The Gauteng E-tolling Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Koosi said:
The RF part of this system is made by Kapsch... I presume that they, being Austrians, would have put some forethought into data collisions.

From my experience with other RFID systems I developed, there is a practical limit to how many collisions you can handle... My guessimation is that 20 or more tags in your car ought to do it.
Click to expand...

Most RFID readers of this quality would be able to read between 400 and 900 tags per second. 20 isn't going to do much.

Also, if you put 2 tags in your car, my assumption would be that both would be charged. You'd need to dispute it to reverse the charge I'd imagine. Once a tag is scanned, the plate is secondary. If their image recognition is up to scratch, they will count the cars present at the time of the read, and not bother to look for the plate unless there are more cars than tags.

As for the dents on the car or reading the license disc... total BS. Not happening.

Now if an unscrupulous person wanted to jam the RFID and force them to use camera... said unscrupulous person would drop a battery powered transmitter on the RFID frequency range (somewhere in the 800 or 900 range depending on equipment and settings). Problem is that you'd be close to mobile phone frequency as well as doing something illegal. You'd rather just not put a tag in your car to start with.

Mud on the plates, and no e-tag. With no visual confirmation of the plate, they are not identifying you without a tag. Not sure if this would give you plausible deniability as opposed to switched plates and such.
 
rakabos3 said:
Just walked past the etoll shop in cresta. Queue was all the way to the escalator. Seems the resistance has ended before it even started
Click to expand...

This saddens and annoys me immensely. What a bunch of cowards.
 
shogun said:
Most RFID readers of this quality would be able to read between 400 and 900 tags per second. 20 isn't going to do much.

Also, if you put 2 tags in your car, my assumption would be that both would be charged. You'd need to dispute it to reverse the charge I'd imagine. Once a tag is scanned, the plate is secondary. If their image recognition is up to scratch, they will count the cars present at the time of the read, and not bother to look for the plate unless there are more cars than tags.

As for the dents on the car or reading the license disc... total BS. Not happening.

Now if an unscrupulous person wanted to jam the RFID and force them to use camera... said unscrupulous person would drop a battery powered transmitter on the RFID frequency range (somewhere in the 800 or 900 range depending on equipment and settings). Problem is that you'd be close to mobile phone frequency as well as doing something illegal. You'd rather just not put a tag in your car to start with.

Mud on the plates, and no e-tag. With no visual confirmation of the plate, they are not identifying you without a tag. Not sure if this would give you plausible deniability as opposed to switched plates and such.
Click to expand...

Collisions of the kind I was referring to, are those with two or more tags in very close proximity to each other i.e. on top of each other. In the work I have done with RFID cards and the readers I have designed, an upper limit was found. Eventually the tags all respond and jam each other out.... spread them out a bit and things get better.

Since none of the details of this system is exposed (not since I last checked anyhow) it is a good first step to play with the system and see what happens....
 
E-tolls: Thousands of operators exempt

A total of 45,700 public transport operators have been exempted from paying e-tolls in Gauteng so far, the transport department said on Wednesday.

"Those who qualify for this exemption are public transport operators in possession of valid permits and operating licences and whose vehicles are registered on the eNatis system," spokeswoman Octavia Mamabolo said in a statement.

"Those exempted constitutes the vast majority of taxis operating in the province."

Public transport operators bringing commuters from neighbouring provinces to Gauteng daily also qualified for exemptions and should contact the SA National Roads Agency Limited to register for exemptions.

"However, public transport operators from other provinces who transport passengers occasionally to Gauteng do not qualify for exemptions," said Mamabolo.

The e-toll system came into effect on Tuesday. It compels motorists to pay to use certain highways around Gauteng.

On Monday, a last-minute attempt by the Freedom Front Plus to stop e-tolling failed. The party's case was struck from the roll by the High Court in Pretoria for lack of urgency.

The Democratic Alliance said it intended taking its fight against e-tolling to the courts and would argue that the legislation providing for e-tolls was incorrectly tagged as national, rather than provincial.


Source : Sapa /mar/hdw/jk/jje
Date : 04 Dec 2013 11:56
 
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...ransport-operators-exempt-from-paying-e-tolls

A total of 45 700 public transport operators have been exempted from paying e-tolls in Gauteng so far, the transport department said on Wednesday.

