Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Hackers Clone E-Passport

Posted by timothy on Thu Aug 03, 2006 09:57 AM
from the thank-heavens-for-black-hat dept.
mrops writes "I guess the skeptical Slashdot community always knew that e-passports are a big waste of time and money; now German security consultants have been able to successfully clone e-passports, even onto building access cards. FTA: 'The whole passport design is totally brain damaged,' Grunwald says. 'From my point of view all of these RFID passports are a huge waste of money. They're not increasing security at all.'"

Related Stories

[+] Politics: E-Passport In the Works 300 comments
ExE122 writes "In an attempt to curb falsification of passports, the United States has placed an order for millions of embedded ID chips. 'The chips carry an encrypted digital photograph of the passport holder. The chip is designed to be read by a special device that will be used by U.S. government workers who check passports when travelers come through border crossings. The State Department began issuing what are being called e-passports to tourists last week and will gradually increase production. State Department spokeswoman Janelle Hironimus said existing passports will remain valid until they expire but, eventually, all U.S. passports — about 13 million will be issued in 2006 — will contain such chips.'"
[+] RFID Passport Security "Poorly Conceived" 33 comments
tonk writes, "European expert researchers on identity and identity management summarize their findings from an analysis of passports with RFID and biometrics — Machine Readable Travel Documents or MRTDs — and recommend corrective measures that 'need to be adopted by stakeholders in governments and industry to ameliorate outstanding issues... By failing to implement an appropriate security architecture, European governments have effectively forced citizens to adopt new international MTRDs which dramatically decrease their security and privacy and increases risk of identity theft. Simply put, the current implementation of the European passport utilizes technologies and standards that are poorly conceived for its purpose.' The European experts therefore come to similar conclusions as the Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee of the US Department of Homeland Security in a draft report, which seems to be delayed."
[+] Ask Slashdot: Would You Trust RFID-Enabled ATM Cards? 214 comments
race_k2 asks: "As a regular Slashdot reader I've followed the development and implementation of RFID devices in many ubiquitous areas such as clothing, passports and even people. Given that our environment is becoming increasingly tagged, often without our knowledge or consent, and can be monitored or hacked by anyone with the proper hardware, skills and motivation, I viewed the recent arrival of two new ATM cards containing RFID chips with skepticism. While this feature may bring the increased convenience of speedy checkouts, it is not something I am completely comfortable using and decided that the safety of my personal data was more important than the ability to buy things quickly. The vulnerable nature of RFID security coupled with recent, though unrelated, reports of a Possible Security Flaw In ATMs make me seriously question whether the marriage of wireless data transfer with personal finance is a wise application of technology." So race's question basically boils down to: How safe and secure are the RFID chips that are being embedded in debit and credit cards? To add another issue on to the fire: Would you trust RFID technology on your cards?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Hackers Clone E-Passport 25 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.
  • by hkgroove (791170) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:04AM (#15839291) Homepage
    But this unfortunately is not going to stop the governments from wasting money on them.
  • I've got one (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Spad (470073) <[slashdot] [at] [spad.co.uk]> on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:05AM (#15839297) Homepage
    I just renewed my passport, hoping to get in before the "biometric" passports became mandatory in the UK (Not that there's actually *any* biometric data on them), but sadly I've ended up with a RFID chip embedded in the back page of my new one.

    The booklet that comes with it helpfully suggests ways to damage the chip, such as microwaving it, but doing so will render the passport useless, unfortunately. Anyone know where I can get a good tinfoil wallet from?
    • Re:I've got one (Score:5, Informative)

      by Lurker187 (127055) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:12AM (#15839359) Homepage
      I believe that those anti-static bags that many computer boards come in will block an RFID signal. They certainly look exactly like the bag I was given with my RFID remote toll-paying tag, and putting the tag in the bag supposedly blocks it from being read.

      (What, you don't have any old computer parts in their original anti-static bags?!? That's it, no /. for you! ;) )
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:I've got one (Score:5, Informative)

      by chownrus (957727) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:53AM (#15839718)
      I think this will meet your needs: http://www.emvelope.com/products [emvelope.com]
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:I've got one (Score:5, Informative)

      by lga (172042) on Thursday August 03 2006, @12:59PM (#15840725) Homepage Journal

      The RFID chip is only the first step.

      The current chip contains a scanned photo. Future passports will be issued with an ID card which means going to an enrolment centre to get your iris and finger prints scanned and entering all your details into the national identity register. The iris scan may or may not be included in the passport RFID chip and the fingerprints won't be at first.

      The price of passports will go up [theregister.co.uk] from 51 pounds to 66 pounds in october (they were only 42 pounds last year!) to cover the costs and may rise again when ID card start being issued.

