Security in data centers has always been a major concern for operators and owners, especially in collocation sites. But how far should you extend security measures? In 2006, it was widely reported that Cincinnati based video-surveillance firm, mandated any employee that worked in its secure data center to get implanted with one of VeriChip's implants. Two of its employees received the implants.
However, there are now concerns over the health implications of implanting RFID chips in individuals, and wider public safety concerns. In June, the state of Wisconsin passed a bill making it illegal for anyone, including employers and government agencies, to implant such microchips into people without their consent. The state became the first to institute such legislation when Governor Jim Doyle (D) signed it into law on May 31.
State Rep. Marlin Schneider (D) introduced the legislation, Assembly Bill 290, on April 4, 2005, primarily to protect individual rights so companies couldn't use the technology to track employees' every move.
The LA Times has reported that the California State Senate has passed a bill that goes one step farther, by banning employers from requiring employees to receive implants.
Indeed, security researcher Jonathan Westhues has shown how a hacker can clone a chip and theoretically duplicate someone's implant to access a secure area.

More here

Punjab would emulate Gujrat and Madhya Pardesh by introducing chip system to maintain exact count of cows in the state.
Revealing this, Punjab Gow Sewa Commission chairman Kimti Lal Bhagat said here on Monday that a micro chip with unique identification number would be implanted in every cow which would be difficult to remove. The technique would help the state prepare a database for cows which would further help in their conservation, he added. He informed that the same company which had undertaken the cow tagging work in the other two states had been hired by Punjab. Chips would also help in checking fraudulent loans and claims against cow insurance policies, he claimed.

More here

More here

LAHORE: The provincial government’s announcement that it would track people listed in the Fourth Schedule (terrorism suspects) by implanting microchips under their skin has drawn criticism from human rights groups. 

At a press conference on February 25, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif said people placed on the Fourth Schedule would have to wear anklets with micro-chips in them. That will help the government track their every move. Sharif said the police would also find out if they ever took the anklet off.

However on Wednesday, Home Minister Shuja Khanzada announced that microchips would be introduced in the bodies of people in the Fourth Schedule. He said the government had procured 5,000 microchips for the purpose.

An official in the Counter-Terrorism Department said that the government was considering the option of injecting a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chip near the knees of people in the fourth schedule. The chip would carry their bio data and criminal records. The chip could be scanned by special instruments, he said.

Previously, people on the Fourth Schedule would have to inform the police if they wanted to travel to other areas. The official said placing microchips in their bodies would enable them to monitor their movement at all times.

Several human rights activists have spoken up against this idea. Human rights activist Dr Mehdi Hassan said the chips could only help police track people’s location, not their actions. “Treating people like pieces of meat does not seem to be an improvement of any kind,” he said.

Similar tactics of tagging certain people had been used by Stalin in Russia and in Nazi Germany, he said. “They should be inconceivable for a democratic country like Pakistan,” he said. It would be a gross violation of human rights and would damage Pakistan’s image abroad, Hassan said.

Former Supreme Court Bar Association president Asma Jehangir said if the government was considering any such options, it must stop immediately. “This is a barbaric thought which undermines basic human rights…it is not a feasible option. There are provisions in law to place hand collars on certain suspects released on bail. Implanting microchips in people is a denigration of human dignity.”

HRCP Chairperson Zohra Yousaf said this was very disturbing news. “This is harassment and invasive,” she said.

“Such techniques violate almost every fundamental right a person has.”

Published in The Express Tribune, March 14th, 2015.

Some 50 people in the Netherlands have had a microchip implanted in their hands this year, piercing specialist Tom van Oudenaarden told broadcaster Nos on Tuesday. Worldwide some 2,000 people have been ‘chipped’ and their number is growing. Oudennarden expects their number to grow considerably next year, particularly among what he calls ‘technerds’. Martijn Wismeijer, who has had two chips in his hand for a couple of weeks, says the pain was over after a couple of days. ‘You can still feel them, but you forget they are there,’ he said.

