From Uniforms to Smart Card IDs

In many situations, the first means of identifying someone as an authorized employee is the uniform or clothing they're wearing. The concept of distinctive clothing for employees first gained prominence in the Middle Ages, when servants, soldiers, and even vassals would wear some mark of their liege lord. From the perspective of employee rights, one benefit of the growth of the merchant class and private employers was the freedom from wearing a lord's mark. Clothes might still mark your profession, of course—the leather apron of the smithy or the powdered wig of the attorney. But the use of clothing to identify people as employees of a particular company was still far in the future.

Today, when you see someone striding into a business dressed in a brown jumpsuit and carrying a package, you instantly think "UPS." A red-and-blue polo shirt and a thermal bag is the uniform for Domino's Pizza; taupe-and-pink are the colors of Dunkin' Donuts; and so on. ^[2] Emergency personnel—police, fire, EMTs—rely on their uniforms in large part to help identify them in a crowd, and of course, distinguishable clothing is particularly important in wartime. Commanders need to be able to quickly identify their own soldiers, and soldiers need to know who to shoot and who not to shoot.

As innumerable books and movies have demonstrated, of course, employee uniforms are hardly the most secure method of controlling access. Credible imitations can easily be bought from clothing supply stores, and actual uniforms are rarely kept under tight control. As a matter of fact, you can purchase uniforms from a number of companies, including UPS and McDonald's, on eBay.

Uniforms themselves would seem to have little impact on employee privacy. For the time being, at least, a uniform can't spy on you at work or report on what you've been doing outside of the workplace.

But even something as low-tech as a cotton polo shirt can be the starting place for potentially invasive scrutiny by your employer. In order to provide you with clothing that fits, your employer at least needs to know your size. And the more extensive the uniform, the more information that must be provided to your employer: A polo shirt, for instance, may only be issued in a handful of sizes (S, M, L, XL, etc.), but a jumpsuit or shirt-and-pants combination may require more extensive and revealing measurements. If your measurements change over time, you may need new clothing; for inventory control purposes, your employer is likely to keep a record of the uniforms that have been issued to you. That information offers general information about your health: sudden weight gain or loss, for instance, can indicate a variety of medical conditions.

Another alternative available to employers is to use a service that will track that information for them. A typical example is Gallagher Uniform, which services clients in the south central Michigan area. Gallagher offers employers a number of different reports for tracking uniforms, including a serial number report:

A serial number report provides detailed bar code information on a specific person's garments. You can track the inventory and age of a person's garments, as well as the garments' delivery history. This report is helpful when an associate is terminated because it provides you with a quick view of their inventory and the serial numbers of their garments. Also if an associate thinks they have misplaced their uniform they can easily track the location of their garments by using this report. If you think you are missing a uniform just let us know, we can email or fax this report directly to you.

Another potential source of information, although slower to infiltrate the workplace, is the technology that can detect the dust and smells that cling to your clothing. A large number of airports and prisons in the United States, for instance, are currently using a device called the Ionscan Sentinel II, an explosive/drug detection machine designed and manufactured by Barringer Protection and Detection Systems.

The device (which looks like an overgrown metal detector) consists of a processing unit attached to a portal. If you step into the portal, gentle puffs of air are used to dislodge trace particles and vapors emanating from your clothes. Any trace substances are pulled into the processing unit, where they are tested and analyzed. In just eight seconds, the Sentinel II can detect over forty different types of explosives and drugs.

Although there are no reports of private businesses purchasing the enormously expensive machines, one of the applications identified for the Sentinel II by Barringer is "site security," which suggests a wide variety of potential applications. And one of the constants of technology is that the cost always goes down over time, which in turn makes the technology more easily available to a larger number of potential users.

One factor that may slow the adoption of the Sentinel II by private companies, however, is the potential uncertainty of its results. The sniffer's primary success is evaluating whether your clothing has been in the presence of something illegal; just because your clothing has been there doesn't necessarily mean that you have. Your roommate, for instance, may have borrowed your jacket without your knowledge and worn it to his job as an explosives expert for a highway construction project.

When it comes to airport security, the mere presence of trace amounts of drugs or explosives on your clothing is a reasonable basis for further investigation. But the use of a machine like the Ionscan to detect drugs in the workplace may be overkill, particularly given the cheaper and more reliable methods that are either already available or are now being developed.

Sizing You Up: The Trend to Smart Uniforms

Admittedly, the information that can be gathered by tracking your uniform size over time is not particularly revealing. However, in the not-too-distant future, your uniform itself might reveal much more detailed information about your habits and your health.

