Super EAS Tags? Wave WG Reviewed

By Brian Rhodes, Published on Jun 27, 2012

Electronic Article Surveillance (EAS) tags are big business. No other security measure is more widely used in retail than those ubiquitous anti-theft tags clipped to product. However, despite their widespread acceptance, one only needs to spend a few minutes on YouTube to learn how to exploit them. See how in less than 20 seconds:

What happens when criminals catch up and figure out how to defeat the technology? Can improvements be made? In this note, we examine a 'next generation' EAS tag from WG [link no longer available] called the 'Wave' and describe what makes it different compared to similar tags.

Overview

Most EAS tags feature some form of mechanical or magnetic clasp that can be defeated with commonly available magnetic removal tools, or given enough time, brute force. The 'Wave' claims to be fundamentally different than typical EAS tags because it features multiple layers of alarming. Not only are Wave tags magnetically secured, they require an additional IR impulse to successfully disarm. Uncommon to most other EAS tags, Wave also features an onboard piezo alarm which can be independently triggered apart from the EAS pedestals.

Wave offers 'Four Stages of Alarming', where other types of tags offer one or two:

  • Tampering causes tag to self-alarm: Trying to mechanically break or separate tag causes tag to sound alarm
  • Tag self-alarms if opened with non-Wave detacher: Using a magnet to separate tag, without IR decoder causes tag to sound alarm
  • Tag self-alarms at EAS pedestal: Trying to pass tag through EAS detector causes tag to sound alarm
  • Pedestal alarms when Wave tag is in its range: In addition to tag alarm, pedestal also sounds alarm
While the Wave tag can be separated with standard magnetic removal tools, if the IR alarm is also not simultaneously disarmed, the siren onboard the tag will alarm. In this way, attempting to remove the tag apart from the companion 'Wave Detacher' that disarms both alarms at once, causes the tag to alarm. The image below depicts a Wave 'lanyard' tag, and a counter-mount 'detacher' unit:
 
 

Wave EAS tag specifications:

  • Tags available in several form factors, including pebble [link no longer available], shell [link no longer available], and lanyard [link no longer available] types for best merchandise fit
  • Onboard RFID sensor: 58KHz RF band
  • Onboard IR sensor: 940nm IR Wavelength
  • Tags feature onboard 95dB piezo siren
  • Manufacturer cites 5 year tag battery life
  • Pricing for Wave Tags are roughly 3 - 5 times the cost of 'standard' EAS tags, somewhere between $5 - $10 per piece, but final pricing is significantly negotiable depending on purchased volumes

While the product's official promotional video is strange, it gives a short pitch on why they believe their system is superior to standard EAS products:

Additional Security

While we have not tested the claims of the Wave system, it appears that the product has an advantage in nested layers of protection that other EAS tag products do not. The Wave mitigates the risk of tampering in a way that other tags are vulnerable. Even with the additional layers of security present in these tags, no additional retraining of cashiers on tag removal is necessary. Cashiers are not 'slowed down' compared to normal transaction throughputs when removing the Wave EAS tag system.

Additional Expense

However, tag cost is significantly higher for Wave compared to other EAS tags. While the Wave tags can be reused multiple times, and the onboard battery cites a 5 year service life, between 3 to 5 'standard' EAS tags can be purchased for the cost of a single Wave unit. Widespread deployment of Wave could prove to be costly due to natural attrition of tag inventories through loss or 'wear and tear'.

Other vendors, including Alpha [link no longer available] and Checkpoint sell versions of 'self alarming' tags, or tags that sound alarms when tampered with. Variations of the 'alarming tag' include 'benefit denial' (rupturing ink) tags. However, the IR alarming feature of the Wave is uncommon, and adds extra cost. Other EAS hard tags are not as expensive as the Wave tags. For most retail buyers, especially softline buyers, a few pennies in extra cost makes a significant difference. Because Wave tags are several times more expensive than 'standard' hard tags, the high cost will exclude it from being seriously considered for many retailers.

Conclusion

In areas where 'theft hotspots' exist, or where standard tag technologies have been proven insufficient, Wave looks to be a strong countermeasure. With its added security features and higher unit cost, Wave is best positioned to secure high-value, expensive items. For less-costly 'commodity' merchandise use, unless a rash of EAS exploitation thefts prove to be an issue for a retailer, it is more cost effective to use less expensive standard 'single alarm' tag.

