Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Australia's Geekiest Man

Posted by samzenpus on Thu Feb 14, 2008 02:03 AM
from the there-can-be-only-one dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Why have a key to open your front door when you can have an RFID tag implanted in your arm that will do the trick? Computerworld has a story up about the outgoing Linux Australia group president's hacked home, in which just about anything from watering the lawn, to opening his blinds, or checking the mail can be controlled through a software environment. Jonathan Oxer is an electronics and coding whiz who apparently has an RIFD tag implanted in his arm that opens his front door, and his front gate is hooked up with gigabit Ethernet — able to tell him when someone enters the property or send him a virtual email or sms to say he has real mail. Apparently the iPod Touch has just inspired him to begin linking all his little hardware hacks together into the one single, software controlled handheld touch device. I wonder if Steve Jobs ever thought the Touch would end up being used this way?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Pretty damn cool (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Corpuscavernosa (996139) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:08AM (#22417204)
    But I can imagine that you might not always want to have your front door unlocked whenever you're near and I imagine it might be a pain in the ass to get out the Touch and disable it if there were some sort of emergency that required your door being locked.

    • by Gription (1006467) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:15AM (#22417250)
      So a good EMP is the only way to keep the people who kidnapped you out of your house?
    • Then again (Score:5, Funny)

      by fictionpuss (1136565) * on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:25AM (#22417300)
      If you're being chased up the garden path then I'd choose the expediency of an RFID lock rather than fumbling around for keys - seen enough movies to know how that ends.

      What sort of emergency do you have in mind? No home security will deter a determined malicious threat from entering, but a gadgetted up house you could fully control with a device that fits in your pocket, could create enough of a distraction to escape.

      • by Corpuscavernosa (996139) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:35AM (#22417360)
        True, most horror movies would have to skip that scene with this technology in place... sure wouldn't be too tense

        Yeah perhaps I didn't think that one through completely, but I'm just not comfortable with security measures being implemented or disengaged simply by proximity.

        Speaking of your distraction scenario, and clearly because I read too much /., I had a vision of all TVs and computer screens splashing goatse on the would-be evildoer. Something tells me that would at least confuse most anybody's plans.

        • Re:Then again (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Tolkien (664315) on Thursday February 14 2008, @03:12AM (#22417522) Journal
          More disturbing is that it's not *your* proximity. It's *your arm's* proximity. This technology could bring about a whole new and horribly gruesome form of breaking and entering. :|
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          I recently had the experience of using a car with a rfid key. It was the most annoying thing to use.
          Basically when you left the car you couldn't test if the car was locked because you had the key that meant it would automatically unlock. Thus someone else had to test to see if you'd locked it.

          If this is fitted to a house then you have the same problems.

          Does everyone who uses the house have to have this e.g. the house lock is fully automated. What happens when you have guests and you want just to leave the d
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            That's just a bad implementation. I have it as well and love it. the trick is that to unlock the doors you have to press a button which triggers the RFID tag. to start the car once inside it looks for the tag and then allows you to start it up.

            The button is on the door handle and works both ways. press once to unlock twice to unlock them all, if unlocked one press will lock them alll.

            For all RFID systems it shouldn't be all automatic there should still be a physical aspect to work with to unlock the it
          • Re:Then again (Score:5, Insightful)

            by bkr1_2k (237627) on Thursday February 14 2008, @09:01AM (#22419280)
            I totally know how to jack with my OCD friend, now. I've been trying to think of a prank for a long time, and now you've come up with it for me. Excellent.
      • a gadgetted up house you could fully control with a device that fits in your pocket, could create enough of a distraction to escape.


        Shhhhh! Do you really want to give the movie studios any ideas and then have to sit through "Home Alone Version 4.0"?
        • Re:Then again (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Malekin (1079147) on Thursday February 14 2008, @07:17AM (#22418542)
          Speaking as an Australian, I'm quite glad this isn't really an option here.

