AP News: AP: Military units track guns using tech that could aid foes
https://apnews.com/article/rfid-military-weapons-guns-62c88008478f4ac403047c21f3184677
Here's a cheap solution I'm thinking of that would address the security risk but also allow fast check-outs for deployment:
Make a tag that is somewhere on the outside of the weapon not likely to be touched that often in the course of use. Under or in front of the optic, for example. The antenna loop would be "open" by default, except when you hold in a momentary switch (leaf-style) to close it while doing inventory.
^ I fully expect someone with much more knowledge about RFID tags to tell me why this wouldn't work, but it's the first thing I thought of.
Anyone else have an idea, short of going back to barcodes?
I think you're addressing a different problem. The RFID tags are for inventory control, allowing entire racks of weapons to be counted in an instant.
@voltronic You could go the other way around, if it's possible to disable/re-enable the antenna loop repeatedly. Leave them enabled on the racks, have the troops disable them when issued for combat, and re-enable them when returned to inventory.
@Dobo @voltronic I’m suggesting that both problems are interconnected, and could possibly be resolved using the technology - not just with the weapons themselves, but with the check in/check out at the armory. Maybe I’m in left field….
TBC, I like the idea of biometrics being used to control unauthorized use of weapons. (It would have to be more reliable than any fingerprint/palmprint/retina scan I've ever used, or things could get ugly when you can't fire your own weapon because you're sweaty or the sun's in your eyes.😜 )
But I don't see how it would enable you to count and identify hundreds of weapons at once, so that problem would still need to be solved.
@Dobo every weapon would have a docking station. Individual scans it at station, which autocodes wpn, and allows for release without an alarm being triggered. When putting back, follow the process in reverse. Inventory control software would do the rest. If a unit is checking in and a weapon isn’t accounted for, you know who to be looking for. Maybe include a kill switch that can be remotely activated. I’m spitballing.
Yes, I get what you're describing. Goes well beyond the tech described in the article (which I believe is dirt cheap, by the way).
That remote kill-switch software would have to be rock-solid unhackable or you could be in serious trouble. 😜
Funny you mentionI the software... I am not a fan of "smart" guns, generally for all the reasons this author mentions:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/josephsteinberg/2014/05/04/smartguns/?sh=49b610026729
Also, there's going to be a cost increase compared to traditional firearms. For civilians, that's another socioeconomic divide between people who can and cannot afford to defend themselves. For LE and military, multiply that cost increase across their inventories. Even with volume discounts, it's going to be significant.
nosanitize
@voltronic @Dobo it would be easy to pay for the increased costs by reallocating funds. How much do we spend on fighter jets? I’m not suggesting we’re ready for smart gun technology, but it’s already here and should be further explored as viable options down the road.
@voltronic I think it’s time to use biometrics, thereby making the weapon inoperable if a non registered user attempts anything.