ID Cards and The Verichip

Resistance and Awareness Group against ID Cards and The Verichip
login.php profile.php?mode=register faq.php memberlist.php search.php noidchip.html



Get a FREE FORUM
ID Cards and The Verichip Forum Index » Health and Security Issues » Demo: Cloning a Verichip
Post new topic  Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic 
Demo: Cloning a Verichip
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 7:20 pm Reply with quote
lifttheveil
Site Admin
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 529
Location: UK




Demo: Cloning a Verichip

In brief: Verichip markets their product for access control. This means that you could have a chip implanted, and then your front door would unlock when your shoulder got close to the reader. Let us imagine that you did this; then, I could sit next to you on the subway, and read your chip's ID. This takes less than a second. At this point I can let myself in to your house, by replaying that ID. So now you have to change your ID; but as far as I know, you cannot do this without surgery.

All of this relates to an article that Annalee Newitz wrote for Wired. I would not have looked at these parts otherwise; the Verichip is built with no attempt at security, and is therefore not very special to clone. The designers of this product must be aware that an attack like I outline below is possible. But, Reuters quoted ‘VeriChip spokesman’ John Procter, who said that:

‘We can't verify what they [Annalee and I] may or may not have done....We haven't seen any first-hand evidence other than what's been reported in the media.’ (Sat Jul 22, 2006)

This is just silly. The Verichip is a repurposed dog tag; there is no reason (counterfeit housepets?) why it would have been designed with any security features, and in fact it was not. Their own technical staff—or failing that, the technical staff of the company that sells them the tags—can tell them this, with or without me.

(And while I used my proxmarkii, there's an easier way, if you want to do it yourself.)

I will briefly describe the steps that I went through to duplicate an ID-only RFID tag using my proxmarkii device. We will be cloning a Verichip, which should not rationally make any of this more interesting but does.



I have a reader and some tags. The first thing to do is to determine the frequency of operation. I could have used the proxmarkii, but I actually just used a coil of wire and my 'scope. I measured the voltage across the coil, energized the reader, and used cursors to measure the frequency of the signal received. These tags happen to work around 134 kHz.

TI's glass transponders work near that frequency, so my first thought was that the Verichip was basically one of them. I therefore tried to read my Verichip as a TI-type tag. That means that I excite it with a pulse a few dozen milliseconds long, and then turn off my carrier and listen for a response.



Clearly, this did not work. The Verichip is not a TI-type tag. That means that it's probably the continuously-illuminated kind. I actually could have determined this from the signal that the reader sends out, if I had paid more attention then. The proxmarkii device could read 134 kHz continuously-illuminated tags if I wrote the proper software for it. Instead I will be lazy and just try it at 125 kHz; the read range will suffer, but that isn't really critical.



So now I did a low-frequency read, and this time I got something. What is unfortunate is that it is a mess. I just want to duplicate the tag, so there is no particular reason to reverse-engineer the exact structure of the bits sent over the air. Still, it would be nice to know the fundamentals, like the period...



I do a quick autocorrelation to determine the period of the returned signal. We could save a trace and do it in MATLAB, but I prefer to do it in the proxmarkii software. MATLAB is nice for signal processing, but not so good for scrolling through long traces. The graph tool that I use is more like the user interface of a digital storage 'scope. It is obvious that the period is 2048 samples (which, sampling every other carrier clock, is 4096 carrier clocks).



Actually it looks like there's a little more structure to the signal, considering all those transitions for an ID that is mostly zeros. I would guess that it is Manchester-coded ASK, or something differential, or something weird. If we wanted to determine the mapping between the tag's ID and the signal sent over the air, then we would spend more time on this. For now it is not worth the bother.



If all that I want is to clone the tag, then it is arbitrary which point in the signal I designate as t=0. The ID just loops, so the signal over the air is unaffected. That feature between the cursors looked sort of like a sync pattern, though, and it occurs in both tags’ traces. For want of a better idea, I will write my demod code to correlate for that, and use that as its reference. Then I can demodulate the received signal to a bit string.



At this point it is only a matter of remodulating the received signal, and we're done. Then I can download that signal to my proxmarkii, put it in ‘simulate’ mode, and it should be indistinguishable from the legitimate tag. To be on the safe side, I read my ‘simulated tag’ using another proxmarkii device, to make sure that my simulated ID is correct. If that looks okay, then I am ready to check my work against the legitimate reader, and as we would hope, it reads:



(Notice that the demodulation and remodulation steps are in a sense unnecessary; I could have just replayed the exact signal that I received over the air, without demodulating and remodulating it. That means that you get twice as much noise, though, because the signal received from the tag never gets ‘cleaned up.’ If I wanted to make this very automatic, then I could write code for the proxmarkii that would automatically determine the period, read the ID many times, and average those together, lining them up at the points of maximum cross-correlation. That might be sort of cute, because it would be fully automatic for any modulation scheme, but it seems like a lot of trouble.)

This took me a couple of hours. I could have done it faster if I had not constantly been interrupting myself to take a screenshot or a picture. Of course it will take me some time if I want to build out the software to read them properly, at 134 kHz.

The screenshots and the photograph prove nothing. I therefore save the traces:

verichip-raw.tr: the raw signal from the tag, voltage versus time, one sample every other carrier clock
verichip-remod.tr: the remodulated (i.e., cleaned up) ID, ready for replay, one sample per carrier clock
These are for Annalee's Verichip, number 1022000000047063.