          If handguns are to work at all to deter assault or robbery, a reasonably high percentage of the general population has to be packing. Unfortunately when there are that many guns floating around it's likely the assailant / robber has one too and all you've done is increased the chances of somebody getting killed rather than just mugged or robbed.

          In the end I'm not sure I buy the idea that handguns deter crime significantly anyway. Even if they did, given the rate at which they're used to inflict grievous harm by angry spouses, stupid children playing with them, and homeowners spooked by noises shooting themselves in the foot at night, I don't think having handguns distributed into society actually works to reduce overall human suffering.
          • Re:Then again (Score:4, Informative)

            by gravesb (967413) on Thursday February 14 2008, @07:43AM (#22418666) Homepage
            The Amici briefs in the DC v. Heller case at the US Supreme Court have a ton of detailed, peer reviewed research on how guns impact crime. Its pretty interesting, and goes a long way to show that gun ownership drastically reduces crime. See, for example, this one. [gurapossessky.com]
  • by dotancohen (1015143) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:11AM (#22417220) Homepage
    What exactly is a virtual email? Can the system send him one when he gets a real email too?
  • by 7-Vodka (195504) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:21AM (#22417278) Journal

    Just as an FYI for anyone considering this, implanted RFID have been known to cause a high incidence of cancer around the implantation area. There's research showing it in animal models, I found out after my pet had to have his RFID tracker replaced (they use this in pets to let vet offices identify your pet if it gets lost).

    Apparently the body doesn't like certain subcutaneous implanted foreign objects and cancerous growths build around it.

    The other issue I would like to point out is that putting RFID chips into people and treating them as cattle has for some time been a dream of the uber wealthy elite classes. This tracks back to the eugenics movement to present day. See Aaron Russo's documentary "America: Freedom to Fascism". [youtube.com]

    As such, I would not be in a hurry to usher in the era of slave I mean people tracking.

    • by flyingsquid (813711) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:32AM (#22417334)
      The other issue I would like to point out is that putting RFID chips into people and treating them as cattle has for some time been a dream of the uber wealthy elite classes.

      Why? By definition, people who are obscenely rich have lots and lots of money, which is a far more effective way to manipulate people than RFID tags. Come on, really, do you picture the super-rich saying, "man, what I'd really like is to be able to implant electronics into the working class so I can watch their every move"? They're rich. They have yachts, and private aircraft, and small islands, and can do anything they want with their lives... do you really think they give a shit about what time Joe Sixpack staggers home with some drunken bar skank?

    • by Dutch Gun (899105) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:33AM (#22417350)
      The notion of people-tracking with RFID is a bit far-fetched, isn't it? These things have a pretty short range, maybe a few meters at most if I recall correctly. Tracking a person isn't going to do much good unless there were sensors everywhere.

      That being said, I'm also in no hurry to have any tracking devices implanted in me either.
      • by 7-Vodka (195504) on Thursday February 14 2008, @04:51AM (#22417954) Journal

        You know something else that has a pretty short range, the toll pay transmitters you can use for toll roads.

        But guess what I recently found out, plenty of states are installing these detectors on the quiet on all sorts of roads, unmarked.

        The one official explanation I saw was that it was for traffic study...

        Not only is it fairly useless for traffic shaping, but when they pick up your ID off those things, it's linked to your CC or bank account, name address etc. And they are keeping records of where you've been with it. Do a little search I'm sure you can find more info.

    • by andersh (229403) * on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:35AM (#22417358)

      implanted RFID have been known to cause a high incidence of cancer around the implantation area

      Known? Implanting "subcutaneous foreign objects" might cause cancer, see the quote below. And the research done on mice indicates it typically happens in one percent or two.

