Quantcast StorefrontBacktalk » Blog Archive » Metro Group To Fine Suppliers Who Don’t RFID Comply
advertisement
advertisement

Metro Group To Fine Suppliers Who Don’t RFID Comply

Written by Evan Schuman
September 5th, 2007
Like this story? Share it
To share this story with people in your social network, please click on the network icons below.

The Germany-based Metro Group, one of the world’s largest retailers and one of the strongest RFID advocates, has gone into fullscale RFID deployment. But the more interesting news is that Metro has decided to penalize suppliers who don’t properly comply.

“Some sort of levy will be imposed for each non-compliant — that is, untagged — pallet shipped by the supplier to the retailer,” said an RFID Update story. “Exactly what that levy will be is unclear. Industry hearsay puts it at two euros per untagged pallet, but METRO has not confirmed the figure.”

The story pointed out that this is in stark contrast to how Wal-Mart has been enforcing its supplier rules. Wal-Mart’s “RFID mandate was considered aggressive indeed but stopped short of threatening a financial penalty for non-compliance,” the story said.


advertisement

One Comment | Read Metro Group To Fine Suppliers Who Don’t RFID Comply

  1. shoppingbasket Says:

    This is going to be interesting to watch. Of course whether or not mandatory RFID actually gets entrenched in supplier contracts will depend on the next round of contract negociations. Metro Group has muscle with its suppliers, that’s clear, but the cost to suppliers of implementing tagging will be high.

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...