In 1999, Kursty Groves, a student at the Royal College of Art in London, invented the Techno Bra, an undergarment equipped with a heart rate monitor, GPS locator, and wireless phone. ^[3] The purpose of the bra, Groves said, was to detect the jump in a woman's heart rate stemming from a domestic assault or rape, and to transmit the victim's location to the police or a friend. The bra would be able to distinguish between the heart rate increase resulting from a frightening attack and that caused by being startled, feeling angry at a careless driver, or becoming excited by a lover's embrace. As columnist Meredith Levinson wrote in the April 2000 issue of CIO Magazine, Groves's invention gave a whole new meaning to the phrase "tech support."

The Techno Bra is illustrative of the type of clothing that could potentially transmit a great deal of useful information about you to your employer, ranging from various health indicators to your specific location. As we'll see in later chapters, companies are showing tremendous interest in a variety of systems that enable them to track the precise location of equipment and personnel both on and off their property. It's not difficult to imagine corporate interest in clothing that can be positively identified as belonging to the company, particularly given the ease with which most uniforms can be duplicated. It's also not difficult to imagine that some companies might not tell their employees that the snazzy new uniform they're wearing is secretly wired to monitor their heart rate, respiration, body temperature, and a handful of other medical indicators, along with their precise physical location.

Such so-called "smart clothing" has already attracted attention from several "big-label" companies, including Adidas, Levi Strauss, and even Samsonite. Those companies were part of a group that helped fund an early research project run by the Brussels-based Starlab, a quasi-utopian experiment in advanced research. Founded by U.S. millionaire Walter de Brouwer in 1996, the one hundred or so scientists at Starlab were encouraged to develop interdisciplinary projects; one of them was "I-Wear," an effort to develop intelligent clothing. The project's head, Walter Van de Velde, envisioned clothing that someday would have circuits woven into the fabric, with the pattern of the circuits determining their capabilities.

As it turned out, even Utopia is vulnerable to economic cycles: The tech sector implosion cost Starlab some important investors, and the remaining supporters lost their enthusiasm. Despite the fact that Starlab crashed and burned, however, the concept of wired clothing has continued to attract attention. In April 2002, the German semiconductor manufacturer Infineon Technologies AG announced its first prototypes of smart textiles, including sensors that can be incorporated into clothing to measure heart rate, body temperature, and other health indicators. The devices will be powered by tapping into the heat differential between the human body and surrounding layers of clothing, and the data will be transmitted wirelessly to a wristwatch or a nearby monitoring device.

Similarly, the Georgia Institute of Technology's School of Textile & Fiber Engineering has been working for the last several years on a computerized shirt. Embedded in the fabric of the shirt (called the Georgia Tech Wearable Motherboard or GTWM) is a simple computer motherboard, fiber optic connections, and special sensors. Research on the shirt has been funded by the U.S. Navy; one application will be a garment that can detect if a soldier or sailor has been shot and can pinpoint the location of the wound for medical personnel. In addition, the shirt's sensors can monitor the wearer's heart rate, temperature, and respiration.

The initial market for smart clothing like the GTWM will be the military, hospital or nursing home patients, and athletes, but private employers will not be far behind. Given the potential liability if a school bus driver or airplane pilot has an ill-timed heart attack, school districts or airline companies will worry (with justification) that they could be found negligent for not requiring those employees to wear smart clothing, if there was any reasonable indication that the clothing could have given enough notice to prevent injury to others.

Faking IDs

Given the events on September 11, 2001, it's more than a little disconcerting that so much of the nation's corporate security is based on a credit card-sized piece of paper decorated with a photo booth-style head shot and a company logo, all stuffed into a small lamination pouch. The point of the nearly ubiquitous photo ID, of course, is to make visual identification an ongoing process, enabling your fellow employees or your company's security staff to verify that the person wearing your badge is really you.

But as any movie fan knows, the basic photo ID is hardly the most secure technology in the world: It's exceedingly easy to alter an existing ID or manufacture a new one. In the 1993 film, The Fugitive, Harrison Ford, in his role as Dr. Richard Kimble, gave roughly 30 million people a virtual tutorial on breaching loosely kept security. First, Kimble sneaked into the basement of a hospital and stole a janitor's photo ID. Next, he bought a janitor's uniform at a supply store. Finally, he used a razor blade to peel apart the plastic covering of the stolen ID, inserted a snapshot of himself taken at a photo booth, and sealed the ID back up. The doctored ID and uniform allowed Ford to wander essentially unchallenged through the hospital's corridors.