      "It's important to emphasize that those studies are not necessarily sufficient to view these implants as known hazards. The data suggest that the devices foster cancer by causing inflammation of the tissues that encapsulate them. There is a large amount of scientific literature linking cancer and inflammation (the National Cancer Institute has some information on the matter). RFID tags turn out not to be the only form of animal tagging that causes cancer through inflammation; standard metallic ear tags can do so as well. That paper also notes that there have been a number of case reports where human prosthetic implants have induced cancers in the surrounding tissues.", taken from Ars Technica [arstechnica.com]

        • by andersh (229403) * on Thursday February 14 2008, @04:22AM (#22417828)

          If we gave them all implants and the same percentage of people got cancer that's 30 to 60 MILLION people!

          No, I said the OP claimed a HUGE percentage got cancer when in fact they don't. Secondly there was no research done on humans, and mice are not humans.

          The fact that 1-2% could even possibly get cancer does not mean 30-60 million people will get it. Science is a bit more advanced than that. I'm not giving you any credit for your math skills. In fact it's probably unlikely they will get cancer at all from this "potential" threat. You are just making outrageous claims from no evidence what so ever.

          I would take those odds, they're really quite good, but I don't want to be tagged none the less.

        • by jamesh (87723) on Thursday February 14 2008, @05:13AM (#22418014)

          I was shocked to hear someone on TV say they got their whole family implanted "after 9/11 because it would make them safer". I'm sure it did :-/

          You can mock all you like, but how many times has a building that they were occupying had an aircraft crash into it since the implantation?
    • by jellie (949898) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:53AM (#22417436)
      Maybe you're referring to this article [slashdot.org], which was discussed here several months ago.

      Inert objects implanted into the body cause fibrous encapsulation, when the body's immune system covers the implant with fibrous and connective tissues. I'm sure you probably noticed that the implant in your pet was covered in tissue after they removed it. The problem is that scientists haven't determined whether it's the RF scanners, the RFID itself, or the presence of an inert implant that's causing the cancer (or at least I'm not aware of any evidence of it). Having said that, I would never implant myself with a foreign object.
  • Excessive? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by multipass666 (1213904) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:22AM (#22417288)
    I was always curious why futurists and cyborg fanboys get RFID chips implanted underneath their skin. What's wrong with just wearing one on a ring or perhaps a chain around your neck? Maybe both for multiple redundancy. Does it really happen THAT often you go to the pub for a few pints and comeback so drunk you've lost all your possessions? Does that slim probability warrant tagging yourself like cattle?
    • Got an RFID tag... well just about everyone has one these days for their office id card or whatever.

      Got an implant.... now that shows you're into it.... or at least it's into you!

    • Does it really happen THAT often you go to the pub for a few pints and comeback so drunk you've lost all your possessions?


      On a worringly frequent basis, often without clothing, with inexplicable knife wounds or covered in leaves.
  • by patio11 (857072) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:30AM (#22417326)
    >>Why have a key to open your front door when you can have an RFID tag implanted in your arm that will do the trick?>>

    I can think of a number of reasons.

    1. You can give your key to a trusted associate, for example to housesit or run an errand for you. Giving your arm to a trusted associate is computationally intensive, destructive, and irreversible.

    2. You can, for the cost of less than one hour's salary, revoke the key tied to a compromised lock, and then issue a new key. If unforseen circumstances should cause the RFID lock to require revoking, well, bad news bears...

    3. Key/lock devices are well understood, hardly ever fail due to them having few moving parts which are almost never in operation, and are robust against almost all unforseen environmental conditions (i.e. power outage). Arm/RFID reader interfaces are poorly understood, by necessity have to be polling constantly, and are dependent on several fragile systems to maintain the key requirements that you be let into your house promptly any time you desire and that unauthorized users be rejected 100% of the time.

    4. You have designs of ever having a romantic relationship. ("Honey, I know preparations for the wedding have been a bit busy, but we'll have to schedule your surgery sometime this week...")

    5. A diligent attacker attempting to compromise your lock/key interface has no reason to attempt to compromise your shoulder/arm interface with a hacksaw.
    • 4. You have designs of ever having a romantic relationship. ("Honey, I know preparations for the wedding have been a bit busy, but we'll have to schedule your surgery sometime this week...")

