I wonder why gun grabbers were pushing RFID in \u2018smart guns\u2019\u2026……..<\/p>\n
Military Units Track Guns Using Tech That Could Aid Foes<\/a><\/p>\n Determined to keep track of their guns, some U.S. military units have turned to a technology that could let enemies detect troops on the battlefield, The Associated Press has found.<\/p>\n The rollout on\u00a0Army<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Air Force<\/a> bases continues even though the Department of Defense itself describes putting the technology in firearms as a \u201csignificant\u201d security risk.<\/strong><\/p>\n The\u00a0Marines<\/a>\u00a0have rejected radio frequency identification technology in weapons for that very reason, and the\u00a0Navy<\/a>\u00a0said this week that it was halting its own dalliance.<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n RFID, as the technology is known, is infused throughout daily civilian life. Thin RFID tags help drivers zip through toll booths, hospitals locate tools and supermarkets track their stock. Tags are in some identity documents, airline baggage tags and even amusement park wristbands.<\/p>\n When embedded in military guns, RFID tags can trim hours off time-intensive tasks, such as weapon counts and distribution. Outside the armory, however, the same silent, invisible signals that help automate inventory checks could become an unwanted tracking beacon.<\/p>\n The AP scrutinized how the U.S. armed services use technology to keep closer control of their firearms as part of an\u00a0investigation<\/a>\u00a0into\u00a0stolen and missing<\/a>\u00a0military guns \u2014 some of which have been used in\u00a0street violence<\/a>. The examination included new field tests that demonstrated some of the security issues RFID presents.<\/p>\n The field tests showed how tags inside weapons can be quickly copied, giving would-be thieves in gun rooms and armories a new advantage.<\/p>\n And, more crucially, that even low-tech enemies could identify U.S. troops at distances far greater than advertised by contractors who install the systems.<\/p>\n Which is why a spokesman for the Department of Defense said its policymakers oppose embedding tags in firearms except in limited, very specific cases, such as guns that are used only at a firing range \u2014 not in combat or to guard bases.<\/p>\n \u201cIt would pose a significant operations security risk in the field, allowing an adversary to easily identify DOD personnel operating locations and potentially even their identity,\u201d Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Uriah Orland told AP.<\/p>\n Spokespeople at the headquarters of the Air Force and Army said they did not know how many units have converted their armories.<\/p>\n AP found five Air Force bases that have operated at least one RFID armory, and one more that plans a retrofit. Executives at military contracting companies said many more units have sought proposals.<\/p>\n A Florida-based Army Green Berets unit, the 7th Special Forces Group, confirmed it uses the technology in \u201ca few\u201d arms rooms. Special forces soldiers can take tagged weapons into the field, said Maj. Dan Lessard, a special forces spokesman. A separate pilot project at Fort Bragg, the sprawling Army base in North Carolina, was suspended due to COVID-19.<\/p>\n The Navy told AP one armory on a base up the coast from Los Angeles was using RFID for inventory. Then this week, after extended questioning, spokesman Lt. Lewis Aldridge abruptly said that the technology \u201cdidn\u2019t meet operational requirements\u201d and wouldn\u2019t be used across the service.<\/p>\n Momentum for RFID built within the Air Force after a 2018 case in which a machine gun disappeared from the 91st Security Forces Group, which guards an installation that houses nuclear-tipped missiles. Authorities recovered the weapon, but the incident reverberated across the service.<\/p>\n With Air Force commanders looking to bolster armory security, defense contractors offered a familiar technology \u2014 one with a military pedigree.<\/p>\n The origins of RFID trace to World War II and the development of radar. In the U.S. military, use grew in the 1990s, after the first Gulf War showed a need to untangle vast supply chains of shipping containers.<\/p>\n The U.S. military is not alone in employing RFID for firearms management: Government armories in Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere have been outfitted.<\/p>\n Armory conversions cost thousands of dollars, and sometimes more. Convenience is a big selling point. Instead of hand-recording firearm serial numbers on paper or scanning barcodes one-by-one like a cashier, an armorer can read tags in a rack of firearms with the wave of a handheld reader \u2014 and without having to see each weapon. The tags tucked inside don\u2019t even need batteries.<\/p>\n Contractors that retrofit armories say tags can be read only within a limited range, typically a few dozen feet or less. But in field testing for AP, two prominent cybersecurity experts showed that a tag inside a rifle can be read from significantly farther, using inexpensive components that fit inside a backpack.