Read more at Microchip implants in humans grow in popularity, some 50 Dutch people are ‘chipped’

AuthorKatina Michael

This is what it might be like living in an uberveillance society.

New York Times, 2004

New York Times, 2004

Read more here at el Robot Pescador.

El empresario de Internet y activista del software libre Jonathan Oxer, se implantó a sí mismo un microchip en el año 2004, después de obtener el mismo kit que usan los veterinarios con las mascotas. Su cuenta de Twitter lo describe como un “cyborg en construcción”.    Oxer lo utiliza para hacer funcionar las cerraduras de la casa y su ordenador y dice que después de una década llevándolo dentro de su cuerpo, el implante no le ha causado ningún efecto negativo.  “Ahora es como cualquier otra parte de mí. Ni siquiera pienso en ello” , dice.

El empresario de Internet y activista del software libre Jonathan Oxer, se implantó a sí mismo un microchip en el año 2004, después de obtener el mismo kit que usan los veterinarios con las mascotas. Su cuenta de Twitter lo describe como un “cyborg en construcción”.

Oxer lo utiliza para hacer funcionar las cerraduras de la casa y su ordenador y dice que después de una década llevándolo dentro de su cuerpo, el implante no le ha causado ningún efecto negativo. “Ahora es como cualquier otra parte de mí. Ni siquiera pienso en ello”, dice.

It is with great joy that MG and I write to let you know that the Uberveillance edited volume is finally in stores and available for purchase. We encourage you to ask your libraries to purchase the volume. Of significance are the coming together of well-known voices in the surveillance field to discuss the definition and impact of uberveillance, including Katherine Albrecht, Roger Clarke, Mark Gasson, Kevin Haggerty, Steve Mann, Ellen McGee, Kevin Warwick, Marcus Wigan and numerous authorities on the topic of microchipping people. This volume contains 17 book chapters, and 7 interviews and panel presentations as well as full referencing of source materials in some 500 pages.

"Uberveillance" edited volume by Michael and Michael (2014)

"Uberveillance" edited volume by Michael and Michael (2014)



PART A The Veillances

Chapter 1 Introduction: On the “Birth” of Uberveillance  (pages 1-31) M. G. Michael (University of Wollongong, Australia)

Chapter 2 Veillance: Beyond Surveillance, Dataveillance, Uberveillance, and the Hypocrisy of One-Sided Watching  (pages 32-45) Steve Mann (University of Toronto, Canada)

Chapter 3 Uberveillance: Where Wear and Educative Arrangement  (pages 46-62) Alexander Hayes (University of Wollongong, Australia)

PART B Applications of Humancentric Implantables

Chapter 4 Practical Experimentation with Human Implants  (pages 64-132) Kevin Warwick (University of Reading, UK), Mark N. Gasson (University of Reading, UK)

Chapter 5 Knowledge Recovery: Applications of Technology and Memory  (pages 133-142) Maria E. Burke (University of Salford, UK), Chris Speed (University of Edinburgh, UK)

PART C Adoption of RFID Implants for Humans

Chapter 6 Willingness to Adopt RFID Implants: Do Personality Factors Play a Role in the Acceptance of Uberveillance?  (pages 144-168) Christine Perakslis (Johnson and Wales University, USA)

Chapter 7 Surveilling the Elderly: Emerging Demographic Needs and Social Implications of RFID Chip Technology Use  (pages 169-185) Randy Basham (University of Texas – Arlington, USA)

PART D Tracking and Tracing Laws, Directives, Regulations, and Standards

Chapter 8 Towards the Blanket Coverage DNA Profiling and Sampling of Citizens in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland  (pages 187-207) Katina Michael (University of Wollongong, Australia)

Chapter 9 ID Scanners and Überveillance in the Night-Time Economy: Crime Prevention or Invasion of Privacy?  (pages 208-225) Darren Palmer (Deakin University, Australia), Ian Warren (Deakin University, Australia), Peter Miller (Deakin University, Australia)

