 RFID tags now 20 feet apart in the shop. How do you know what tags are relevant to your shop and which are from other shops ? You must be able to receive the encoded replies from the devices - two way communications - a proper radio link. The military can radar track a mortar shell in flight. This maybe perhaps 10 miles away. But a mortar shell is a hand sized lump of metal and it does not need to offer any information about itself to the radar. As we've agreed, a radar target does not emit RF, only reflects it, and there is no information provided by the target. Further it is up in the sky offering a direct line of sight to the radar. In contrast this topic is generally focused on population privacy which puts our discussion in busy and congested urban environments. Far from line of sight and far from supporting less than ideal equipment for long distance communications and the whole point of RFID is not to know there is an RFID device, but we want to know which RFID device. So I stand by my previous example using the home wifi router and laptop as a good example the layman can understand that providing lots of power at one end of the link does not infact make for a long distance two way communications network until both ends are addressed, and yes a complete radio link needs to be established to transfer information between the two nodes. RFID needs to exchange encoded information to be useful.
It's more sophisticated than you think. The response is is basically like a coded on/off of reflections. It is not a real reflection. Just looks like a reflection. And the responses go through a sequence and frequency hops from 908-928mhz (in the case of the commercial EPC Gen2). True Radar will not have a frequency hop. The response or "fake reflection" is controlled by the CONTROLLER in the IC chip. And the response is programmed in. The IC is a remote memory module so you can have it emit a series of numbers. There's a limit to the number of bytes sent back in the reflection. Go watch the DefCon explanations of Long Term RFID on RU-vid. If radar can work at 240 miles then a reflection will work as well. However, the problem I stated has to do with collisions and the frequency used. Commercial RFID's cannot go hundreds of miles because there are too many. There has to be a narrowing down of the signal using techniques like beam forming with phased arrays, and changing the frequency so you can spot specific "custom" RFIDs.
There are devices to scan rfid. But the video is confusing uhf(ultra high frequency up to 900Mhz) tags with common consumer tags which are lf(low frequency 123.5khz) or hf(high frequency 13.5Mhz). The uhf tags are used typically for inventory control or short range tracking. The consumer units and tags are lf or hf. The uhf readers are very expensive because of the processing that needs to be done with a dynamic signal burst of 1ms or less. As well as the frequency shifting from channel hop. The lf tags are currently mostly used for access control (ie badging into or out of a building) but is slowly disappearing, it's also the least secure as it has no encryption and just spits out its id number once it's energized. Lf is also used on the door locks that are sold for domestic use. Hf is also used for nfc such as tap pay with your phone or card. The nfc uses a semi encrypted protocol and tap pay uses a handshake encryption. But as far as destroying rfid Tags, the easiest is to damage the antenna but it can be done by exposing it to a high energy (typically 500 watts or more) radio field in the tuned frequency.
yes, I do not like that hundred dollar bills in the USA have RFID tags. Someone will figure out how to read that you have RFID cash on you right now - so they can steal it.
@@mistyculous9644 US currency does not have rfid integrated. The closest is the magnetically reactive strip which denotes the value based on location within the note.
Theoretically, through a spaced out array of recievers- you could filter out collisions in collision-prone RFIDs by comparing the full total return waves at each location- accounting for amplitude and phase. With 4 or more recievers, you have enough data to geolocate each tag. Using this geolocation, you can use the phase to scrub competing signals at the same wavelength and amplitude, allowing you multiple filters. This is further compounded by the fact you could relay a command that has a known output, allowing you to predict the noise based on the difference between the known value and the recieved return. All of this, on mass is incredibly intensive on processing power in real time- but you could take a recording over an extended stretch of time and use it identify and track the movements of potentially thousands of individuals, even if the data send back by the tags is not fully recoverable.
My credit card has RFID, it's 13.56mHz, same as most modern NFC. I guess the US doesn't have that yet, we call it "Paypass" or "tap and go". That's why I use a travel wallet that blocks RFID... There's something better than RFID dust, it's synthetic DNA and is applied/sprayed in UV reactant dye. It lasts for weeks or longer.
I remember 20-25 Years ago i was in Italy and buying a pair of shoes. And they give a signal as i left the shop. Protecting against theft. The RFID whas implemented in at the heel of the shoes.