      If I recall correctly they used a big arsed needle to implant the microchips in my dogs and that was 8 years ago.

      Hey honey, bend over! This will only take a minute!

      Oops silly me, that was meant to go in your arm. I read the instructions wrong. Hey your options are that you can put your arse against the door to open it or
      • "I would guess most of us are in the hope/dreams stage"

        I for one am well past the "take the cheque and fuck off" stage, I've survived the "working single dad" stage and the "middle age disco heart attack" stage. I think the "indifferent old fart" stage is next, I'd ask dad but he's in the "surprised to be alive" stage and mostly just grins like a child.

        Go away, I don't have a lawn!
  • by jsse (254124) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:45AM (#22417398) Homepage Journal
    and were planning to sell it to China.

    The system contains everything you could imagine: in-house tracking system, motion detectors, remote messaging control and web-interface administration, integration with all electronic household appliances for whatever control you could think of doing, including but not limited to gardening and feeding your dogs.

    He even got VC supports to build the actual products; but then, I asked him one question: "what about power outage, which happen so frequently in China?"

    He thought briefly and said "We could include an fuel-powered, emergency backup power supply for my system."

    "Well, when there's a power outage, those house appliances cease to function as well..."

    He then thought more deeply and said "Then we must kick in a bigger fuel-powered, emergency backup power supply for the entire house!"

    He's now selling household fuel-powered emergency backup power supplies and really good at it.
  • by coljac (154587) on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:47AM (#22417410) Homepage
    For all those who are about to make wisecracks about this dude, by all means go ahead.

    Just pause for a moment and admit to yourself that you were thinking what language *you* would be scripting the curtains with.
  • Hmmmmm..... (Score:3, Funny)

    by IHC Navistar (967161) on Thursday February 14 2008, @03:20AM (#22417554)
    Every time I read a story about people implating RFID tags into themselves as a means of "keyless entry", it always reminds me of that scene in Demolition Man where Wesley Snipes pulls out the warden's eyball so he can get past the retinal scanner in the Cryoprison.
  • by bitspotter (455598) on Thursday February 14 2008, @03:23AM (#22417574) Journal
    My understanding of "RFID" tags is that since they are powered by the energy broadcast by the reader, the tags themselves can't do very much in terms of computation. As a result, they are limited to parroting back a static serial number (though a long one, or part of it) that's determined when the tag is manufactured.

    This means that the tags themselves cannot do any encryption at all.

    If this is the case, why the hell would anybody want to use it to gain secure access to anything when anybody nearby the tag with an RFID reader can read the serial number and spoof the tag?

    This would be like writing your credit card number on the front of your shirt - //in infrared ink//. Sure, you'd need fancy infrared optics to read it - but why the hell would you take that chance?

    Is my understanding flawed, here? Are there newer RFID tags that actually can do crypto (and are people like those in TFA using them)? I may be wrong in any number of ways, so I'm looking for some more solid info.

  • Jon Rocks (Score:4, Interesting)

    by laptop006 (37721) on Thursday February 14 2008, @03:36AM (#22417628) Homepage Journal
    But we have geekier people.

    Like, say, Andrew Tridgall who at a recent event (linux.conf.au 2008), instead of socialising decided to reverse engineer the Sony eBook reader.

    Although the blog post with photos of how he put the RFID in himself was one of the most distrubing things I've ever seen on the internet (I guess because I've worked with him).
  • Jobs Shmobs (Score:3, Funny)

    by EveLibertine (847955) on Thursday February 14 2008, @03:49AM (#22417698)

    I wonder if Steve Jobs ever thought the Touch would end up being used this way?"
    Who cares what Steve Jobs thinks? He's got nothing on Jonathan Oxer.
  • Why the iPod touch? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DingerX (847589) on Thursday February 14 2008, @03:53AM (#22417712) Journal
    I mean a N800 [wikipedia.org] runs Linux out of the box and has most of the bits and pieces already available for the remote control uses he describes. And, being not only a Linux geek, but a Linux geek motivated enough to hobble together his own house, he should recognize that the Touch's strength is in doing the small number of factory-approved tasks, but doing them really well, while the N800 excels in doing whatever you want, provided you can figure out how to do it. I'm just saying, it's a better fit.
     