      Anyone who wants to avoid the National Identity Register should join the renew for freedom [renewforfreedom.org] campaign and renew their passport early. It is too late to avoid the biometric passport with RFID, but you will stay off of the NIR and will not have to provide fingerprints and iris scans in person. It will cost you 51 pounds but may well be worth it to avoid having to tell the Identity and Passport service every time you move house.

      [ Parent ]
  • by plover (150551) * on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:07AM (#15839309) Homepage Journal
    According to TFA, in order to read the data from the passport you have to enter a key printed in the passport itself. This will at least prevent a surrepetitious cloning while sitting in an airport chair (like the guys who cloned the Mobil SpeedPass keytags.)

    Of course, that won't stop the mad bombers with their IEDs from detonating their bombs in the presense of an ePassport. The video [youtube.com] from TFA shows yet another weakness in this crappily designed (i.e. vendor driven) system.

    • by undef (682662) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:18AM (#15839420)
      Safe from surreptitious cloning? Big deal. You routinely hand over your passport at hotels, etc... while in Europe.
      [ Parent ]
      • Well that's fucking secure - chalk up another one for security through stupidity.

        Ya know, there is not a thing that Homeland Security has done that has made us more secure. Even the one or two instances where they actually tracked down a terrorist cell instead of wasting government money on vacations and useless Katrina relief trailers could easily have been done by the individual agencies themselves.

        It's almost difficult to fathom what anyone that requires this shit is thinking. There is no evaulation of technology, and a complete lack of understanding of security. Unfortunately, those that make the decisions often disregard for political reasons the constant cries of the actual technology folks in those agencies that actually point out these flaws. Unfortunately, their cries fall on deaf ears (although, a big thanks for not giving up the good fight). But politics outweighs information, and RFID gets put into passports, despite the overwhelming evidence that they are a very bad idea.

        Almost all of this is politically motivated now, in one of two avenues - to "appear" to be taking some action to protect security, or in an effort to more easily collect information on anyone that steps foot one into this country - be ye citizen or visitor.

        Checks and balances, being the glory of the past but just about dead now, make sure that these unilateral decisions can be made without any oversite. And with Bush just giving himself more power [theonion.com] (a parody, but eerily poignant) there is no end in site to this stupidity.

        [ Parent ]
  • RFID is the latest buzz. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Skynet (37427) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:10AM (#15839339) Homepage
    Now if we could only enabled these RFID passports to download XML via SOAP on a Web 2.0 platform with XmlHttpRequest, Ruby on Rails would finally take off.
  • This isn't news. (Score:5, Informative)

    by 4815162342 (940334) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:12AM (#15839357)
    While the headline sounds scary, when you examine it closer, this isn't really surprising. The ability to copy the passport is not the issue here. The key point of the technology was to have the issuing government digitally sign the information contained in the passport. This means that a forger cannot simply tip-ex out the name and and put in a new one ;-) The article did not mention if the German passport contains bio-metric data. i.e. a digital copy of the photo. This combined with a digital signature of the photo would make the system very secure indeed. The passport inspector simply scans the data and compares the photo to the person standing before him. I don't see how this "hack" compromises the security of the system, except in cases where the inspecting authority misuses or misunderstands the basis of security in the system.
    • Re:This isn't news. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by plover (150551) * on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:22AM (#15839457) Homepage Journal
      The weakness happens if the inspector examines only the paper copy and relies on the electronic copy to perform the security checks in the background. That's likely to become a common occurance -- look at the passport, scan the passport, chat with the guy asking if he's here on business or holiday, wait for a green "OK" screen in the corner of your eye, and wave him through. It'll happen a hundred times a day, and the inspectors will make mistakes.

      Probably the better question is "will the bad guys be willing to risk trying this?" No doubt there'll be an endless stream of stolen passport data available on line from crooked hotel clerks -- skimmed e-passport RFID data will be the next hot hacker item for sale.

      [ Parent ]
  • Not so bad really... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MobyDisk (75490) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:24AM (#15839470) Homepage
    After reading this article, the RFID thing isn't nearly as bad as I thought.

    1) They aren't eliminating the physical passports. So all the physical protections (watermarking) still apply.
    2) They are shielding the passports so they can't be remotely read.
    3) You need to send a cryptographic key which makes it even more difficult to read remotely (although I don't understand how this works).
    4) They are hard to tamper with because of the hashes (assuming they are good hashes, this is comparable to watermarks).