Rob, you are sooo lucky that I'm not your neighbor. Doing these videos would have to make you a little paranoid. I'm extremely technical and I love pranks.
I have a question: you said by increasing the power of the transmitter it increases the range of RFID reading, but the passive tag will not respond with the same power so how can its range be enhanced ?
Some passive tags are small microcontrollers or fancy shift registers that leech power from the incoming transmitter to temporarily power on. As the transmitter continues to communicate, the passive tag changes the impedance (complex electrical resistance) of its antenna array which affects the electromagnetic field reflected back to the transmitter. Some tags reflect their serial number (like toll road toll tags) so that the transmitter owner can track the presence of individual tags. Some small amount of collected dynamic data could also be communicated.
the blaring alarm, people think its RFID,usually, it's just a magnet and an unprocessed RFID. Stores are lazy when it comes to inventory. Yes there is a general inventory, but the buzzers at the store doors, are passive, and only pick up magnets strength tuned to the magnets purchased to work with the sensors. They can be bypassed with an electro magnet. 9v batter, a 16 penny anil wrappedin a bunch of coper wire, connect the wire leads tothe batter, touch nail to security device. disabled.
Places like Walmart have so-called greeters that look at your basket and check your receipt on the way out the door. Good luck trying to get out of my local Walmart with anything of value without paying for it.
I used to drive grain truck. And some of the places that I would go, would register my truck with an rfid tag, that I would carry in my truck. They followed the truck through the plant, and recorded the load to the rfid card. And it read out to several hundred feet. How much tech has never been militerized?
I have just been thinking about this subject! I was recalling what Rob was saying about, (Wi-Fi? Bluetooth?), being boosted in power, and being detectable, when we expect it to be undetectable with commercial lower powered devises. You answered my question, Rob, or corrected my mistake, the chips in credit cards are contact chips. I decided to get an RFID blocking wallet. I noticed these minimalist wallets, 2 plates of aluminum sandwiching your cards, 'Could they broadcasting at the edges?' I was considering-RFID blocking is simply a Faraday cage-is RFID blocking technology ACTUALLY a Faraday cage, or is it deficient, possibly requiring a ground. So, I have a RFID blocking wallet, but I don't need it.
Biodegradable and permanent nano-RFID definitely already exists; it's just not cost-effective to put one in everybody yet. The incentive to innovate this was always in the background of the events of the past quarter millennium.
These are public service messages that a government that was honest and sane should be producing. Unfortunately, we are beyond the point of no return. If Rob was to make these broadcasts while on the government payroll, he could not be trusted.
Question: If military radar can send a signal to some crazy range - how can passive tag reply to this? it has no power for any range. How can military radar detect the answer from a weak stamp miles away?
There are nano technologies that are robotic. If you can create a nono-robot then I wouldn't find it too difficult to believe that a nano rfid is a possibility!
Seems like, a custom RFID using a military frequency, with military radar power-- would be unable to respond (transmit) with anything close to the power being sent to it. 100W, for instance, would vaporize a postage_stamp_size RFID device trying to transmit that much power. Yes?
Next level Braxman - gait detection via cellphone tower radar, no microchips required - See Total Information Awareness on wikipedia. Upgrading to millimetric frequency radar with super fine resolution on the 5G network right about now. Have to suspect those cloud connected WiFi hotspots are at it too and the SMART streetlights of course.
My concern is alteration of the bodies electromagnetic field as it interacts with the overcooked RFID reflector. These things are ubiquitous now, recently I removed on from a circular saw handle that had broken , found it haphazardly wedged in where it would be essentially within the operators closed hand
Imagine them embedded into your clothes around your neck or the base of your spine etc, that'll get your chakras going. Those wires in the arms of a pair of glasses are right up next to your brain and near nerves, its about the right length for a 2.4Ghz antenna (ever seen Harrison Bergeron?). That wonderbra might be a problem too I don't get to examine enough of them unfortunately.
Shopping malls already track and triangulate you via your phones cell position update metadata. They use this to “improve your experience” to see which stores you spend more time looking at the display window etc. fun times if you add in your passive rfid takes in your shoes, belt, watch, and packages.