"Those who qualify for this exemption are public transport operators in possession of valid permits and operating licences and whose vehicles are registered on the eNatis system," spokeswoman Octavia Mamabolo said in a statement.

"Those exempted constitutes the vast majority of taxis operating in the province."

Public transport operators bringing commuters from neighbouring provinces to Gauteng daily also qualified for exemptions and should contact the SA National Roads Agency Limited to register for exemptions.

"However, public transport operators from other provinces who transport passengers occasionally to Gauteng do not qualify for exemptions," said Mamabolo.
Click to expand...

Then as previously posted

NTA spokesperson Theo Malele said that although the government had promised that taxis would not pay, 80% of the taxis in the province did not have permits.
Click to expand...

So if these 80% get their permits and are exempted there will be over 100,000 taxis ( riding free of e-tolls ) in Gauteng ?
 
Koosi said:
Collisions of the kind I was referring to, are those with two or more tags in very close proximity to each other i.e. on top of each other. In the work I have done with RFID cards and the readers I have designed, an upper limit was found. Eventually the tags all respond and jam each other out.... spread them out a bit and things get better.

Since none of the details of this system is exposed (not since I last checked anyhow) it is a good first step to play with the system and see what happens....
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on the type of tag and reader. I've sat with a whole roll of tags on my desk. While collisions between tags don't seem to be a problem, covering them with some radio absorbing material (your hand even) does cause a problem. Any metal / carbon / water or material that isn't tuned for the antenna can cause an issue, even for powered chips of which I assume this is one. Placing two tags right on top of each other is likely less about interference and more about covering the one antenna.

I admittedly speak with little radio knowledge through... just what I've seen first hand, which could be based on invalid observations.

The point is moot though. All that will happen even if the tag reader is "confused" somehow is that those tags will be ignored. Much like not even having the tag there in the first place. It won't affect the system in the slightest as it will revert to camera as if there wans't a tag. Other tags in the vicinity will function normally.

I wonder how much these things are RFID tags though, and how much they are rather a form of transponder (i.e. do they function using a backscatter pattern, or just by emitting a signal based on their own internal power that kicks in when it picks up the gantry's radio).
 
I don't think having multiple tags in the car will help. Wouldn't you have to activate/register the tag first - or?
 
Ricard said:
Perhaps there is no integration to the eNAtis system... and all queries have to be handled manually? Forcing you to register negates that problem.

185000 cars through one gantry (in 24Hrs) that are not registered adds 123 Transactions/minute to query car ownership on eNatis... that is ONE Gantry (OUTA figures from William Nicol)
Click to expand...

Ricard said:
I assume the invoices would be posted to the registered keeper of the car... aka... what is on the eNatis database.
Click to expand...

koeksGHT said:
They get your banking details/credit card/debit order to take money from your account whenever. Plus double identification to prove vehicle was you..
Click to expand...

I was hoping that it would be illegal for SANRAL to acquire our personal information without registration but alas, no according to chapter 12 of POPI Act.

With as much as 185000 going through one gantry in 24 hours, surely must be a drain on eNatis, however non e-tag users pay extra so it would be expected to cover admin, IT costs etc.

Banking details/credit card/debit order are a bit risky, since SANRAL has not disclosed the system their using so we cannot be assured of security.
 
shogun said:
The point is moot though. All that will happen even if the tag reader is "confused" somehow is that those tags will be ignored. Much like not even having the tag there in the first place. It won't affect the system in the slightest as it will revert to camera as if there wans't a tag. Other tags in the vicinity will function normally.
Click to expand...

It has to use the camera in every case.
 
shogun said:
I suppose it depends on the type of tag and reader. I've sat with a whole roll of tags on my desk. While collisions between tags don't seem to be a problem, covering them with some radio absorbing material (your hand even) does cause a problem. Any metal / carbon / water or material that isn't tuned for the antenna can cause an issue, even for powered chips of which I assume this is one. Placing two tags right on top of each other is likely less about interference and more about covering the one antenna.

I admittedly speak with little radio knowledge through... just what I've seen first hand, which could be based on invalid observations.

The point is moot though. All that will happen even if the tag reader is "confused" somehow is that those tags will be ignored. Much like not even having the tag there in the first place. It won't affect the system in the slightest as it will revert to camera as if there wans't a tag. Other tags in the vicinity will function normally.
I wonder how much these things are RFID tags though, and how much they are rather a form of transponder (i.e. do they function using a backscatter pattern, or just by emitting a signal based on their own internal power that kicks in when it picks up the gantry's radio).
Click to expand...

