Ruminations On The Nature Of The Key
Any day now, our landlord will finally deliver a working swipe mechanism to open our office door. Meanwhile, since we moved in, we’ve had to use a physical key to get in, even though we already have the cards that let us into our parking garage. What leads to this rumination, though, is my recent car purchase.
I bought a 2006 Toyota Prius, which came with a smart key.
I don’t need to pull the key out to open the car or operate it. As long as I have the key on my person, the car talks to it to establish my authenticity and allow me to open the door and push the start button. It’s kind of eery, actually, for an older guy like me: I walk up to the car and when my hand reaches the door handle, the car senses my proximity, talks to the key and unlocks.
My life now: I physically lock the door to my house, walk up to my car and drive away. I swipe me and my car into the parking garage, swipe myself into the gym, and then take a key out to open our office door. Any day now, of course, our landlord will finally deliver a working swipe mechanism; then I can use one card for both parking garage and office door.
Why do I have a key? Isn’t it feasible and affordable now to install electronic locks everywhere, including my house? Indeed, if it is feasible, why the heck do you need different electronic fobs or cards for each entry point? Why can’t I use my ATM card or cell phone or something else I already carry around? (See this post on my personal blog for another smart-card experience, but I don’t want my identity stored on that one!)
You can feel it: The future isn’t too far around the corner.
February 16th, 2007 at 3:16 am
The solutions for swipe cards are usually relatively expensive. Longer range technology also requires batteries and is subject to the possibility of being hacked. Some studies report the ability to effectively jam locking devices using this method by flooding them with signals, thereby locking an individual inside or outside and potentially disabling the system. There is also the issue of privacy - if the use of systems became widespread so would the use of copying technologies, in the case of RFID technology such systems are already available. This could potentially allow people to copy all of your keys without ever coming into contact with you.
February 21st, 2007 at 7:05 pm
Problem with communication between key and door is “intent”. Proximity to the car does not equal “I want it to unlock”. Found this out when walking past the car after a walk to the local village. Went into the house and next morning found that someone had opened up all the glove boxes, etc. as the car was open all night. It was only after the fact that we realized that the car instinctively thought we wanted to go for a ride, but had misread our intent.
March 16th, 2007 at 10:32 am
The future is already here - http://www.sargentandgreenleaf.com/prod_elect_bio_keypad.php
March 19th, 2007 at 10:45 am
The future of the key is that it will disappear. Once the things we lock up today know who we are and what we intend, the key will be a thing of the past. We’ll be our own keys.
Objects that contain valuables will be aware of their environment, know their owners, and be network connected. Your house won’t have a lock that requires you to carry a key, it just won’t open for anyone that it doesn’t know or that you have told it isn’t permitted inside. Your car will recognize the allowed drivers and will only start for them. Etc.
A “person recognition” based lock system will consist of a network of sensors such as cameras, microphones, etc. around your home or in your car which are connected to a local server and/or remote alarm service. Multiple sensor types can be combined for a more robust system.
This will allow your home or vehicle to detect the presence of people wanting to enter, identify them as known or unknown, and even estimate their intentions before allowing them access. The locks themselves will be IP addressable and will open when the appropriate authorization is presented by another entity on the network. Fingerprints or PINs could be used as well for added security as well as alternates for fail over, but as available processing power increases in the next decade or so they won’t be needed in either the home or (probably) the automotive setting.
JimmyG’s example of the car is interesting in sort of a “worst practices” sort of way, since a simple timer could have fixed the problem described. That is the car could open based on proximity of the key fob and then lock itself after a few minutes if no one actually starts it. This would fix most of these cases I’d guess. The user could have been allowed to adjust this time out from the existing controls an displays. FWIW, my Acura already does something like this but I can’t adjust the time out.
Going back to biometric based locks, if the car “knew” its drivers, this capability could be extended to include a robust model of driver behavior to determine their intentions. These sorts of models have been used successfully in simulations of complex man/machine systems as well as in predictive modes in real-time settings.
The “intention to drive” requires the driver not only approaching the vehicle but also entering it and sitting in the driver’s seat. A system that can detect and identify the driver can also use these sorts of simple state based models to estimate the driver’s future intentions. Simply approaching the vehicle might cause a lower security state for example so you could open the trunk, but it wouldn’t start the car. The passenger cabin would unlock once your identity had been confrimed and when you reached a hand towards the door handle.
There are lots of possibilities once the car knows who owns it, who is trying to get in, and has even a limited model of their intentions.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:26 am
My landrover difficult to use remote.Some time error if near equiptment telecom radio.
Thanks for you post .