Dielectric smart card protector sleeve

A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever. 37 CFR 1.71(d).

N/A

This invention relates generally to wallets, and specifically to credit card/smart card holders.

This invention was not made under contract with an agency of the US Government, nor by any agency of the US Government.

Smart cards are credit card sized plastic cards containing embedded integrated circuitry. In general, smart cards are multiplying rapidly, with tens of millions in use in the US, hundreds of millions believed to be in use in Europe and more spreading rapidly in other parts of the world. For example, in Malaysia it is believed that there are already 20 million smart cards in use. Normally, standard credit card sizes are used, such as ISO/IEC 7810 defines a standard size card (ID-1) as 85.6 millimeters by 53.98 millimeters, or a bit more than 3 inches by 2 inches or other popular sizes. Almost as important, the US government and other governments have begun issuing passports with similar chips in them, as well as health insurance cards, driver\'s licenses and the like.

In general, the chips may be “contact only” types, or they may be contactless types, which offer greater convenience. The contactless cards use RFID (radio frequency identification) technology: the circuit on the card/passport is a transponder which may receive energy from a radio transmission and then respond, usually at a throughput such as 100 to 800 kbits per second and with a short range, usually a few yards/meters.

Obviously, these parameters can define an enormous security issue, a fact not lost on manufacturers and users. One response is to limit range. ISO/IEC 14443 defines a maximum range of 10 centimeters (about 4 inches) while ISO/IEC 15693 defines a longer range of about 50 centimeters (about ½ yard). In use, unfortunately, the actual ranges vary from cards that won\'t even respond in contact to times when cards can be accessed from a considerable range, in fact, from ranges which may make users unaware that they are even being targeted.

Another response has been encryption of the card information. DES, 3DES, RSA and other algorithms have been used for this, however, even with encryption, card content may still be vulnerable to a determined attack, and not all cards are actually encrypted as yet.

Normal card holders and passport folders do nothing to present such remote access. In fact, one common sales feature of the cards is that they can make payments without even being removed from the user\'s handbag or pocket. This is for the obvious reason that most common materials for clothing and accessories are completely transparent to radio waves.

Various US patents attempt to address security in credit cards, particularly in reference to protecting magnetic stripes on credit cards. U.S. Pat. No. 6,121,544 to Petsinger on Sep. 19, 2000 shows a smart card protector, however, the structure of the device is a hard sided case which uses metal inserts, not soft films. In use, the device would be bulky and hard to retrofit to a wallet. U.S. Pat. No. 7,163,152, Jan. 16, 2007 to Osborn, U.S. Pat. No. 6,845,863 to Riley on Jan. 25, 2005, U.S. Pat. No. 4,851,610 Leblanc et al on Jul. 25, 1989, and U.S. Pat. No. 5,941,375 to Kamens et al on Aug. 24, 1999 all show various attempts to protect credit card magnetic stripes from de-magnetization and the like, but not using structures which would be sufficient to protect a smart card from illicit radio access.

Thus the references shown do not generally adequately deal with the issue of illicit access by means of a convenient structure for users.

Searching shows several other items not in patent publication record of the US PTO. Smartcardfocus.com, idstronghold.com, and cardsafeonline.com all teach sleeves for protecting cards from either RF or magnetic influences. However, these sleeves are all apparently made of some sort of single layer, unattractive, opaque, fiber material. These products also serve only a single card with a single pocket and have no structure to cover the open end of the sleeve.

FIG. 3 is a PRIOR ART block diagram of a smart credit card showing authorized and unauthorized access possibilities. Smart card 310 has RFID capable chip 312, which may have thereon credit card numbers, passport vital information, actual electronic cash values, medical information or the like. Now as legitimately used, an authorized RF device 314 such as a POS (point of sale) station may read the card with the user\'s knowledge and consent, for example, when boarding a subway or the like. Authorized RF access 316 would consist of broadcasting radio frequency energy and inquiry to the card, which would then “power up”, identify the query as legitimate (if the card has security features built in), and respond, also by RF.

However, illicit/furtive RF device 318 may be further away or disposed in a concealed manner, and it might also engage in illicit/furtive RF access 320, which would, from the perspective of the smart card, follow the exact same sequence: reception of RF energy and signal, security check (if any) and response. This could result in considerable lose of privacy or currency by the unwitting card “user”.

FIG. 4 is a PRIOR ART side view of a limited use of a “window” of material in a credit card holder. Credit card holder 422 is designed to protect a credit card magnetic stripe by means of a window 424 of refractory material over the magnetic stripe. If the dielectric or RF refractory window 424 is transparent in the visible spectrum of light, then the device body must be non-transparent in order to protect the credit card numbers and name printed on the side of the card elsewhere, resulting in the “window” configuration shown.

Unfortunately, the choice of either refractory window 424 or visible blocking material means that only that which is directly under the window will be protected. Looking at the smart card of FIG. 3, it will be seen that the IC circuit of that card would not be positioned so as to be protected by the material of window 424.

The card is also weakened by the window section.

It would be preferable to provide a device not having these deficiencies.