Tag Archives: RFID tags

Corporate sponsoring of RFID GPS tracked children

A school district in Northern California is to start tracking children on and off schools buses via RFID and GPS technology.  The system is free to the district, taxpayers and parents with local businesses sponsoring the messages sent to parents phones to tell them their child is safe at school.

The company East Coast Diversified Corporation (ECDC), the parent group of StudentConnect, is enabling this RFID tracking technology to be financed using adverts sponsored by local businesses.

According to ECDC this tracking of children “creates a unique opportunity for businesses to demonstrate a policy of corporate responsibility toward student safety in communities they do business with“.  Advertisers can engage “the brand loyalty of parents out of appreciation for receiving safety notification regarding their children.”

This just sounds bizarre.  What shop would want to sponsor tracking a child?  Eroding that child’s privacy.  Are society’s ethics and morals to be discarded for “corporate responsibility” – trading safety messages about location tracking of our children in exchange to be advertised at?  Do we not trust the bus driver, schools and society to show a collective care for our youngest?

Yes, there are random acts of violence that defy logic or reason but when statistics are scrutinized both from the industry selling this technology and real risks that do exist, possible perceived scenarios – that involve compromising children rights more than they do protecting their safety – arise offering a financial solution to a situation that is not that urgent and disproportionate to the reported transport crisis.

There is money to be made in tracking children, that is for sure.

“Good morning.  Your child has arrived safely at school.  Oh, and by the way, your local hardware shop is offering 99% off sledge hammers to a crack nut with”

We should have more faith in society to care for our children collectively.  All members of society, community, family, corporate, faith based, all aspects should care for all.  We should not rely on a money driven system to take responsibility for our children, nor be led into believing that that is where responsibility lies.

Surely as a society, whatever country or community you live in, we should all take a part in looking out for each other and not be driven in this supposed care for our children from a financial incentive.

RFID Wifi tags for teachers in the wake of Sandy Hook

Wifi tags percieved terror

In the age of perceived terrorism that we live in, it seems that technology offers our children safety in a school environment.

Skyview High School‘s Mandy Petty, a school counselor, commented, “Look at what we spend to protect our banks, our cars, our homes. When do we start protecting our kids and what is the dollar value to that?”  The question is protecting our kids against what?

In the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings, Ekahau, a company that supplies active RFID tags to the medical industry to track hospital equipment, has now supplied a school with active RFID tags that enables teachers to communicate with the local police department as soon as a terror threat happens, medical emergency or simply “to get help with a student that may be unruly“.  Ekahau have already supplied this RFID to staff and students to a school in Germany after a shooting incident.

At the moment only the teachers are wearing the wifi enabled RFID tags; how long will it be until the children will be wearing them too and normalized into using privacy intrusive technology for ‘safety’?  The intent behind this use of  RFID is admirable but with this application of RFID, that gives the police a real time eye into the school, it has the potential to lull in a false sense of security, when practically any person deciding to wield a firearm anywhere cannot be predicted or stopped if they are determined to cause harm.

Terrorism should not be used as an excuse to “dollar value” our rights to privacy.  These shootings are terrible and the perpetrators, whoever they are, should be brought to justice.  Thankfully the chances of dying from a bee sting are greater than that of dying from an act of terrorism.

Let’s hope that this school never has to use this RFID for the extremely slim chance that a random shooter may visit them, though I suspect the technology will be put to good use for other reasons – not terrorism.

“The badge has only been in use for two weeks and some say they can’t imagine not having it.

School refuses students request

A recent Federal Court ruling sided with a Texan school, John Jay High School, Northside 01-18-2013_Hernandez_Letter from Rutherford Institure1Independent School District, in that it was acceptable to discriminate – to the point of expulsion – a student, Andrea Hernadez, for refusing comply with the RFID programme the schools runs.

This image to the right is a letter Andrea wrote yesterday to her school – which speaks volumes. (From the Rutherford Institution’s website.)

From the Rutherford InstituteOn January 18th ‘in a phone call delivered near the end of the day before a long holiday weekend, school officials at John Jay High School informed Andrea Hernandez that they would not be granting her request to stay at the magnet school.

In coming to Andrea’s defense, Rutherford Institute attorneys alleged that the school’s attempts to penalize, discriminate and retaliate against Andrea violate her rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.’

