Filed in archive
Implementation
by Anita Campbell on February 25, 2006

In a nutshell, the furor concerns the purchase of a port security company by a Dubai-owned company from the United Arab Emirates. Dubai Ports World would end up managing operations at several shipping ports in the United States.
People are still sorting out the facts about the exact nature of Dubai Ports World's role. First reports suggested that Dubai Ports World would be in charge of security at the ports. Naturally the idea that a foreign-owned company -- of any country -- would be in charge of security had people up in arms.
Slowly more information is coming out about exactly what Dubai Ports World would be in charge of. More recent reports suggest the role is much narrower and does not involve security at all, but rather, puts them in charge of routine operations.
I think you can fairly say many average citizens are against the deal, based on what little they have heard so far. Whether we have been hearing complete and accurate information is another matter altogether.
In the past several days, the nature of the debate has broadened, with lawmakers and news analysts noting that the bigger issue is that ports in the U.S. are still insecure. The belief is that not enough has been done by the U.S. government to improve port security. Only 5%, maybe 10%, of containers are inspected before arriving in the United States.
So what does all this have to do with RFID?
The RFID connection is that the port security debate has once again raised security technology to the forefront.
A while back in this blog I noted that RFID had the potential to be able to detect contents of shipping containers, secure containers from tampering, and otherwise make our ports more secure. See earlier posts here and here.
RFID is being raised once again, in several contexts. First, why aren't we using more technology such as RFID to make U.S. ports more secure? Second, could the management of our ports by foreign companies allow the technology to fall into the wrong hands (which seems to me a stretch, because anybody can buy any technology today as it is)?
I'm afraid there are no answers about RFID at this stage -- just lots of questions. Let me point you in the direction of a few recent news reports discussing the role that RFID could play in making ports more secure and the broader issue of port security:
Permalink: Is RFID The Answer to Port Security?
Trackback: http://publish.creative-weblogging.com/publish/mt-tb.pl/16306
Mr Wong
Vote for Is RFID The Answer to Port Security?:
|
Rating: 10.00 out of 1 vote(s) cast.
|
Response from:
Chris Kapsambelis
(02/26/06 12:43pm)
From your previous reporting the DoD was unable to read pallet loads of case goods. It is safe to assume that reading the contents of sealed shipping containers is currently not feasible. Adi Ahamir, an authority on Computer Security, said EPC RFID tags are very vulnerable to attack. I would be much more comfortable using tried and proven methods of Port Security.
Response from:
Warching Them, Watching Us
(03/05/06 7:25pm)
Surely RFID is entirely irrelevant to the "port security" issue ?
Who owns the port management concession at the moment ? P&O - a *foreign* oened* (British) company.
Does anyone seriously think, that the British authorities provide any sort of "security vetting" for the operations or personnell of the foreign overseas operations of thuis company ?
Port security is the responsibility of the local Ports Authorities and Customs etc authorities in the USA, no matter who opwns any bits of the port logistics chain.
Are only US flagged ship[ps allowed to carry cargo into US ports ? Obviously not.
As you point out it is the lack of inspections of incoming containers which presents the security and smuggling problem, and RFID would do nothing whatsoever to help with this.
How many shipments of cocaine or illegal weapons or illegal immigrants are going to be correctly labelled, with or without RFID ?
Reliance on RFID labels for pallets or cerates could lead to even more security holes, if stuff which is labelled as a "reputable, safe" consignment is not actually inspected as a result, since RFID tag signals are so relatively easy to clone or forge.
Who owns the port management concession at the moment ? P&O - a *foreign* oened* (British) company.
Does anyone seriously think, that the British authorities provide any sort of "security vetting" for the operations or personnell of the foreign overseas operations of thuis company ?
Port security is the responsibility of the local Ports Authorities and Customs etc authorities in the USA, no matter who opwns any bits of the port logistics chain.
Are only US flagged ship[ps allowed to carry cargo into US ports ? Obviously not.
As you point out it is the lack of inspections of incoming containers which presents the security and smuggling problem, and RFID would do nothing whatsoever to help with this.
How many shipments of cocaine or illegal weapons or illegal immigrants are going to be correctly labelled, with or without RFID ?
Reliance on RFID labels for pallets or cerates could lead to even more security holes, if stuff which is labelled as a "reputable, safe" consignment is not actually inspected as a result, since RFID tag signals are so relatively easy to clone or forge.
Response from:
Drug Addiction
(04/10/09 7:27pm)
http://www.thecyn.com/drug-rehab
Response from:
George Renoux
(08/04/09 2:37pm)
Again, I think that we, as a society are not focusing our efforts correctly here. We need to support drug treatment centers that address the issue of addiction at the source, and not merely the street trade that always seems to make the evening news.
Subscribe
Use the search to look for other interesting posts
| RSS | See all blog subscribe options |
|
What is RSS? | |
| Yahoo! |
|
| Addthis |
|
| Bloglines |
|
| Newsletter | |
| Follow us on Twitter! |







