Would you get a readable chip implanted in your hand? In a 2021 European survey 51% of people said that they would. What are the risks and potential benefits of the technology as it currently stands?

There are currently two main technologies for implantable chips that can be read at close range through the skin. The more familiar technology is RFID – radio frequency identification. There is also Near Field Communication (NFC) which is a type of device that uses short range connections, less than 4cm. Both NFC and RFID use radio frequency wireless communication. They are activated by coupling with an external antenna that allows one-way or two-way data communication. The devices are therefore passive, they do not require their own power, which is a huge advantage for something implantable.

This is the same technology used in wireless card readers or similar non-implantable technology. The real difference is that these chips are designed to be implanted, so that are small (slightly larger than a grain of rice) and are encased in a bioplastic that is tissue compatible. The first such chip was implanted in a person in 1998. They have been used routinely for implantation in pets. They are FDA approved for implantation in humans, and the data shows that they are medically safe. They are also MRI safe, meaning that (despite rumors) they won’t explode, overheat, or move if a person with a chip implant goes through an MRI scan. However, some brands may not be MRI compatible, meaning that the data on them may be wiped or destroyed by the MRI scan. This is likely a solvable problem, however. Chip designs could be made MRI resistant. It’s also theoretically possible to put on a glove that would shield the chip to reduce or avoid damage.

Assuming the chips are engineered to be safe, which seems to be the case, what are their risks and benefits. The obvious application that is most often discussed is use as a method of payment. A chip with the exact same function as one embedded in your credit card could be instead embedded in your hand, in the tissue between the thumb and forefinger. This way your card could never be lost or stolen. You don’t have to hide it somewhere when you go swimming. You will never forget it. There is an obvious convenience to this setup. But also, the same chip could be used to grant you access to secure locations, or let you into your own front door or be used as a key to your car. Essentially the chip proves that you are you, and could be used for any application requiring identification.

The chip could therefore serve theoretically as your drivers license, passport, and voter registration. Once you are uniquely identified, all of that information can be stored in a central government database. Once such a system becomes more common, it could also be used for any ticketed situation, including your boarding pass to get on a plane. I just boarded a plane this past weekend. Nearly every single passenger used their smartphone as their boarding pass. Not too long ago this would have been considered unworkable, but now such devices are so common they can be used for all kinds of tickets. The same may soon be true for implanted chips. Chips could be used for authentication, so forget ever having to remember or reset another password. Just swipe the chip and you get access to any application, device, or website. Some may keep passwords for two-level authentication when necessary.

Another application is medical and other emergency information. Your entire medical history could be accessible through the implanted chip, so even if you are brought to the ER as a John or Jane Doe your doctor can know your allergies and other pertinent medical history.

What’s the downside? Pretty much every popular article about the technology will mention the risk of being hacked or tracked. If someone with a reader gets close enough, they could copy the information off your chip and then steal your identity, which would be obviously disastrous. However, that can happen now, at least for your wireless credit cars, key fobs, or ID cards. The greater risk is that your implanted chip may be all of those things at once. This is definitely a security risk, and the infrastructure would need to have robust security fail-safes. No technology is unhackable, but it should be made as hack resistant as possible. Also there should be quick and easy protocols to detect such hacking (credit card companies already use algorithms to detect fraud), and to report possible hacking and put a hold on your identity until it is resolved.

Similarly, carrying an ID chip around with you everywhere opens the possibility of being tracked for nefarious purposes. This is especially problematic in authoritarians countries, who don’t need a more convenient way to Big Brother their citizens.

But I could argue that this is already the situation. We already routinely carry around with us devices that can be tracked, far better than an implanted chip. Going “off the grid” is no easy task in a 21st century developed nation. You are tracked through your phone, your use of credit cards, your use of toll-paying apps, your use of websites, and certainly any electronic identification. So would it really be any different? The one difference is that you can ditch physical objects much more easily than removing an embedded chip. But you could put on a glove that is shielded. Perhaps that will become a popular gift item in the future.

If history is any guide, it seems likely that an embedded chip is in our future. We have a history of trading a little bit of security and privacy for a little bit of convenience, and the convenience here is pretty extreme in a plugged-in technological society. We will get comfortable with the idea, and most of use will be willing to take the chance in order to get the benefits.