If You Think Your RFID Passport Is Secure, Think Again
in [Airline Travel]
|
From: tim.... on 12 Dec 2009 08:11 "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:tcj6i5prl4rrm3le16vt5s3rpb8u0s0dei(a)4ax.com... > tim.... writes: > >> and just how useful is knowing someone's name and date of birth, if you >> don't know their address? > > For one thing, it makes it a lot easier to find out the person's address. > The > more you have, the more you can find. I don't deny this, but my point is you can already obtain this information without having to risk snooping at airports >A name attached to a photo is perhaps > some of the most useful information of all. Why? For a Photo ID to be useful to you, *you* have to look like the photo. There are no security systems in place that rely upon someone having a document with a photo in it, where the photo is of somebody other than the person holding the document tim
From: tim.... on 12 Dec 2009 08:13 "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:mej6i5pppinc000b0rt5v3kl90nvlfv79j(a)4ax.com... > tim.... writes: > >> If there is a publicly accessible database that enables you to find >> someone's address from a name and date of birth, then there is also a >> publicly accessible database that enables someone to find a date of birth >> from an address and a name. > > Right. > >> ISTM that the ID thief is far more likely to have the name and address of >> the person who they wish to target than their name and date of birth. >> So, >> it is the accessibility of this database that is the major risk factor >> here, >> not the fact that chipped passports are potentially insecure. > > These are targets of opportunity, not premeditated targets. and so is every person in the phone book. Why bother taking the risk of getting caught snooping at an airport (for which you will undoubtedly be charged with a serious terrorist offence if caught) when you can do virtually risk free snooping in your public library? tim
From: Kurt Ullman on 12 Dec 2009 08:34 In article <7ohisgF3p30mqU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "tim...." <tims_new_home(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > No, I'm suggesting that it's information that they can get from elsewhere so > there's no new security risk form getting it this way It MAY (and I am not at all sold) be an ADDITIONAL security risk. One additional channel to get information that may be useful for nefarious reasons. How much of an added risk is subject to debate. -- To find that place where the rats don't race and the phones don't ring at all. If once, you've slept on an island. Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"
From: Mxsmanic on 12 Dec 2009 09:37 tim.... writes: > and so is every person in the phone book. Phone books don't provide as much information as passports. > Why bother taking the risk of getting caught snooping at an airport (for > which you will undoubtedly be charged with a serious terrorist offence if > caught) when you can do virtually risk free snooping in your public library? See above.
From: Mxsmanic on 12 Dec 2009 09:38
tim.... writes: > I don't deny this, but my point is you can already obtain this information > without having to risk snooping at airports You can't get pictures or Social Security numbers associated with names. > Why? For a Photo ID to be useful to you, *you* have to look like the photo. You might want to find someone, instead of pretending to be someone. |