Technology

58303 readers

26 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

165

This tiny, tamper-proof ID tag can authenticate almost anything (news.mit.edu)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

TL;DR MIT researchers have developed an antitampering ID tag that is tiny, cheap, and secure. It is several times smaller and significantly cheaper than the traditional radio frequency tags that are used to verify product authenticity. The tags use glue containing microscopic metal particles. This glue forms unique patterns that can be detected using terahertz waves. The system uses AI to compare glue patterns and calculate their similarity. The tags could be used to authenticate items too small for traditional RFIDs.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 39 points 8 months ago

To clarify what OP meant by his 'AI' statement

The system uses AI to compare glue patterns [...]

The researchers noticed that if someone attempted to remove a tag from a product, it would slightly alter the glue with metal particles making the original signature slightly different. To counter this they trained a model:

The researchers produced a light-powered antitampering tag that is about 4 square millimeters in size. They also demonstrated a machine-learning model that helps detect tampering by identifying similar glue pattern fingerprints with more than 99 percent accuracy.

It's a good use case for an ML model.

In my opinion, this should only be used for continuing to detect the product itself.
The danger that I can see with this product would be a decision made by management thinking that they can rely on this to detect tampering without considering other factors.

The use case provided in the article was for something like a car wash sticker placed on a customers car.

If the customer tried to peel it off and reattach it to a different car, the business could detect that as tampering.

However, in my opinion, there are a number of other reasons where this model could falsely accuse someone of tampering:

Temperature swings. A hot day could warp the glue/sticker slightly which would cause the antitampering device to go off the next time it's scanned.
Having to get the windshield replaced because of damage/cracks. The customer would transfer the sticker and unknowingly void the sticker.
Kids, just don't underestimate them.

In the end, most management won't really understand this device well beyond statements like, "You can detect tampering with more than 99 percent accuracy!" And, unless they inform the customers of how the anti-tampering works, Customers won't understand why they're being accused of tampering with the sticker.