    Having said that, I'm not sure why the RFID thing is even useful. A bar code would be simpler, although no more or less tamper proof. And there are existing machines which can read passports by scanning them and OCRing. They are very reliable since passports use high-quality printed text with the characters in known fonts and positions.
  • Specs here (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hughk (248126) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:29AM (#15839519) Journal
    You can find a copy of the specs on the ICAO website [icao.int].

    It doesn't give away a lot, it doesn't have to. A passport must be inspectable by anyone so the spec on how to read it must be pretty much public. There is an (optional) electronic signature mechanism, but this predicates an international public key infrastructure. The bank where I work has enough problems getting one of those together, let alone an international organisation. PKI is very hard. Google for references on this.

    Key compromise means that all issues documents are then compromised. Can you imagine a country recalling all its passports?

  • Secure Documents don't need RFID (Score:5, Insightful)

    by davidwr (791652) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:47AM (#15839666) Homepage Journal
    In order to be "secure" against fakery a passport, or any document should:

    1) Have an digital signature of all the data, or at least a signature of a strong one-way hash.
    2) Have a means to verify the signature, and that the signer's key hasn't been repudiated.
    3) Have a means to verify the hash is legit, i.e. rehash the data on the spot.
    4) Have a means to verify the data in question matches the printed version of the document, e.g. a computer screen that shows the digitized picture and the other data that should be on the printed document. A human, or perhaps a computer, can then compare that with the actual document.

    Steps 1, 2, and 3 are at the heart of any digitally-signature-validation scheme. Step #4 will detect misuse, as someone using a cloned passport will "look" the same as someone using a stolen-but-legitimate one to the checker.

    An alternative, where bandwidth is available, is to have the document-issuing authority validate the document: Upload the document to the authority, and have it send back a "valid" or "not valid" response. This is essentially what happens with credit cards: the name, card #, and expiration date are passed on to the bank or the bank's agent, and the merchant gets back a code saying "card is valid," "card not valid," or one of several other codes such as "card reported stolen/missing."

    There are still 2 problems with this approach:
    1) The identical twin or look-alike problem.
    2) Privacy issues if passport data is compromised.

    The twin problem is mitigated by the digitized version of the handwritten signature, a fingerprint, notation of scars, or other items which look-alikes are less likely to share. Privacy issues are in principle no more than they are today with stolen passports, ASSUMING no information that is not on the printed passport finds its way to the embedded electronic data. However, electronic data is much easier to deliver to fraudsters than paper data, and passport theives aren't likely to spend the time typing or scanning in data from a paper passport. The best cure for this is to encrypt the data.

    RFID is not required for a secure document. All RFID does is make the data easier to read, which is good for those who want to read the passports without contact them, be they freind or foe. Hmm, maybe someone should invent an RFID tag with an "on" switch.
    • RFID tag with an "on" switch (Score:5, Insightful)

      by davidwr (791652) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:49AM (#15839688) Homepage Journal
      I'm not even an expert in the field, but an RFID tag with an "on" switch seems pretty obvious. Just put the switch between the antenna and the rest of the device. It can be either a traditional on-off switch or a pressure-sensitive "off when not pressed" switch. Imagine an RFID-enabled passport that ONLY broadcasts when someone was holding down the "broadcast" switch.
      [ Parent ]
  • by MikeRT (947531) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:49AM (#15839687) Homepage
    An insecure, RFID-driven passport is the perfect thing for making it too dangerous for Americans to travel safely abroad. If an American had one of these in Lebanon, Hezbollah could walk through a public place with a RFID reader and discretely find some good targets of hostage-taking opportunity. It'd be easier for the Chinese police, for example, to track American visitors.

    Don't go abroad! Don't see the world except through the lens of CNNABCCBSNBCFOXNPR! That's how the political class wants it. A population that is scared to travel is a population that can't as easily see the world on its own and make its own decisions.
    • Re:And this helps... how? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tweekster (949766) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:18AM (#15839426)
      Do you think its hard to snag someones passport?

      How about a pickpocket at the airport, they can even turn it in to the lost and found afterwards. Suddenly being John smith isnt that bad now...

      and secondly, gee I really wonder if the people at the border are gonna be lazy and not bother to check but simply swipe it.... oh wait they are lazy and will do exactly that!

      As for the need to steal a passport right now to do this...wait a week, im sure someone will figure out how to take this one step further.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:And this helps... how? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by rs232 (849320) <emacsuser@lin[ ]ail.org ['uxm' in gap]> on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:39AM (#15839608)
      "Seriously why is this a big deal? .. as far as I understand it is an additional measure of security, not the only measure", MoneyT

      Allow me to explain it to you. The move to e-passports was so as you couldn't counterfeited them like the paper ones. One of the measures required, if not the primary one is the ability to not be cloned. Thats why they call them e-passports

      "his grand achievement is... what? That that a fellow called John Smith could thus make a fake passport that still says John Smith?", Moraelin

      No, that a follow called Osama could pass through an airport if it used electronic scanning. Or as the article mentions an electronic device could be activated when 'John Smith' opened his passport.