I know nothing of the receiver, but I know a lot about the tag.
1) The tag is a microwave transponder. It has a separate transmit and receive section.
2) The tag is battery powered, runs from a Lithium cell (so what SANRAL has also not disclosed is that these pieces of crap will need to be replaced eventually)
3) The frequency is around 5GHz
4) Communication is bi-directional half-duplex.
5) Two tags side-by-side on a dashboard will definitely transmit at the same instant in response to the gantry, and this is where an anti-collision algorithm will be used.
6) The antennas on the mast, from my observations are not much different from those used for RFID tags. The beam is aimed at the windscreen, since vehicles cannot be on top of each other, unless they have collided, I doubt that the antenna will pick up a car from an adjacent lane. There are as many as 6 antennae on the gantry
7) Blocking the e-tag is the same as not having one at all
8) Causing significant problems i.e. many tens of tags in your car's windscreen could either have been foreseen by the designers of the system, or not. We don't know until we try.
9) We do not know what the reader will do faced with a large number of tags in the front of the vehicle. There is only one way to find out
10) I am an expert in RF now, so I have sound knowledge of digital radios and dealing with this sort of thing and what happens when they transmit at the same time
11) The ANPR camera is what makes the system secure. The numberplate is captured when the vehicle blocks a marker. Have any of you noticed the little reflective markers on the road?
12) The point is not to bypass the system entirely, but to mess with it, expose its flaws.
 
Last edited:
The numberplate is captured when the vehicle blocks a marker. Have any of you noticed the little reflective markers on the road?
Click to expand...

Can you replicate that marker on your bonnet, dashboard, bumper ?
 
Koosi said:
I know nothing of the receiver, but I know a lot about the tag.
1) The tag is a microwave transponder. It has a separate transmit and receive section.
2) The tag is battery powered, runs from a Lithium cell (so what SANRAL has also not disclosed is that these pieces of crap will need to be replaced eventually)
3) The frequency is around 5GHz
4) Communication is bi-directional half-duplex.
5) Two tags side-by-side on a dashboard will definitely transmit at the same instant in response to the gantry, and this is where an anti-collision algorithm will be used.
6) The antennas on the mast, from my observations are not much different from those used for RFID tags. The beam is aimed at the windscreen, since vehicles cannot be on top of each other, unless they have collided, I doubt that the antenna will pick up a car from an adjacent lane. There are as many as 6 antennae on the gantry
7) Blocking the e-tag is the same as not having one at all
8) Causing significant problems i.e. many tens of tags in your car's windscreen could either have been foreseen by the designers of the system, or not. We don't know until we try.
9) We do not know what the reader will do faced with a large number of tags in the front of the vehicle. There is only one way to find out
10) I am an expert in RF now, so I have sound knowledge of digital radios and dealing with this sort of thing and what happens when they transmit at the same time
11) The ANPR camera is what makes the system secure. The numberplate is captured when the vehicle blocks a marker. Have any of you noticed the little reflective markers on the road?
12) The point is not to bypass the system entirely, but to mess with it, expose its flaws.
Click to expand...


Hence my question of whether it was even and RFID tag... which it seems it isn't. This actually makes more sense as RFID tags would be really bad at pick up due to antenna placement and the material that tag would have to be near.
 
shogun said:
Hence my question of whether it was even and RFID tag... which it seems it isn't. This actually makes more sense as RFID tags would be really bad at pick up due to antenna placement and the material that tag would have to be near.
Click to expand...

RFID tags have an inherent problem in that they derive their power from the RF signal beamed at them. This means that attenuation and long distances results in unreliable communcation.

Transponders on the other hand have a powered receiver and transmitter and solve the problem of attenuation and power source. They also offer muchly increased range.

In the radio transponders I have designed, I have had to solve the problem of collisions, so I am interested to see how well, or how badly a job they did and whether one can actually crash the receiver firmware. I am almost certain the receiver is a software defined radio.
 
Koosi said:
5) Two tags side-by-side on a dashboard will definitely transmit at the same instant in response to the gantry, and this is where an anti-collision algorithm will be used.
Click to expand...

No such thing as the same instant. Close to each other in time yes, microseconds, maybe nanoseconds, but not same instant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X