Radio Frequency Identification Chips (RFID) 

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips are small and relatively low-cost circuits capable of communicating with a fixed or portable device, the reader. In order to do so, an antenna, usually made of tin foil, must be attached to the silicone chip. Chip and antenna together are referred to as RFID tags or transponders. RFID tags can be attached to consumer goods, packaging and other items, and they can also be implanted into animals and even humans. 

Readers are linked to special middleware (computing hardware and software). RFID-based technology can therefore provide the missing link between the material world (commodities, stocks) and its virtual representation in a computing system. 

Three kinds of RFID chips are in use: 

Passive RFID tags do not need a power supply of their own; the minute tension induced from a radio frequency signal emitted by the reader is sufficient to activate their circuit and to send out short digital information streams in response. Typically, this information consists of an unique identification number that points to an entry in a data base. 

Semi-passive RFID tags have built-in batteries and do not require energy induced from the reader to power the microchip. This allows them to function with much lower signal power levels and over greater distances than passive tags. They are, however, considerably more expensive. 

Active RFID tags have an on-board power-supply, usually a battery, of their own. This allows for more complex circuits to be powered and for more functionality. 

Applications: Passive RFID tags are being used by the millions in stores, where they facilitate supply-chain management, storage, stocktaking, theft protection, encashing, recycling and waste disposal. They facilitate some airports' baggage retrieval systems. RFID chips are also embedded in electronic documents, for example in the so-called e-passport , which is being introduced throughout the EU, as a result of Council Regulation No 2252/2004 . 

Future trends 

600 million RFID tags were sold in 2005. Research completed by Commission Services predicts that the value of the market, including hardware, systems and services, may increase by a factor of ten between 2006 and 2016. The sheer number of tags delivered in 2016 is predicted to be more than 450 times the number delivered in 2006. 

The preconditions for this wide-spread application were cost reduction, enhanced performance  and miniaturisation.  The smallest tags are now around two square millimetres in size and are 0.0075mm thick; they can be embedded in shoes, garments, cardboard wrappers and even sheets of paper. Polymer-based tags being developed could replace current silicone-based chips. They could be produced using printing technologies, which would reduce their additional cost to almost naught. 

In the future, passive as well as active tags, together with a growing number of embedded reading devices, could become an enabling technology of what has been labelled 'the intelligent home', 'ambient intelligence' and 'ubiquitous computing', wherin consumer goods and household items would 'communicate' with each other and with computing devices - both local and elsewhere. 

Standards

In order for different devices from different producers to work smoothly together, they will have to follow common standards. A number of bodies work together to establish those standards: 

• GS1 is the global industry alliance defining interoperability standards for supply chain management. Currently, GS1 administers interoperable standards for barcodes on packaging.
• Together with its US equivalent GS1 US , GS1 has formed EPC global . The industry association with a world-wide membership develops what it calls "industry-driven standards for the Electronic Product Code (EPC) to support the use of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in today’s [...] trading networks". Currently, EPC global is working on specifications for a generation two ('Gen 2') standard, which should include feature requests from the industry and accommodate legal requirements concerning for instance privacy and data security.
• The international standardisation body ISO has passed the ISO 18000  standard, parts 1 to 7 of which which lay down parameters for the so-called air interface (transmission) in the different frequency bands. ISO might adapt 'Gen 2' as ISO 18000-6C. 

Frequency management

ISO standards lay down five frequency bands  in the Low Frequency (LF), High Frequency (HF), Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) and microwave or Super-High Frequency (SHF) bands. As a rule of thumb, the higher the frequency is, the more data can be transmitted, the longer maximum read-out distances are and, as a consequence, the more functionality can be added to the tag. For LF tags, the technical read-out distance is a few centimetres, for HF and UHF tags a few metres and for tags operating in the microwave band up to hundreds of metres. For supply chain purposes, the two frequency bands (860-960 MHz and 433 MHz) in the UHF spectrum are most important. Active tags can only operate in the UHF and microwave spectrums. 