      The same lack of thought seems to have gone into fingerprint scanning. As this article [diva-portal.org] demonstrates it is possible to forge these as you leave your prints all over the place.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:And this helps... how? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by SyncNine (532248) on Thursday August 03 2006, @11:12AM (#15839868)
        OK, seriously. You sound like George Bush. Just stop talking.

        Let me explain this as simple as possible so that I'm sure that we're all on the same page:
        Someone can duplicate the DATA on a passport and NOT edit it, and you say 'OMFGZ OSAMA BIN LADEN ROFLOL'.
        Give the Osama argument a rest.

        Let us play out this scenario of yours:

        Osama Bin Laden finds himself in possession of a stolen/cloned passport for one 'John Smith' of the USA.
        This passport, while stolen and cloned, is still digitally signed -- meaning that the information on it cannot be changed.
        Osama Bin Laden attempts to enter the USA with this passport.
        The electronic scanner reads 'John Smith' and provides a picture of 'John Smith'.
        Osama Bin Laden is NOT 'John Smith'.
        Osama Bin Laden is taken into custody.

        The only way that "Osama could pass through an airport if it used electronic scanning" is if he found a way to re-digitally sign the contents of the passport, OR if he could do enough facial modification that he looked like 'John Smith'.

        So, what we're saying is, if he's willing to do the plastic surgery or to spend the time to crack the RSA encryption on the contents of the RFID chip and is able to RE-digitally sign it after he edits it, he can get into the country. Gee. Sounds a lot less secure than our current method of ... uh ... looking at a piece of paper that could be edited by anyone with enough time and the holograms to make it look right.

        Or, the more likely scenario, he'll just waltz across the Mexican border because the USA doesn't seem to give a crap about the fact that thousands of people illegally cross it daily. Without passports. Or extensive facial modification.

        On to your second mention that someone could have an electronic device that activates when an RFID chip is within range:
        YIPPEE. Anyone could make an electronic device that would activate when your Chase Blink card or your FastPass or your Building Key Card is within range. THIS IS NOT NEW, NOR IS IT EXCITING OR DANGEROUS.

        Quit with the FUD posts and actually take a step back to find out that, YES, RFID passports are not perfect. YES, the concept has its inherent flaws. NO, they really aren't (yet) worse than the standard passport flaws. NO, this does not mean that you can just drop a FUD post about Osama getting into the airport because of it without any factual basis behind it, whatsoever.
        [ Parent ]
    • Re:And this helps... how? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Dare nMc (468959) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:57AM (#15839754)
      >Ah yes, so he could clone someone else's chip, if he can steal their passport, and place it on his own passport.

      Except that 2 major stated purposes of RFID in passports is nullified by his actions.

      IE:
      RFID passports are more secure/no the digital portion can be copied easier than the paper.
      RFID passports will speed customs/no the RFID download can't be trusted, without thourgh comparison to the paper.

      also Identity theft occurs within families. So if I were 18 year old George W Bush Jr, I snag W Bush Sr's passport, make a copy of the chip, return it. Unless a photo is on the RFID chip, their are only 3 differences in our passports, 1) Age, 2) a additional roman numeral (ie III instead of II) 3) SSN

      not to mention their are 3 unrelatead Jim Jones within 5 miles of my house, all within 5 years of age to me, likely at least 2 have the first 3 digits of their SSN the same as me (most SSN's issued in my home state, of simular issue dates started with number in the range of 478 to 480)
      So if I were to become a felon on Parol with a travel ban,
      1) have my name legaly changed to Jim Jones
      2) Break into Jim Jones' houses, cloan digital chip, Jim never knows.
      3) I now have 4 passable unique ID's to use anywhere I want, 1 piece of paper, 3 chips to swap.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:German consultants (Score:4, Informative)

      by Yvanhoe (564877) on Thursday August 03 2006, @10:37AM (#15839597) Journal
      Don't German security consultants also specialize in building super-bunkers for Islamic terror states like Iran?

      And now they've compromised the future US passport as well?

      3 words to describe this -

      state sponsored terrorism.


      I know you are humorous. But you are insightful in your humor. See how easy it is to put something against anyone in the "war on terror" ? Now in three sentences, that is far-fetching, but if it was released day after day in news report, I am confident you could turn the majority of US opinion against any country in the world.
      [ Parent ]