Quantcast StorefrontBacktalk » Blog Archive » Why Wal-Mart’s $2/Pallet Non-RFID Penalty Isn’t Going To Work
advertisement
advertisement

Why Wal-Mart’s $2/Pallet Non-RFID Penalty Isn’t Going To Work

Written by Evan Schuman
June 2nd, 2008
Like this story? Share it
To share this story with people in your social network, please click on the network icons below.

Computerworld columnist Frank Hayes–a former colleague of mine from CMP and an awesome folk singer as well–has a wonderful column out about why the Wal-Mart RFID effort is still having problems.

Although some of the proprietary arguments are slightly overstated, Hayes makes a great point about how Wal-Mart’s $2 per pallet non-RFID penalty reflects a lack of understanding of why suppliers have resisted RFID tagging. It’s the software implementation costs and the fact that different retailers demand different versions. Hayes’ column is worth reading. (But not everyone seems to agree. The RFID Journal took exception to the piece, on several levels. And then some RFID Journal readers took exception to that disagreement.)


advertisement

One Comment | Read Why Wal-Mart’s $2/Pallet Non-RFID Penalty Isn’t Going To Work

  1. Chris Kapsambelis Says:

    Wal-Mart’s requirements for pallet and case level tagging is a duplication of current EDI practice, and an added expense for nothing. The software argument does not become important until item level tagging is implemented. When that happens, the database record volume explodes beyond any present standards.

    Unless there is a need to track individual items, the only reason to use RFID at the item level is the efficiency gained by counting large groups of items with a single reading. Since this technique has been proven inaccurate and unreliable there is no need to tag at the item level in general retail applications.

    As long as the requirement remains to scan each item at the Point of Sale (POS), Item level movement data is a byproduct of this process. As for sharing this info with individual vendors, I suggest email. There is no need for expensive and proprietary software for such a simple task.

Leave a Reply

Newsletter

Quickly catch-up on the latest in E-Commerce and Retail Tech with our free weekly newsletter, with urgent bulletins as news merits.
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Kill All The Passwords

This article does mention, but does not give enough attention to, the fact that the attacks discussed are only feasible when the encrypted password file can be copied and subjected to an offline attack. The trick is to have authentication performed on a separate, much more strongly secured host - such as an Active Directory Domain Controller, or a Kerberos server, or a NIS+ server, or even using something as banal as an LDAP-over-SSL authentication dialog. In these environments, the odds of the "password file" being stolen and subjected to an offline attack go to near zero, and only online attacks may be carried out by the attacker. With sensible exponential backoff between failed password attempts, lockout after a modest number of failed attempts on a single account, and pattern detection, that minimum 7 character password is quite secure enough. Passwords aren't dead yet for security purposes, and they will be with us for a very long while to come for practical purposes. The trick is to employ them correctly. Read more...
The possibilities you describe are years away from being implemented at best, so for the moment passwords are an ugly reality. Luckily, password managers can easily manage hundreds of passwords of any length. The only thing a user needs to remember is the master password. It seems like an easier task to educate users on how to use password managers rather than implement complex security technology on a global basis. Read more...