Sound farfetched? Unfortunately, it's not. In November 2000, a drifter named Gary Lee Stearley was arrested for trespassing after he used a physician's assistant ID he'd created at a local printing shop to do eight hours of rounds at Mercy Hospital in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Stealey told the court that he had pulled similar stunts in Florida and Washington State.

In the aftermath of the attacks on 9/11, the FAA ordered every airport and airline to validate all of their identification cards. To assist in the review process, the United States Justice Department launched "Operation Tar-mac," during which eleven government agencies reviewed the employment records of over 20,000 people. Disturbingly, the probe resulted in the arrests of ninety-four workers at Washington-area airports on charges of fraudulently obtaining airport security badges. Other arrests on similar charges occurred in Baltimore, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, and San Francisco. ^[4]

Despite the increased scrutiny, a con man named Edward Forrest successfully gained access to supposedly secure areas of the Los Angeles Airport less than two months after the terrorist attacks. Forrest had used a computer and scanner to create fake badges identifying him as an employee of Delta Airlines, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Defense Department, and the Air Force. ^[5]

Employers and security firms, of course, are acutely aware of the fact that if you're a do-it-yourself-type person, a five-minute search on the Internet can produce all the information you need to alter a basic photo ID. The vulnerability of the laminated pouch IDs led to the development and increasingly widespread adoption in the late 1980s of an ID card technology called digital printing. Although the process remains relatively expensive, digital printing produces ID cards that are far more difficult to alter. Digital printers are capable of taking high-resolution images, including photographs, and printing those images directly onto a solid plastic card or a piece of high definition film that is tightly bonded to the ID card.

ID manufacturers have come up with a variety of other techniques designed to make it more difficult to copy an ID and use it as a template for fake cards. Here are some of the leading techniques used by Datacard Group, one of the world's largest identification card manufacturers:

• Topcoats—a clear polymer or laminate can be used to coat the top of an ID card to make it more durable and hard to alter (In addition, Datacard can incorporate holographs into its topcoat that don't show up when the card is copied or scanned.)

• Microprinting—a high-resolution printing process for IDs can incorporate extremely small characters into the card's design (If a card is copied or scanned, the microprinting is either missing or blurred in the copy.)

• Ghost printing—the printing of a faint copy of an ID's main photo, usually as background to some personal information contained on the card (Any effort to alter the personal information damages the ghost image.)

• Iridescent inks—inks containing metallic or pearlescent particles that glitter as the card is tilted in the light (A copier or scanner cannot reproduce iridescent inks.)

• Rainbow (iris) printing—a printing process that subtly and gradually shifts the background color of a card from one side to the other (Copiers and scanners cannot accurately reproduce the color shift.)

• UV printing—the use of ultraviolet inks that can only be viewed using a long-wave UV light source (Copiers and scanners cannot reproduce UV inks.)

• Indented and embossed printing—a familiar feature of credit cards, embossing and indentation requires special equipment to reproduce accurately

• Computer-generated image modification—in digital printing systems, the computer can be used to embed images that can only be viewed with certain equipment, and which are not reproduced by copiers or scanners

• Holograms—the major credit card companies have been using holograms for a number of years (Like most of these other features, holograms are not easily reproduced by average office equipment, and they are similarly difficult to manufacture. The holograms themselves may be metallic and affixed to the card, or printed over the card's data in a semitransparent layer.)

By themselves, these new printing technologies have little direct impact on your privacy. Even with high-tech features, a standard employee photo ID contains information that is public anyway, at least within the company for which you work—your name, the name of the company, your appearance, and possibly your employee ID number.

The privacy impact of a basic ID, however, cannot be measured solely by the information contained on the card itself. In a post-9/11 world, the issuance of even the most rudimentary employee ID is now raising far more serious privacy issues.

First, the days of the basic ID are clearly numbered, as security experts urge businesses to increase the amount of information printed on each employee ID. Some security experts are already recommending that encoded biometric information—fingerprints, iris scans, even DNA—be printed on plastic ID cards. Although a variety of encryption technologies can be used to protect biometric information, the collection and encoding of highly personal information on a card that can be fairly easily lost or stolen raises obvious security and privacy concerns.