However, in a time of increasingly prevalent wireless applications, frequency is a scarce commodity. Frequency management and allocation are becoming controversial issues, because they imply a regulatory choice of one technology over another. In November 2006, the Commission addressed these issues with a Decision on harmonisation of the radio spectrum for radio frequency identification (RFID) devices operating in the ultra high frequency (UHF) band . 

Privacy and data protection

Data protection practitioners , consumer advocates and NGOs are concerned over privacy implications of a wide-spread introduction of RFID. In brief, the concerns voiced by the Article 29 Group of data protection commissioners and confirmed by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS ) are:

• RFID could be used to collect personal data. For example, retailers could tie a client's personal data, such as a credit card number, to an RFID tag embedded in an item they sold. Individuals could then be identified when they revisit a store and their movements could be monitored.
• Personal data could be stored on RFID chips. This could for example occur with RFID-based ticketing systems for public transport, where itineraries chosen by an individual could, together with exact times, be stored on a card or on computers. 
• RFID could be used to track individuals. Shops could for example hand out tokens with embedded RFID that allow for certain advantages or can be used for activating trolleys. Using readers distributed throughout the shop and more RFID embedded in consumer goods, the shop would be able to track the customer's purchase habits. 
• When data stored on RFID-enabled items (such as travel documents, credit cards, banknotes, medicines) is not effectively enough encrypted, anyone with a reader and sufficient knowledge could invade the privacy of a person carrying those items. 

As a solution for RFID-enabled consumer goods, it has been suggested that embedded RFIDs should have a 'deactivation' or 'kill' option. For other items, such as documents, strict respect of privacy rules is key. In both cases, persons must be informed in a clearly understandable manner of the presence of RFID tags in items they may be carrying, and of reading devices where such is the case. 

Information Society and Media Commissioner Viviane Reding is known as a keen promoter of RFID technology. "We need to build a society-wide consensus on the future of RFID. We need to ensure that RFID technology delivers on its economic potential and to create the right opportunities for its use for the wider public good, while ensuring that citizens remain in control of their data. In a Communication planned for December 2006, the European Commission intends to assume these twin responsibilities. I invite all stakeholders to contribute to this debate," Reding said in July 2006, at the launch of the public consultation on RFID policy. 

On 16 October 2006, two weeks after the consultation closure, Reding added: "The overriding message that comes out of the consultation is that citizens have concerns over privacy issues. The large majority are willing to be convinced that RFID can bring benefits but they want to be reassured that it will not compromise their privacy. This is the deal that we have to strike if we want RFID to be accepted and widely taken up. This is the deal I am looking to make."

Gérald Santucci, head of unit "ICT for enterprise networking" in DG Information Society  told the 2006 RFID Conference that RFID, although they were "the doorstep to the ubiquitous European Information Society", had no doubt "a bad reputation in Europe". He partly blamed the industry of being to blame for this bad reputation by not sufficiently respecting consumers' and citizens' perspectives. He urged "a dialogue to build trust" and finished by saying: "Together, let's make RFID work!" 

Speaking for SME association UEAPME, Freek Posthumus described a tendency of "cascading outsourcing" by big companies, where small companies "are part of the process all the way". He said, however, that with the present technology of barcoding items, the lack of interoperable standards was used by big companies to the detriment of their smaller partners, often requiring additional barcoding by SMEs. He urged, therefore, interoperable standards to apply to RFID already on an item level. 

Oracle commented: "We consider RFID to be a technology that will have very many beneficial applications. Oracle therefore welcomes the EU’s open, collaborative and consultative approach to RFID policy development. As an international company, we also thoroughly support the EU’s call for collaboration and co-operation on the development of technologies and standards both inside its borders and on the international stage. We would like to see the EU encouraging RFID development by providing a supportive regulatory environment in which innovation can flourish, and we look forward to participating in further consultative activity in the second half of 2007."