[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Cryptography] Anti-counterfeiting microchip

Le 07/09/2017 à 00:29, Tom Mitchell a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Camille Harang via cryptography <cryptography AT metzdowd.com> wrote:
Le 06/09/2017 à 01:29, Jerry Leichter a écrit :
> Hmm. A couple of years back, when Intel proposed to add a unique ID to
Hello Jerry, thanks for your reply. Yes indeed there are serious
tracking issues with this kind of technologies. My motivation is to make
transportable goods usable as cash,

Cash has serial numbers but they cannot be read from a distance.
OCR tech would allow a dispenser to log all the serial numbers dispensed
on any transition.   Cashregister tech could also read serial numbers.

Hello Tom, thank you for your reply and all this pertinent extra information. Yes low or high tech tracking is a big issue! But I think that the first threat towards privacy is central banking, tracking is an extension of this initial power they have with their monopoly over money creation. So I think that privacy issues regarding these technologies should be addressed and mastered, instead of preventing us to act. The question here is decentralization, these techs will be deployed anyway, the question is will they be deployed by the people for the people, or by central powers. If it is by central powers we will have no control on privacy, nor monetary independence. If it is by we the people, we will have monetary independence, and imperfect but IMHO manageable control over privacy abuse.

On the Checkoin specs (https://checkoin.org/) there is an extra layer of reputation system, it is optional, but it can help in many privacy case. Because it's Open Source and decentralized the users have the freedom to chose their tech (or make their own), so they will likely choose to use the apps, coins, cashiers, stores, etc. that will display the best privacy score on their screens (because they are being audited for that by third party services), this freedom of choice would never happen if such technologies are forced upon us in a coercive manner by central powers, they would force the most intrusive technologies upon people, as always. IMHO we have no choice but to take the bull by the horns.

I agree with you about central powers will to get rid of cash, that's also why I believe that if cash is a problem for them, it's a solution for us (if we control it). The $10000 limit you mention is a clear signal about this war on cash, they will lower it until its use become worthless, until it vanishes. Here in Europe it's even worth, the limit has been lowered so many times that it's under €300 in Italy now IIRC.

Yes indeed access cost to be able to use such technologies will always be higher than with cash. But I don't see how we can make something dencentralized and secure without tech :-/

This RFID device you mention is very interesting, does it exist or did you invent it? Yes indeed in case of NFC/RFID with cryptographic checks, there must be power supplied, that's why I suggested a battery that could be charged with standard micro-USB plugs, if it can last few month I think it can remain convenient, otherwise people wont use it. Or power+communication be done via USB, then we get rid of power problems and distant spying, if the act of plugging the device is not too difficult (not harder that scanning a banknote under a blacklight as cashiers already do), I think it can be useful. Here is a fictional printed circuit microchip that was originally designed for Checkoin: https://checkoin.org/home/#printed-circuit-with-a-a-hrefcoin__public_keykey-signing-microchipa

Yes indeed I also believe that there must be special cases where this notion has value. Thanks for your feedback, thanks to get involved or spread the word if you believe this can be useful, I'd really like to see this tech in the hand of the people.



The important thing to look at is the cost of the first transaction.
A reader and computer with connectivity have a cost.

Cash transactions have no cost beyond the risk of theft (taxation can apply).

Barter transaction have no cost beyond the risk of theft (taxation can apply). 

Currently cash transactions are under pressure to vanish.  The merchant does not
risk theft at the point of sale (hacking at Target).   Transactions involving 10,000 in
the US are to be reported.

It seems the entry at the low end is a barrier and law enforcement would want to 
play in the $10,000 and above range.   

I can see an RFID device that has a fuse link key that cannot be inspected
and could be challenged with a random sequence to return a good hash
of that challenge.   If the owner of the key in involved and keeps track of challenge keys
it will never submit the same key twice to eliminate replay spoofing as an authoritive
attack.   Power in an RFID device limits so much that this may collapse to something too
simple to be secure.

Hard wire the device in a board so it can be read when power is on and 
the Intel push back would replay.   

There may be special cases where this notion has value and tomorrow is 
a new day.

  T o m    M i t c h e l l

The cryptography mailing list
cryptography AT metzdowd.com