Chapter 10 Global Tracking Systems in the Australian Interstate Trucking Industry  (pages 226-234) Jann Karp (C.C.C. Australia, Australia)

Chapter 11 Tracking Legislative Developments in Relation to “Do Not Track” Initiatives  (pages 235-259) Brigette Garbin (University of Queensland, Australia), Kelly Staunton (University of Queensland, Australia), Mark Burdon (University of Queensland, Australia)

Chapter 12 Uberveillance, Standards, and Anticipation: A Case Study on Nanobiosensors in U.S. Cattle  (pages 260-279) Kyle Powys Whyte (Michigan State University, USA), Monica List (Michigan State University, USA), John V. Stone (Michigan State University, USA), Daniel Grooms (Michigan State University, USA), Stephen Gasteyer (Michigan State University, USA), Paul B. Thompson (Michigan State University, USA), Lawrence Busch (Michigan State University, USA), Daniel Buskirk (Michigan State University, USA), Erica Giorda (Michigan State University, USA), Hilda Bouri (Michigan State University, USA)

PART E Health Implications of Microchipping Living Things

Chapter 13 Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006  (pages 281-317) Katherine Albrecht (CASPIAN Consumer Privacy, USA)

PART F Socio-Ethical Implications of RFID Tags and Transponders

Chapter 14 Privacy and Pervasive Surveillance: A Philosophical Analysis  (pages 319-350) Alan Rubel (University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA)

Chapter 15 Neuroethics and Implanted Brain Machine Interfaces  (pages 351-365) Ellen M. McGee (Independent Researcher, USA)

Chapter 16 We Are the Borg! Human Assimilation into Cellular Society  (pages 366-407) Ronnie D. Lipschutz (University of California - Santa Cruz, USA), Rebecca J. Hester (University of Texas Medical Branch, USA)

Chapter 17 Uberveillance and Faith-Based Organizations: A Renewed Moral Imperative  (pages 408-416) Marcus Wigan (Oxford Systematics, Australia & Edinburgh Napier University, UK)

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Compilation of References

About the Contributors



Roba Abbas, University of Wollongong, Australia

Greg Adamson, University of Melbourne, Australia

Katherine Albrecht, CASPIAN, USA

Anas Aloudat, University of Jordan, Jordan

Michael V. Arnold, University of Melbourne, Australia

Emilia Belleboni, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Spain

Rafael Capurro, University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee, USA

Kenneth Foster, University of Pennsylvania, USA

Amal Graafstra,, USA

Mireille Hildebrandt, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Peter Hyland, University of Wollongong, Australia

Nicholas Huber, Accenture, Australia

Indrawati, Institut Manajemen Telkom, Indonesia

Eleni Kosta, K. U. Leuven, Belgium

Ronald Leenes, Tilburg University, The Netherlands

Avner Levin, Ryerson University, Canada

Michael Loui, University of Illinois – Urbana-Champaign, USA

Noëmi Manders-Huits, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Keith W. Miller, University of Missouri – St. Louis, USA

Lyria Bennett Moses, University of New South Wales, Australia

Christine Perakslis, Johnson and Wales University, USA

Laura Perusco, Macquarie Bank, UK

Kenneth Pimple, Indiana University – Bloomington, USA

Joseph Savirimuthu, University of Liverpool, UK

Alan D. Smith, Robert Morris University, USA

Charles Smith, Mesa State College Alumni, USA

Judith Symonds, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand

Samuel Fosso Wamba, Rouen Business School, France

John Weckert, Charles Sturt University, Australia



MLA Style

Michael, M.G. and Katina Michael. "Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies." IGI Global, 2014. 1-509. Web. 24 Dec. 2013. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4582-0

APA Style

Michael, M., & Michael, K. (2014). Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies (pp. 1-509). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4582-0

Chicago Style

Michael, M.G. and Katina Michael. "Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies." 1-509 (2014), accessed December 24, 2013. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4582-0