Filed in archive
Tags and Readers
by gautam on March 22, 2006

Here is what AIM has to say:
According to AIM, the study has overlooked a number of fundamental design features which are necessary in automatic data collection systems and good database design.
It further says that poor system design is bound to create vulnerabilities while capturing bar code information or RFID tag information.
The trade group also threw light on the fact that there two broad categories of RFID tags- one which has fixed data and other in which data can be changed of which the former one is immune to infection by virus.
It also noted that the ability to insert a virus into the system implies that a tag contains executable code that can be recognized by the software but according to it was not possible with many RFID applications as they looked for specific kinds of data and would either flag or reject anything that does not fit the data template.
I simply don't know when this confusion is gonna end. I believe that these kinds of reports are not going to do any good to RFID. With this kind of uncertainty surrounding RFID, it could have serious repercussions in terms of the progress of the technology and its commercialization. Why doesn't some specialized RFID body come ahead and end this confusion once and for all? I simply can't bear this.
Permalink: RFID Virus - The War Continues
Trackback: http://publish.creative-weblogging.com/publish/mt-tb.pl/18684
Mr Wong
Vote for RFID Virus - The War Continues:
|
Rating: 5.50 out of 2 vote(s) cast.
|
Response from:
Anita Campbell
(03/23/06 12:32am)
Response from:
Rich Miller
(03/27/06 2:34am)
You can see my take on this in two posts in my blog: http://telematique.typepad.com/twf/2006/03/how_does_an_rfi.html
and http://telematique.typepad.com/twf/2006/03/more_on_the_rfi.html
and http://telematique.typepad.com/twf/2006/03/more_on_the_rfi.html
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! |








Last month it was the big cell phone attack that turned out to be a non-attack:
http://www.rfid-weblog.com/50226711/the_big_cell_phone_nonattack.php
So many of these seem to be exaggerated claims with little or no basis, that I am starting to think we have a "cry wolf" situation. I wonder: will we have so many false alarms that we run the risk of ignoring something truly serious if it ever comes along? How will we sort out whether something is truly serious -- and not just another urban myth in the making?
Best,
Anita