PHOTO: gusto images
|
Wanted: Power-systems engineer with experience in
high-power (5–100-kW) motor-controller design. Must be
U.S. citizen and have valid ISO1443-compatible
access-control RFID implant.
Sound farfetched? Today, yes. A decade from now, maybe not.
With the proliferation of radio-frequency
identification technology and the recent, but
increasing, use of implantable RFID chips in humans, we
may already be on a path that would make such an ad
commonplace in a 2017 issue of IEEE Spectrum.
The benefits would be undeniable—an implantable RFID
chip, which is durable and about the size of a grain of
rice, can hold or link to information about the
identity, physiological characteristics, health,
nationality, and security clearances of the person it’s
embedded in. The proximity of your hand could start your
car or unlock your front door or let an emergency room
physician know you are a diabetic even if you are
unconscious. Once implanted, the chip and the
information it contains are always with you—you’d never
lose your keys again.
But there is a darker side, namely the erosion of our
privacy and our right to bodily integrity. After all, do
you really want to be required to have a foreign object
implanted in your arm just to get or keep a job? And
once you have it, do you really want your employer to
know whenever you leave the office? And do you want
every RFID reader–equipped supermarket checkout counter
to note your presence and your purchases?
Until a couple of years ago, chipping humans was
largely the domain of cybernetics provocateurs like
Kevin Warwick or hobbyists like Amal Graafstra [see
Graafstra’s accompanying article, “Hands
On”]. Then, in 2004, the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, which regulates medical devices in the
United States, approved an RFID tag for implantation in
humans as a means of accessing a person’s health
records.
This tag, called VeriChip, is a short-range
transponder that relies on the signal from a reader unit
for its power supply [see photo, “Anatomy of an RFID
Tag”]. When exposed to a varying magnetic
field from the reader, the chip powers itself up and
repeatedly transmits a 16-digit code that is unique to
the tag. According to the company, 2000 people have
already had tags implanted.
The VeriChip tag is part of a health information
system called VeriMed. The code contained in the
implanted chip points to a record in a database
identifying the patient and containing that patient’s
health records. By scanning a person’s chip, caregivers
can retrieve an identification code that enables them to
access the medical history of people who cannot
otherwise communicate their identities—speeding up their
treatment and possibly saving their lives.
VeriChip Corp., a subsidiary of Applied Digital
Solutions, headquartered in Delray, Fla., is also
promoting its device as a security measure. It has six
clients around the world, five of which use the implant
as a secondary source of authentication, says Keith
Bolton, vice president of government and international
affairs for VeriChip. The highest-profile example of
this application came in 2004 when the attorney general
of Mexico and 18 of his staff had chips implanted to
allow them to gain access to certain high-security areas.
The tag is also finding use as a kind of implanted
credit card. In trendy nightclubs in the Netherlands,
Scotland, Spain, and the United States, patrons can get
“chipped”—at a cost of about US $165 in one
establishment. In future visits, “by the time you walk
through the door to the bar,” one proprietor told
Britain’s Daily Telegraph, “your favorite drink is
waiting for you, and the bar staff can greet you by
name.”
And the list of proposed applications could grow
quickly. VeriChip is advancing a scheme to “chip”
soldiers, as a replacement for a soldier’s traditional
dog tag, and a VeriChip officer has proposed chipping
guest workers entering the United States.
Before too many of those suggestions become realities,
we need to examine carefully the very real dangers that
RFID implants could pose to our privacy and our freedom.
If we don’t figure out the risks and come up with ways
to mitigate them, someone answering that ad for a power
engineer may live in a world with considerably less
privacy and feel compelled to have an implant just to be
able to get a job.
The VeriChip tag’s main use, as a means of identifying
patients who might be unable to communicate with
caregivers and of accessing their medical records, could
clearly be lifesaving in emergency situations. As long
as the patient has provided informed consent and the
privacy of the patient’s medical records is adequately
protected, there are few ethical concerns with the
technology. But VeriChip Corp.’s well-meaning attempt to
improve personal health care may serve as a beachhead
for wider use, and that expansion could create urgent
ethical issues, particularly if an element of coercion
enters into the process.