Second, as the cards grow steadily more sophisticated and harder to duplicate, their value as a means of identification steadily increases. This in turn means that employers will only be willing to issue them after a particularly thorough background check. The U.S. Transportation Security Administration has already drawn up plans to issue a tamper-proof ID to all transportation employees who pass a very strict background check (a proposal that is discussed in more detail in Chapter 4). A possible extension of the program, which the TSA is still discussing, will be to offer faster boarding lines to passengers who are willing to undergo a similar background check and carry the TSA's ID.

Also on the near horizon are security IDs that can record and store large quantities of data. For instance, LaserCard Systems, based in Mountain View, California, manufacturers ID cards with optical memory built into the card. These so-called "LaserCards " are capable of holding up to 2.8 megabytes of information. The types of employee information that could be stored is really limited only by the imagination of a company's HR department, but would typically consist of identifying information, including a photo and biometric details, along with computer network passwords, security access authorizations, job description, attendance and timeliness records, and so forth—in short, virtually anything an employer might find useful. The LaserCard Systems technology is already being used to replace "green cards" on the U.S.-Mexican border with "laser visas" that can be updated with information about each border crossing.

The basic picture ID, which has been around for more than a century, will hardly disappear overnight: It has the advantage of being both simple and inexpensive to produce. The speed with which employers adopt digitally printed cards, LaserCards , and other sophisticated ID technology will depend in large part on how quickly prices fall and how important improved security is to the company in question.

Name, Rank, and Serial Number: Smart Cards Get Drafted

In the early 1970s, inventors in Germany, Japan, and France filed patents for a new type of card, one with a microchip built into it. As is often the case, it was an example of a good idea getting ahead of the technology. It would take another decade before the semiconductor industry could manufacture the components needed to make a practical "smart card."

Once the technological hurdles were overcome, the next challenge was to find a use for the cards. The French led the way, adopting smart card technology for the French National Visa Debit Card and the French Telecom system. Largely because of France's leadership, smart cards have become enormously popular in Europe. They are, for instance, an integral part of the Global System for Mobile communications (GSM). There are over 300 million GSM phones in use in Europe, and each one has a slot for a smart card, which stores the cardholder's phone number, billing information, and list of frequently called numbers. Likewise, a number of national health systems (led by Germany and Austria) now rely heavily on smart cards to track health insurance information and other basic patient data.

The popularity of the smart card stems from its steadily improving capabilities. To the average user, a smart card looks like a traditional credit card, albeit slightly thicker because of the memory or microprocessing chip embedded in the center. ^[6] Currently, smart card memory chips are capable of holding 16,000 bits of data, and the microprocessing chips can hold 32,000 bits. That's not an enormous amount of information, but in both cases, the storage capacity is expected to rise dramatically; after all, IBM now sells a hard drive the size of a quarter that can hold a gigabyte of information.

What makes a smart card "smart" is the fact that the information it stores can be retrieved, verified, amended, added to, and processed, depending on the capabilities of the chip embedded in the card. Most cards communicate with the card reader in one of two ways—either through direct contact (usually a gold-plated dime-sized disc in the upper left-hand corner of the card), or via a tiny antenna built into the card itself (such cards are described appropriately enough as "contactless"). An increasing number of cards, known as "hybrid" or "combi" cards, are manufactured with both types of communication technology.

Smart cards have not proven as successful in the United States as they have in Europe (and increasingly, in Asia). Chase Manhattan Bank, Citibank, Mastercard, and Visa have all launched trial programs for smart cards, but the result was the same for each—not enough consumers used the cards to make it worthwhile to expand the program. In 1997 and 1998, for instance, Citibank and Chase Manhattan issued over 100,000 smart cards to residents on the Upper West Side of New York. In theory, consumers could transfer funds from their bank accounts to their smart card and use the card to make small purchases at 600 different area merchants. The banks found, however, that most people did not charge up their cards a second time. Without a large enough pool of consumers making purchases, most of the merchants dropped out of the program.

To date, no widespread consumer application for smart cards has developed in the United States. However, the retailer Target Corp. is taking another run at the introduction of a consumer smart card. Target has teamed up with Visa and smart card manufacturer Gemplus International S.A. to introduce cards that consumers can use both in stores and on their home computers. In September 2001, Target began mailing out 2.5 million smart cards to holders of Target store cards. With a planned launch of a loyalty program in the fall of 2002, the Target/Visa/Gemplus consortium is hoping that they can reach a critical mass of both consumers and vendors.

The Target smart card is currently being actively promoted on the Target site:

When you look at Target Visa, you're actually looking at the future. Why? Target Visa has a built-in computer chip, called a smart chip, that's designed to add more convenience and benefits to everyday life. Today, you can use your Target Visa with an in-home smart card reader to access exclusive offers. And soon, you'll see exciting new smart chip features popping up online, in Target Visa account management, at your local Target store, and more! The chip makes the Target Visa smart.