It is difficult to believe that in this day and age, with the knowledge of what discrimination can potentially do in our society, that the school district have pursued this course of action.  It is clear to me that the school district’s priority does not lie in the care of education, or respect for the teaching the children in it’s community but in budgets and stamping their authority to a point of overriding children’s and families religious beliefs.

Andrea with her family and supporters I think here have exposed that there is a desperate need for an open and honest discussion of issues on the use of RFID in schools.

(The ‘Position Paper on the Use of RFID in Schools ‘ August 21, 2012 details issues surrounding RFID in schools)

Real time tracking more enabled by new industry standard

The recently approved standard in February 2012 from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) IEEE 802.15.4f enabled Zebra Technologies to develop RFID tags, sold to West Cheshire College for tracking its students.

As reported in the RFID Journal, [NB. This RFID Journal article was withdrawn from the RFID Journal’s website w/c 7 Jan 2013.  A Copy of the article (pdf) is here and here is the original article on the Internet Archieve Wayback MachineZebra “In anticipation of that development [IEEE 802.15f], Zebra Technologies has announced a new version of its Dart ultra-wideband (UWB) real-time location system (RTLS) sensor that will be compatible with that standard

With no regulations of the tracking of humans – students in this case – by RFID in the UK it seems that students at least, as education becomes more corporate and finance driven, have this real time location system tracking to look forward to.

Much like how biometrics were trialed and introduced in schools in the UK from 2001-2012, completely unregulated, not informing parents, government having no knowledge of what the biometric industry was up to in its schools, it appears that RTLS RFID now is being afforded the same luxury.

According to the RFID Journal  [NB. This RFID Journal article was withdrawn from the RFID Journal’s website w/c 7 Jan 2013.  A Copy of the article (pdf) is here and here is the original article on the Internet Archieve Wayback Machinethese are the characteristics of RFID tags the students wear:

  • UWB tags emit brief RF signals across the entire 6.35 to 6.75 GHz frequency band.
  • Average battery lifespan of a tag is seven years.
  • Receivers, which can receive tag signals from up to 328 feet away, located throughout the campus buildings, in order to ensure that the tags can be pinpointed no matter where within the school a student might be located.  (Toilet? Showers?)
  • Designed to provide accuracy greater than 1 meter (3.3 feet).
  • Transmission rate of once per second.
  • Enables observation of student and staff in peer groups.

The standard IEEE 802.15f was approved February 2012.  RFID Journal article of 30 April 2012 states that “The school deployed the technology in two phases—first at its Chester Campus, in 2010, and then at its newly built Ellesmere Port Campus, last year [2011]”

…mmm has the college been trialing RTLS before the standard was set?

Transparent RFID policy and consent

In January 2011 the EU document ‘Privacy and Data Protection Impact Assessment Framework for RFID Applications’ was published. The document is an industry-prepared framework for Personal Data and Privacy Impact Assessments of RFID Applications and endorsed by the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party.

RFID Privacy targets include “Compliance with the data subject’s right to object –  It must be ensured that the data subject’s data is no longer processed if he or she objects.” along with one of the concerns of the privacy risks being Invalidation of explicit consentConsent has been obtained under threat of disadvantage.” – see pages 13 and 15.   However, this EU document is only advisory and simply details good practice with no set enforcable regulated code of practice yet in place for RFID tracking people.

In a recent article it came to light that in the UK a 14-19 college, West Cheshire College, are using RFID tags for registration purposes but then oddly state the information the RFID give them will be anonymised.  Quite how they plan to register individual students with anonymised RFID tags is baffling but, more worryingly, the college seems to have adopted a ‘must wear’ attitude.

In order for students to be able to object, as detailed the above EU document, to this level of surveillance, where staff at educational establishments such as West Cheshire College are able to  “look at them in groups, such as peer groups.”, both students and staff tagged need to be fully informed of exactly what the RFID chips they carry are being used for. i.e. how and where people would be tracked and the personal information held.

rfidcctvsignThis communication of the college’s intent of RFID use to register its students and staff, and subsequent consent, presumably would need a little more than a verbal statement.  Indeed, a document detailing the college’s RFID policy and a Privacy Impact Assessment would surely be considered good practice.

Maybe an adoption of the CCTV industry’s code to inform persons of CCTV tracking by signage on walls in areas where surveillance is occurring should be considered where RFID real-time location systems are in operation?

This would go some way to ensure transparency for those choosing to carry RFID tags.