True, an RFID tag has potential as a security device, when it's incorporated into a larger scheme. But it's not an anticounter­feiting device in the way that, say, a hologram label is supposed to be. An RF reader cannot simply read information on an RF tag-even an encrypted one-and provide its owner assurance that the product is authentic. RFID technology is either a way of facilitating the documentation required to create a drug's electronic pedigree (the record of a drug's journey through the supply chain), or a component of a much more complicated system known as track and trace, which involves communication with the drug's source, or someone who knows it. Which brings us to point number two.

Myth 2: RFID technology is necessary to track the movement of legitimate drugs.
At AmerisourceBergen, a complex track-and-trace pilot project is under way that would allow the $61 billion distributor to check the source of any drugs that pass through its distribution facility in Sacramento, Calif. Funny thing is, RFID technology is just one tiny piece of the project-the one that (hopefully) makes it operate quickly, rather than securely. The component of the technology that actually authenticates drugs is a registry handled by VeriSign, which is known mostly for its digital certificate products.

Shay Reid, AmerisourceBergen's vice president for integrated solutions, explains. Drugs that have RFID tags are read with an RF reader, but the crucial part from a security standpoint is what happens next: two-way communication. "If I am the rightful owner, and VeriSign can verify that I did receive [the product] from an upstream trading partner, then they'll give me a certification number that allows me to further distribute the product downstream," Reid says. "If they can't verify that I am the rightful owner, then the transaction will be refused."

Here's the catch: Typically, products that are marked with RFID tags are also marked with a 2-D bar code, which is similar to a traditional bar code but carries more information. "The 2-D is the backup," Reid explains.

That's because the most common complaint about RFID tags is that they're flaky. Read rates as low as 70 percent have been reported, and accuracy can be especially difficult when liquid medicine or foil wrapping is involved. (To be fair, RFID technology has come a long way in the past couple years, and tests of the latest tags are much more encouraging. Cardinal Health reports that its latest tests showed 99 percent accurate read-rates and no ill effect from liquids or foils.)