    But when you look at home automation like that, do you ask yourself "how much time a day does he spend installing and maitaining his automatics?"
  • Full Interview (Score:4, Informative)

    by BeeBeard (999187) on Thursday February 14 2008, @04:13AM (#22417784)
    Is there a reason why the summary doesn't link to the full interview [computerworld.com.au]?
  • by PipingSnail (1112161) on Thursday February 14 2008, @04:29AM (#22417862)

    "Why have a key to open your front door when you can have an RFID tag implanted in your arm that will do the trick?

    • Because I don't want the door to open just because I'm near it.
    • Because I don't want the door to lock just because I'm not near it.
    • Because I don't want to be locked in if there is a power failure.
    • Because I don't want to be locked out if there is a power failure.
    • Because I don't want cancer caused by the implant.
    • Because its a damn stupid idea..
    • Just because its a use of technology doesn't make it clever or cool.
    • I'm sure some of you can think of other reasons I haven't enumerated here.

    RFID tags and proximity cards (like on some cars) are not a good replacement for a key. They do not behave the same way.

    We have a modern key-less system at the local swimming pool. Keys have been replaced with a wristband with a single button about the size of a UK 5pence piece (a dime in the US I think). Most of the time they work well. But when the conductance isn't quite right (usually the surfaces are too wet) they don't work. In a swimming pool and the changing rooms, the chances of things being too wet, is er, rather high. A different pool I go to uses real keys. I never, ever have a problem opening a locker at that pool. The key does what it is meant to do, that is, be a key, not a clever, technology over-engineered replacement for a key that requires operator intervention by the key creators to fix malfunctions.

    We have a lecturer (professor?) here in the UK that does stupid stuff like this all the time. Gets him in the media. I'm sure he loves it. Really, really sad. Why don't people use their creativity a bit more usefully?

  • Even without having met him, there's one thing I can tell you about this gentleman with absolute certainty: He does not number among his friends anybody with a warped sense of humour and knowledge of the term "induction field".
  • by jcr (53032) <jcr&mac,com> on Thursday February 14 2008, @07:11AM (#22418508) Journal
    The iPhone and the iPod touch are both excellent devices for controlling a house. Now we need USB or Wi-Fi enabled thermostats, garage door openers, door locks, etc. X-10 was a cool idea for its time, but it's showing its age.

    -jcr

  • "Why have a key to open your front door when you can have an RFID tag implanted in your arm that will do the trick?"

    Because you'd like to attract women at some point? /joke
  • Captain Cyborg (Score:4, Informative)

    by gilesjuk (604902) <giles.jones@nOspAm.zen.co.uk> on Thursday February 14 2008, @08:26AM (#22418924)
    Kevin Warwick (aka Captain Cyborg) did this years ago. Having a chip implanted for the purpose of opening doors etc.
    • Re:RFID? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:17AM (#22417264)
      How long until someone freaks out irrationally about it?
    • Re:RFID? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2008, @02:47AM (#22417402)
      I've used the RFID kit [jaycar.com.au] he's installed on his front door before.

      There is absolutely no encrypted handshake between the RFID tag and the reader. Hence an attacker could VERY easily conduct a replay attack using an easily duplicated tag. Given that the tag he uses is implanted into his arm, anyone that walks past him on the street could steal his front door key.

      But I guess this isn't much of an issue for fellow geeks, because what sort of geek walks outside their basement and gets within the vicinity of other people in the first place?