1 report cite this report:

EAS Startup Queuehop Profile on Dec 15, 2016
Electronic Article Surveillance (EAS) tags have been used for decades to...
Comments : Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

Budget Covert Cameras Tested on Nov 26, 2019
Covert cameras under $100 are widely available online but are they any...
Axis Compares Fever Camera Sellers to 9/11 on Sep 18, 2020
Axis Communications, the West's largest surveillance camera manufacturer, has...
IP Camera Installability Shootout 2019 - Avigilon, Axis, Bosch, Dahua, Hanwha, Hikvision, Uniview, Vivotek on Dec 09, 2019
What are the best and worst cameras to install? Which manufacturers make it...
Vulnerability Directory For Access Credentials on Feb 20, 2020
Knowing which access credentials are insecure can be difficult to see,...
IP Camera Browser Support: Who's Broken / Who Works on Dec 10, 2019
For many years, IP cameras depended on ActiveX control, whose security flaws...
Anixter Runs Fake Coronavirus Marketing Using Shutterstock Watermarked Images on Jul 24, 2020
Coronavirus faked marketing is regrettably commonplace right now but Anixter...
IPVM Editorial Staff on Aug 01, 2020
IPVM has the largest and most experienced editorial team covering video...
Breaking Into A Facility Using Canned Air Tested on Jan 28, 2020
Access control is supposed to make doors more secure, but a $5 can of...
The Future of H.266 For Video Surveillance Examined on Aug 17, 2020
First H.264, now H.265, is H.266 next? H.266 was recently announced amid...
Clorox Announces, Then Pulls, Fever Camera on Oct 15, 2020
For almost one week, Clorox was marketing fever cameras. The booming...
The Next Hot Fever Detection Trend - $100 Wall-Mounted Units on Jul 06, 2020
The first wave of the booming fever detecting market was $10,000+ cameras,...
This YouTuber is Now Selling ThermoHealth Temperature Screening on Jul 29, 2020
An enterprising 20-year old is mass marketing medical devices on Facebook and...
XNOR.ai Terminates Wyze on Nov 27, 2019
Wyze has shocked the industry again - this time with a major setback. Just...
Uniview Deep Learning Camera Tested on Jul 14, 2020
Uniview's intrusion analytics have performed poorly in our shootouts. Now,...
Video Surveillance History on May 06, 2020
The video surveillance market has changed significantly since 2000, going...

Recent Reports

Panasonic Presents i-PRO Cameras and Video Analytics on Oct 19, 2020
Panasonic presented its i-PRO X-Series cameras and AI video analytics at the...
Augmented Reality (AR) Cameras From Hikvision and Dahua Examined on Oct 19, 2020
Hikvision, Dahua, and other China companies are marketing augmented reality...
18 TB Video Surveillance Drives (WD and Seagate) on Oct 19, 2020
Both Seagate and Western Digital recently announced 18TB hard drives...
Watrix Gait Recognition Profile on Oct 16, 2020
Watrix is the world's only gait recognition surveillance provider IPVM has...
Intel Presents Edge-to-Cloud Ecosystem for Video Analytics on Oct 16, 2020
Intel presented its processors and software toolkit for computer vision at...
Best Manufacturer Technical Support 2020 on Oct 16, 2020
5 manufacturers stood out as providing the best technical support to ~200...
Microsoft Azure Presents Live Video Analytics on Oct 15, 2020
Microsoft Azure presented its Live Video Analytics offering at the September...
Worst Manufacturer Technical Support 2020 on Oct 15, 2020
4 manufacturers stood out as providing the worst technical support to ~200...
Clorox Announces, Then Pulls, Fever Camera on Oct 15, 2020
For almost one week, Clorox was marketing fever cameras. The booming...
Faulty Hikvision Fever Cam Setup at Mexico City Basilica and Cathedral on Oct 14, 2020
Donated Hikvision fever cameras (claiming screening of 1,800 people/min. with...
Directory of 209 "Fever" Camera Suppliers on Oct 14, 2020
This directory provides a list of "Fever" scanning thermal camera providers...
Avigilon UMD / UAD Tested on Oct 14, 2020
Avigilon's Unusual Activity Detection and Unusual Motion Detection claim to...
Longse Promoting Hikvision Partner Fullhan Chip Based Cameras on Oct 14, 2020
With Huawei HiSilicon production being shut down at TSMC, camera...
Meridian & Goodview (BEMS Relabeller) Temperature Screening Tested on Oct 13, 2020
A lot of temperature tablets look exactly alike and that is because they use...
Monitoring Alarm Systems From Home - Innovation or Danger? on Oct 13, 2020
Remote monitoring by alarm companies since COVID-19 is bringing cost savings...