An attacker uses methods to deactivate a passive RFID tag for the purpose of rendering the tag, badge, card, or object containing the tag unresponsive. RFID tags are used primarily for access control, inventory, or anti-theft devices. The purpose of attacking the RFID chip is to disable or damage the chip without causing damage to the object housing it.
Extended Description
When correctly performed the RFID chip can be disabled or destroyed without visible damage or marking to whatever item or device containing the chip. Attacking the chip directly allows for the security device or method to be bypassed without directly damaging the device itself, such as an alarm system or computer system. Various methods exist for damaging or deactivating RFID tags. For example, most common RFID chips can be permanently destroyed by creating a small electromagnetic pulse near the chip itself. One method employed requires the modifying a disposable camera by disconnecting the flash bulb and soldering a copper coil to the capacitor. Firing the camera in this configuration near any RFID chip-based device creates an EMP pulse sufficient to destroy the chip without leaving evidence of tampering. So far this attack has been demonstrated to work against RFID chips in the 13.56 MHz range.
Relationships
This table shows the other attack patterns and high level categories that are related to this attack pattern. These relationships are defined as ChildOf and ParentOf, and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as CanFollow, PeerOf, and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar attack patterns that the user may want to explore.
Nature
Type
ID
Name
ChildOf
Standard Attack Pattern - A standard level attack pattern in CAPEC is focused on a specific methodology or technique used in an attack. It is often seen as a singular piece of a fully executed attack. A standard attack pattern is meant to provide sufficient details to understand the specific technique and how it attempts to accomplish a desired goal. A standard level attack pattern is a specific type of a more abstract meta level attack pattern.
A Related Weakness relationship associates a weakness with this attack pattern. Each association implies a weakness that must exist for a given attack to be successful. If multiple weaknesses are associated with the attack pattern, then any of the weaknesses (but not necessarily all) may be present for the attack to be successful. Each related weakness is identified by a CWE identifier.
Physical Security: The term "Physical Security" is used by both CAPEC and CWE, but has different definitions in each corpus. CAPEC uses this term to discuss physical access to buildings and/or specific rooms. In contrast, CWE typically uses this term to discuss physical access to hardware components. CWE does not cover "Physical Security" in the essence described by this CAPEC, so there is no mapping between to the two corpuses at this time.
References
[REF-33] Stuart McClure, Joel Scambray
and George Kurtz. "Hacking Exposed: Network Security Secrets & Solutions". Chapter 9: Hacking Hardware. 6th Edition. McGraw Hill. 2009.
Content History
Submissions
Submission Date
Submitter
Organization
2014-06-23
(Version 2.6)
CAPEC Content Team
The MITRE Corporation
Modifications
Modification Date
Modifier
Organization
2019-09-30
(Version 3.2)
CAPEC Content Team
The MITRE Corporation
Updated @Abstraction, Related_Attack_Patterns
2022-02-22
(Version 3.7)
CAPEC Content Team
The MITRE Corporation
Updated Description, Extended_Description
More information is available — Please select a different filter.
Description
This table shows the other attack patterns and high level categories that are related to this attack pattern. These relationships are defined as ChildOf and ParentOf, and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as CanFollow, PeerOf, and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar attack patterns that the user may want to explore.
Content History