For a limited time, Target is also giving away a smart card reader that consumers can plug into their computer so that they can use their smart card for Web purchases. Consumers who have the smart card reader will be able to download electronic coupons onto their smart card and redeem them at Target stores.

The only other organization in the United States that is enthusiastically adopting smart card technology right now is the Department of Defense (DOD). By the end of 2003, the DOD expects to have issued over 4 million 32-kilobyte smart cards to active duty personnel and authorized contractors. The cards will contain such information as each person's name, rank, serial number, and Social Security number. In addition, the DOD card will store three public key infrastructure certificates, which the bearer can use to log onto military networks, authenticate e-mail, and digitally sign electronic documents. In the future, when the 32-kilobyte cards are upgraded to 64 kilobytes, the DOD plans to include biometric identification data, which will allow the cards to be used to regulate physical access to military facilities.

The wholesale adoption of smart card technology by the Department of Defense offers a model for the growth of smart card use in this country. Economies of scale in production will help lower the cost of smart cards, and increased capabilities will make smart cards more useful as security devices. In addition to the increased capacity that is in the works, smart card manufacturers are also turning to multiplatform programming languages like Java, which will make it easier for the cards to work with readers produced by a variety of manufacturers.

When digitally printed IDs and smart cards routinely carry biometric information, they will help employers implement a two-prong security system, one that identifies each employee by something she has (the card) and something she is (fingerprints, for instance, or iris scan). But even more secure identification is in the works.

Employee Tagging: Not So Much if but When

From a security point of view, even the most sophisticated ID card is potentially vulnerable: It can be lost, stolen, or even sold. Given enough time and resources, a determined individual or organization can replicate virtually any card on the market today.

One solution to the security problem will be to require the use of identification devices that can't be taken off (or at least not easily or painlessly). In February 2002, one Florida family—Leslie, Jeff, and Derek Jacobs—offered a glimpse into the future when they volunteered to become the first consumers to have radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips, known as VeriChips, implanted in their bodies. A Brazilian government official also announced that he would have a chip implanted as well. Believing that implantation of RFID-enabled devices could someday be a $70 billion per year business, VeriChip manufacturer Applied Digital Solutions (ADS) has even trademarked the phrase "getting chipped."

The Jacobs volunteered to have the chips implanted in order to provide emergency care givers with medical information. Jeff Jacobs is a survivor of Hodgkin's disease and lymphoma, and his son Derek is allergic to antibiotics. The theory was that in the event either Jeff or Derek became incapacitated, the information contained on the VeriChips could be used to save their lives.

ADS's hope to link the VeriChip to medical information was put on hold by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which advised the company that any medical application of the chip would require FDA clearance. The FDA's medical device chief, Dr. David Feigal, told the Associated Press earlier this year that one serious concern would be the accuracy of the records contained on the chip because outdated medical records could be more dangerous than no records at all. ^[7]

In a somewhat surprising move, however, the FDA granted ADS permission to market the VeriChip for "security, financial, and personal identification or safety applications." The approval came despite the public reservations of one FDA investigator, who told Wired.com that he was unaware of any device approved for human implant without a full FDA review. ^[8] Following the FDA's action, ADS moved quickly to begin marketing the VeriChip, offering a fifty-dollar discount to the first 100,000 people who signed up to "get chipped." The device itself costs $200, plus an outpatient fee to a doctor for injection and a ten-dollar monthly fee to ADS to maintain the records to which the VeriChip is linked. ^[9]

Applied Digital says that there is tremendous interest in South America, where kidnapping fears outweigh privacy concerns, for an implantable device containing both VeriChip and GPS electronics. Antonio de Cunha Lima, who is a Brazilian senator from Sao Paulo and a minister in the federal government, had the VeriChip implanted as a deterrent to the epidemic of kidnapping that is occurring in Brazil. ^[10]

In addition, the British government announced in November 2002 that it is considering using the VeriChip to track sex offenders, particularly once the device can be tracked remotely. The British government is also interested in the possibility that future versions of the VeriChip will be able to monitor heart rate and blood pressure; sudden changes could be an indication of criminal activity. ^[11]

Right now, VeriChips can't be used to trace a person's physical location; the radio signals from the current version of the VeriChip only travel a few feet. In addition, the device, which measures 11.1 mm by 2.1 mm (roughly the size of a grain of rice), is too small to contain the GPS electronics needed to track and transmit the bearer's location. The RFID can be used in conjunction with an external GPS device, but if the device is removed or turned off, then the tracking information stops. Engineers have not yet figured out how to put together an implantable device containing both VeriChip and GPS electronics, but ADS planned to have a prototype ready by the end of 2002. Estimates are that when they do, the final product will be roughly the size of an electronic pacemaker.

