Ready For RFID Gen3?

Written by Evan Schuman
June 28th, 2006

Few are, but as item-level tagging looms on the horizon, security and functionality may stretch Gen2 beyond its limits.

Considering the glacial pace that is the world of global standards bodies, it’s not surprising that developers need to think far ahead. But as the politically-complicated RFID community has just started getting used to RFID’s Gen2, some are already prepping for Gen3. That’s making some in the industry feelings a little skittish–or perhaps nauseous.

“Some people are so committed to RFID Gen2” that talk of Gen3 “is like garlic to a vampire,” said Kevin Ashton, a VP at ThingMagic and co-founder of MIT’s Auto-ID Center.

Ashton argues that if past RFID standards effort are used as a benchmark, it will take between two to four years to come together on a Gen3 RFID standard, which would put it into the 2008-2010 timeframe, which is not coincidentally “when I think item-level tagging will get real volume.”

Volume item-level tagging and the processes that will support are going to put huge demands on RFID systems and Ashton doubts today’s chips will hold up.

“What people are talking about is security and item level tagging. There is some dancing around the inevitable conclusion that we need an improved protocol to address this,” he said. “Some of the dancing takes the form of attempts to shoehorn security into Generation 2 or to deny that there is a problem. But if you don’t want eavesdropping, and you want to authenticate tags and readers, you need so many changes to Generation 2 that it may as well be called Generation 3. There are some other security features that would be nice to have too – like non-repudiation: undeniable evidence that a certain reader read a certain tag.”

None of this should be a surprise, of course. “Lots of people get that there is going to be Generation 3 and we’re getting some kudos for saying so publicly,” Ashton said. “At the same time, there are people who would love Generation 2 to live forever. Same thing happened with Generation 1. The more things change, the more they stay the same.”

This gets into the never-ending semantic debate about when does software morph from a patch to an upgrade to a dot zero release. How many changes can be done to Gen2 before it truly is Gen3? The good news is that there are plenty of standards meetings to debate such matters. The better news?for all concerned–is that I won’t be attending any.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.