<\/p>\n While the hackers who devised the experiments observed U.S. government restrictions on transmitting signals, enemies who would not be so constrained could detect tags miles away, they said.<\/p>\n Some within the military share the tracking concern.<\/p>\n The Marine Corps has, according to a spokesman, decided across the service not to tag guns.<\/p>\n \u201cThe use of RFID tags on individual weapons systems increases the digital signature of Marines on a battlefield, increasing the security\/force protection risks,\u201d said Capt. Andrew Wood.<\/p>\n A top weapons expert from the Corps said he saw how tags can be read from afar during training exercises in the Southern California desert in December 2018.<\/p>\n \u201cRFID tags on tanks, weapons, magazines, you can ping them and find the disposition of where units are,\u201d said Wesley Turner, who was a Marine chief warrant officer 5 when he spoke in a spring interview. \u201cIf I can ping it, I can find it and I can shoot you.\u201d<\/p>\n The Air Force and Army did not answer detailed questions about use of the technology in firearms. In written statements, spokespeople said unit commanders can add RFID systems as a further layer of accountability, but no service-wide requirement is planned.<\/p>\n Policy experts within the Office of the Secretary of Defense appeared unaware that the services have been tagging firearms with RFID.<\/p>\n Asked why service branches can field a technology that Pentagon planners consider so risky, Defense Department spokesman Orland first said that the services told the Pentagon they are not tagging guns due to security concerns.<\/p>\n Informed that AP found units which acknowledge using the technology, the Pentagon revised its statement and said it allows service branches to explore innovative solutions. The Defense Department \u201ctries to balance pre-emptive prohibitions due to current security risks with flexibility to adopt new technologies when they mature and those risks decrease,\u201d Orland said.<\/p>\n ___<\/p>\n HACKERS ON THE HUNT<\/p>\n The two hackers had locked onto their target: The rifle held by a man walking away from them under the scorching summer sun.<\/p>\n \u201cStill reading, still reading, still reading,\u201d called out one, Kristin Paget, whose prowess has landed her jobs at tech titans including Apple and Tesla \u2014 as well as the nickname \u201cHacker Princess.\u201d<\/p>\n Here in California\u2019s San Joaquin Valley, in a sloping field surrounded by almond orchards, Paget and her hacking partner Marc Rogers were testing the limits of an RFID system they\u2019d cobbled together for about $500. To see how far they could detect a tag in the rifle, they were telling the man, firearms trainer Michael Palombo, to keep going.<\/p>\n By now more than half a football field away, the hackers had to shout or wave hands to communicate.<\/p>\n Because the hackers were following Federal Communications Commission regulations that limit the power of radio signals, their antenna lost the tag at 210 feet (64 meters).<\/p>\n That is nowhere near the farthest distance possible, according to Paget. She theorizes that a reader with enough of a power boost could detect an RFID tag on the outside of the International Space Station, 250 miles (402 kilometers) above.<\/p>\n What\u2019s more, Paget said, it doesn\u2019t take a Chinese or Russian cyber army to take advantage \u2014 a tinkerer with YouTube access could learn the needed skills.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s one of those situations that in the security world we say it keeps honest people honest, or it\u2019s secure unless there\u2019s an attack,\u201d said Paget.<\/p>\n Paget warned publicly about the vulnerabilities of RFID in 2010, during presentation at the annual DEF CON hacker convention. From a stage in Las Vegas, Paget broke down a test that read a tag 217 feet (66 meters) away.<\/p>\n Dale \u201cWoody\u201d Wooden, who at the time was part of naval special warfare, saw that presentation and warned fellow service members.<\/p>\n \u201cIf the disease is missing weapons and the cure is RFID tags, then you have a cure that is worse than the disease,\u201d said Wooden, who after 20 years in the Navy founded Weathered Security, which teaches digital protection to the military and law enforcement. \u201cThey\u2019re prioritizing convenience over service member lives.\u201d<\/p>\n In the California field tests, Paget and Rogers were prepared to demonstrate what they see as other vulnerabilities created by putting RFID in firearms. They thought about showing how a tag could trigger a roadside bomb, but settled on something more mundane: inventory checks.<\/p>\n One benefit of RFID is that it can reduce daily weapon count drudgery. Instead of cataloging dozens of guns one-by-one, an armorer at the end of an aisle can read all their tags at once.<\/p>\n Rogers demonstrated his doubts by showing how a thief could defeat the system.