The security and identification capabilities of RFID will spur further human use through one of two ways: payment convenience or employment security. At some point, the argument will be made that having an RFID device embedded in your hand offers the possibility of an extremely secure, highly convenient cashless payment system. Imagine simply being able to wave your hand over a cash register and pay for your purchases by having the correct amount deducted from your account. You'll never have to worry about forgetting your wallet, signing a credit card receipt, or fumbling for change again. ^[12]

Of course, the electronic databases that currently track your major credit card purchases would then contain a record of every purchase you make, regardless of how minor and insignificant. It will be a treasure trove of data for prosecutors, litigators, and marketers (although hopefully not in that order). But we've already clearly demonstrated our willingness as consumers to trade pieces of our privacy for things as insignificant as a ten-cent coupon, so it's unlikely that the increased data collection will serve as a serious deterrent.

With RFID technology in its infancy, there have been no reports of companies demanding implantation as a condition of employment. Given the tremendous increase in concern over security following the attacks of 9/11, however, it's only a matter of time before the business use of implanted RFIDs becomes commonplace. To be truly useful, the RFIDs will undoubtedly contain some type of biometric information about the individual—iris or retina scan, or fingerprints—that can be compared against a central database. Otherwise it would be far too easy for someone to simply sell their RFID to a potential infiltrator.

But employees are likely to resist the implantation of an RFID far more strongly than they have resisted other methods of verifying their identity. Even though it might be convenient to have a security ID that can't be easily lost or left on the bedroom dresser, it's doubtful that people will readily acquiesce to company requests that they roll up their sleeves and hold out their arms. Few employees will be able to resist speculation that the implanted chip is capable of doing far more than simply controlling access to company property. Moreover, it will be hard to justify a routine requirement that employees accept RFIDs when less invasive and nearly as secure alternatives exist. Nonetheless, at some point in the not-too-distant future, some employer is going to see the VeriChip (or something like it) as the ideal solution to its security concerns.

^[2]In her influential paper, "Belated Feudalism," UCLA political scientist Karen Orren argues that the American workplace was actually a feudal institution well into the twentieth century. As journalist Corey Robin recently argued, the modern workplace—from its insistence on distinctive uniforms to its near-obsessive surveillance of employee activities—retains many of the trappings of feudal society. "Lavatory and Liberty," The Boston Globe (September 29, 2002) p. D1.

^[3]Groves has since moved on to become a special ventures manager for Pankhurst Design & Developments, Ltd., an engineering design firm in London, England.

^[4]John Solomon, "Operation Tarmac nabs 94 workers at Washington-area airports," Boston Globe (April 23, 2002). Downloaded from the Web on April 23, 2002, from www.boston.com/news/daily/23/airport_arrests.htm.

^[5]Eric Nadler, "Fake ID cards make airport infiltration too easy," Detroit Free Press (November 10, 2001). Downloaded from the Web on June 15, 2002, from www.freep.com/news/nw/terror2001/wid10_20011110.htm.

^[6]A "memory" chip is simply used for storing information; a "microprocessing" chip has the ability, albeit limited, to perform calculations on and manipulate the data stored on it.

^[7]Associated Press, "Tech company to sell ID-only computer chip implant," Burlington Free Press (April 5, 2002) p. 7A.

^[8]Julia Scheeres, "ID Chip's Controversial Approval," Wired.com (October 23, 2002).

^[9]Julia Sheeres, "Implantable Chip, On Sale Now," Wired.com (October 25, 2002).

^[10]According to estimates, in Sao Paulo alone, a person is kidnapped every thirty-five hours.

^[11]Julia Scheeres, "Brits Mull Chipping Sex Offenders," Wired.com (November 19, 2002).

^[12]A not insignificant fact is that the RFID can be implanted and used without any external indication of its presence. That alone makes it a more attractive solution than tattooing bar codes on people so that they can pay by being scanned. Remarkably enough, a patent has been issued for such a system. See United States Patent No. 5,878,155, issued to Thomas W. Heeter of Houston, Texas, on March 2, 1999. The historical, sociological, and psychological barriers to the implementation of such a system begs description.