There is a curious aside: the Verichip that I read here is not supposed to have that ID, according to medical records; but the ID that I cloned is the ID that my legitimate reader reports. As to what this means—malpractice? sloppy record-keeping? that I have the special ‘reverse engineer's edition’ of the reader?—I haven't a clue.

Oh, and lest anyone get overly worried about drive-by Verichip identity theft: that is probably not a big deal. Their biggest security feature is the absurdly short read range, which is restricted by the tiny antenna. As long as the user stays at least a foot away from any unsecured person or thing, there is very little risk.

January (and updated July) 2006, Cambridge MA

Original article and links here -
http://cq.cx/verichip.pl

_________________
www.civilliberties.realisticpolitics.com
View user's profile Find all posts by lifttheveil Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
VERICHIP RFID IMPLANT HACKED
PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:05 pm Reply with quote
lifttheveil
Site Admin
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 529
Location: UK




January 27, 2006

VERICHIP RFID IMPLANT HACKED!
Will Security Problems Quash IPO Plans for Controversial Company?

The VeriChip can be hacked! This revelation along with other worrisome details could put a crimp in VeriChip Corporation's planned initial public offering (IPO) of its common stock, say Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre.

The anti-RFID activists and authors of "Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID" make no bones about their objection to VeriChip's plans to inject glass encapsulated RFID tags into people. But now they've discovered information that could call VeriChip's entire business model into question.

"If you look at the VeriChip purely from the business angle, it's a ridiculously flawed product," says McIntyre. She notes that security researcher Jonathan Westhues has shown how easy it is to clone a VeriChip implanted in a person's arm and program a new chip with the same number.

Westhues, known for his prior work cloning RFID-based proximity cards, has posted his VeriChip cloning demo online at http://cq.cx/verichip.pl.

The VeriChip "is not good for anything," says Westhues, has absolutely no security and "solves a number of different non-problems badly."

The chip's security issues may spell trouble for those who have had one of the microchips embedded in their flesh. These include eighteen employees in the Mexican Attorney General's office who use an implanted chip to enter a sensitive records room, and a handful bar patrons in Europe who use the injected chips to pay for drinks. "What are these people going to do now that their chips can be cloned?" says McIntyre. "Wear tinfoil shirts or keep everyone at arm's length?"

Albrecht quips, "A man with a chip in his arm may soon find himself wondering whether that cute gal on the next bar stool likes his smile or wants to clone his VeriChip. It gives new meaning to the burning question, 'Does she want my number?'"

But the VeriChip's problems don't stop there, says McInytre, who is also a former bank examiner and financial writer. She has carefully analyzed the company's SEC registration statement and associated chipping information and discovered serious flaws. It turns out the company's own literature indicates that chipped patients cannot undergo an MRI if they're unconscious. What's more, the company admits that critical medical information linked to the chip could be unavailable in a real emergency. "These issues call VeriChip's promotional campaigns and business plan into question," McIntyre says.

The instructions provided to medical personnel warn that chipped patients should not undergo an MRI unless they are fully alert and able to communicate any "unusual sensations or problems," like movement or heating of the implant. This conflicts with the company's efforts to promote the device to people who cannot speak for themselves, such as Alzheimer's patients, those with dementia, the mentally disabled, and people who are concerned about entering an emergency room unconscious.

"The irony is that implantees will have to wear a Medic Alert bracelet or bear some obvious marking so they aren't mistakenly put in an MRI machine," Albrecht says.

Chipped patients might also have to wear a Medic Alert bracelet as a back-up in case the VeriChip database containing their critical medical information is unavailable. The fine print on the back of the VeriChip Patient Registration Form warns implantees that "the Company does not warrant...that the website will be available at any particular time," and physicians are told the product might not function in places where there are ambient radio transmissions--like ambulances. In addition, patients are required to waive any claims related to the product's "merchantability and fitness." The waiver paragraph as it appears on the form is reprinted below:

"Patient...is fully aware of any risks, complications, risks of loss, damage of any nature, and injury that may be associated with this registration. Patient waives all claims and releases any liability arising from this registration and acknowledges that no warranties of any kind have been made or will be made with respect to this registration. ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, HOWEVER ARISING, WHETHER BY OPERATION OF LAW OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MECHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE EXCLUDED AND WAIVED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COMPANY BE LIABLE TO PATIENT FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOST INCOME OR SAVINGS) ARISING FROM ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THEIR POSSIBILITY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH DAMAGES ARE SOUGHT BASED ON BREACH OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY."

"For a life or death medical device, that's unbelievable," says McIntyre. "I wouldn't buy toilet paper that required that kind of a disclaimer, never mind a product that's supposed to serve as a lifeline in an emergency."

McIntyre contacted the VeriChip Corporation for comments on these issues and was initially promised a response. When the company failed to get to get back to her, McIntyre followed up and was told that the employee had been instructed not to answer her questions. The unanswered questions, along with photos of the VeriChip and associated literature, are available at -
http://www.spychips.com/verichip/unanswered-questions.html

_________________
www.civilliberties.realisticpolitics.com
View user's profile Find all posts by lifttheveil Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Demo: Cloning a Verichip
ID Cards and The Verichip Forum Index » Health and Security Issues
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Post new topic  Reply to topic  


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
Designed for Trushkin.net | Themes Database

Powered by Free-Forums.org. Free Forum Hosting - Get your FREE FORUM now!
Hosted on DUAL XEON, 4GB RAM, SCSI drive RAID 1 managed dedicated servers at THEPLANET data center with premium dedicated server bandwidth.


Online Loans | Mobile Phone | Free Advertising | Horoscopes | Credit Cards UK