<\/p>\n Aiming his RFID reader at a rifle inside a hard carry case, Rogers replicated the rifle\u2019s tag with the lid still closed. Palombo then removed the firearm and Rogers put the cloned tag inside. As a clone, that tag had all the same data as the rifle\u2019s tag \u2014 and indeed, with the case again closed, the RFID reader was fooled into thinking the original tag, and thus the rifle, was still inside.<\/p>\n It took Rogers less than two minutes.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s the ultimate false sense of security,\u201d said Rogers, who designed the hacks on the TV show \u201cMr. Robot\u201d and is now vice president of cybersecurity at Okta. \u201cIt lists all the weapons and tells you that they\u2019re there, but you\u2019ve never actually seen the weapon.\u201d<\/p>\n Executives at two companies that have installed RFID armories at Air Force bases agreed that a corrupt insider could trick the technology.<\/p>\n \u201cRFID is not truly an anti-theft system,\u201d said Cody Remington, president of Enasys.<\/p>\n The executives also said they had never heard anything like the 210 feet (64 meters) that the hackers achieved.<\/p>\n Remington suggested there might be ways to mitigate the risk, but said he deferred to the Pentagon. \u201cOur expertise certainly isn\u2019t on the battlefield,\u201d he said, \u201cour expertise is inside the buildings and tracking where items are.\u201d<\/p>\n Another executive said he had been hearing the concern about troop tracking for years. Eric Collins, the CEO of Trackable Solutions, said it wasn\u2019t a real life problem because a reader would need a stronger power source, and even then couldn\u2019t exceed several dozen feet.<\/p>\n Collins said RFID in weapons poses \u201cabsolutely no risk at all,\u201d especially if the guns stay on base.<\/p>\n He said he didn\u2019t believe a tag could be detected from more than 100 feet (30 meters), making the Pentagon\u2019s security concerns invalid. \u201cThe leadership needs their staff to give them better guidance,\u201d Collins said, \u201cbecause that\u2019s not good guidance.\u201d<\/p>\n ___<\/p>\n THE LURE OF RFID<\/p>\n RFID is a relatively expensive solutions for armory management, but the payoff is enticing.<\/p>\n Consider normal inventories. Between physical inspections and voluminous paperwork, counting all the guns on just one base can stretch to days or even weeks. Meanwhile, time seems to stop when a weapon is lost or stolen, as the installation shuts down and search parties launch to find it.<\/p>\n RFID offers a simpler, more efficient system. Which is why two airmen went to an Air Force\u00a02020 Innovation Rodeo<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 an ideas competition patterned after the TV show \u201cShark Tank\u201d \u2014 to pitch a project to a panel of senior officers.<\/p>\n The airmen offered another scenario, one service members dread and that RFID promises to eliminate: A thousand troops suddenly need to deploy overseas, fast. To get the weapons they will carry, each must wait in a line that snakes around the building and barely seems to move.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to get on board with the 21st century,\u201d Staff Sgt. Nicholas Mullins said from the stage.<\/p>\n Though the proposal didn\u2019t win that competition, with the support of another federal program it found a home at an armory for security forces that patrol Eglin Air Force Base in Florida\u2019s Panhandle.<\/p>\n Open with \u201cfull operational capability,” the RFID armory is a success as promised, according to spokeswoman Jasmine Porterfield. The new system cuts inventory time in half, limiting the need for two armorers and creating more schedule flexibility and training opportunities.<\/p>\n The maximum distance tags can be read, according to experts on the base: about 8 feet (2 meters).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I wonder why gun grabbers were pushing RFID in \u2018smart guns\u2019\u2026…….. Military Units Track Guns Using Tech That Could Aid Foes Determined to keep track of their guns, some U.S. military units have turned to a technology that could let enemies detect troops on the battlefield, The Associated Press has found. The rollout on\u00a0Army\u00a0and\u00a0Air Force … Continue reading “”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,87],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-72777","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-crap-for-brains","category-technology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72777","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=72777"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72777\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":72778,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72777\/revisions\/72778"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=72777"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=72777"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=72777"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}