https://computer.rip/2025-11-22-RuBee.html

Computers Are Bad
a newsletter by J. B. Crawford
 Archive
 Subscribe
 RSS
[cubes]

RuBee

2025-11-22

I have at least a few readers for which the sound of a man's voice
saying "government cell phone detected" will elicit a palpable
reaction. In Department of Energy facilities across the country,
incidences of employees accidentally carrying phones into secure
areas are reduced through a sort of automated nagging. A device at
the door monitors for the presence of a tag; when the tag is detected
it plays an audio clip. Because this is the government, the device in
question is highly specialized, fantastically expensive, and says
"government cell phone" even though most of the phones in question
are personal devices. Look, they already did the recording, they're
not changing it now!

One of the things that I love is weird little wireless networks. Long
ago I wrote about ANT+, for example, a failed personal area network
standard designed mostly around fitness applications. There's tons of
these, and they have a lot of similarities---so it's fun to think
about the protocols that went down a completely different path. It's
even better, of course, if the protocol is obscure outside of an
important niche. And a terrible website, too? What more could I ask
for.

The DoE's cell-phone nagging boxes, and an array of related but more
critical applications, rely on an unusual personal area networking
protocol called RuBee.

RuBee is a product of Visible Assets Inc., or VAI, founded in 2004 ^1
by John K. Stevens. Stevens seems a somewhat improbable founder, with
a background in biophysics and eye health, but he's a repeat
entrepreneur. He's particularly fond of companies called Visible: he
founded Visible Assets after his successful tenure as CEO of Visible
Genetics. Visible Genetics was an early innovator in DNA sequencing,
and still provides a specialty laboratory service that sequences
samples of HIV in order to detect vulnerabilities to antiretroviral
medications.

Clinical trials in the early 2000s exposed Visible Genetics to one of
the more frustrating parts of health care logistics: refrigeration.
Samples being shipped to the lab and reagents shipped out to clinics
were both temperature sensitive. Providers had to verify that these
materials had stayed adequately cold throughout shipping and
handling, otherwise laboratory results could be invalid or incorrect.
Stevens became interested in technical solutions to these problems;
he wanted some way to verify that samples were at acceptable
temperatures both in storage and in transit.

Moreover, Stevens imagined that these sensors would be in continuous
communication. There's a lot of overlap between this application and
personal area networks (PANs), protocols like Bluetooth that provide
low-power communications over short ranges. There is also clear
overlap with RFID; you can buy RFID temperature sensors. VAI, though,
coined the term visibility network to describe RuBee. That's
visibility as in asset visibility: somewhat different from Bluetooth
or RFID, RuBee as a protocol is explicitly designed for situations
where you need to "keep tabs" on a number of different objects.
Despite the overlap with other types of wireless communications, the
set of requirements on a visibility network have lead RuBee down a
very different technical path.

Visibility networks have to be highly reliable. When you are trying
to keep track of an asset, a failure to communicate with it
represents a fundamental failure of the system. For visibility
networks, the ability to actually convey a payload is secondary: the
main function is just reliably detecting that endpoints exist.
Visibility networks have this in common with RFID, and indeed,
despite its similarities to technologies like BLE RuBee is positioned
mostly as a competitor to technologies like UHF RFID.

There are several differences between RuBee and RFID; for example,
RuBee uses active (battery-powered) tags and the tags are generally
powered by a complete 4-bit microcontroller. That doesn't necessarily
sound like an advantage, though. While RuBee tags advertise a battery
life of "5-25 years", the need for a battery seems mostly like a
liability. The real feature is what active tags enable: RuBee
operates in the low frequency (LF) band, typically at 131 kHz.

At that low frequency, the wavelength is very long, about 2.5 km.
With such a long wavelength, RuBee communications all happen at much
less than one wavelength in range. RF engineers refer to this as
near-field operation, and it has some properties that are
intriguingly different from more typical far-field RF communications.
In the near-field, the magnetic field created by the antenna is more
significant than the electrical field. RuBee devices are
intentionally designed to emit very little electrical RF signal.
Communications within a RuBee network are achieved through magnetic,
not electrical fields. That's the core of RuBee's magic.

The idea of magnetic coupling is not unique to RuBee. Speaking of the
near-field, there's an obvious comparison to NFC which works much the
same way. The main difference, besides the very different logical
protocols, is that NFC operates at 13.56 MHz. At this higher
frequency, the wavelength is only around 20 meters. The requirement
that near-field devices be much closer than a full wavelength leads
naturally to NFC's very short range, typically specified as 4 cm.

At LF frequencies, RuBee can achieve magnetic coupling at ranges up
to about 30 meters. That's a range comparable to, and often much
better than, RFID inventory tracking technologies. Improved range
isn't RuBee's only benefit over RFID. The properties of magnetic
fields also make it a more robust protocol. RuBee promises
significantly less vulnerability to shielding by metal or water than
RFID.

There are two key scenarios where this comes up: the first is
equipment stored in metal containers or on metal shelves, or
equipment that is itself metallic. In that scenario, it's difficult
to find a location for an RFID tag that won't suffer from shielding
by the container. The case of water might seem less important, but
keep in mind that people are made mostly of water. RFID reading is
often unreliable for objects carried on a person, which are likely to
be shielded from the reader by the water content of the body.

These problems are not just theoretical. WalMart is a major adopter
of RFID inventory technology, and in early rollouts struggled with
low successful read rates. Metal, moisture (including damp cardboard
boxes), antenna orientation, and multipath/interference effects could
cause read failure rates as high as 33% when scanning a pallet of
goods. Low read rates are mostly addressed by using RFID "portals"
with multiple antennas. Eight antennas used as an array greatly
increase read rate, but at a cost of over ten thousand dollars per
portal system. Even so, WalMart seems to now target a success rate of
only 95% during bulk scanning.

95% might sound pretty good, but there are a lot of visibility
applications where a failure rate of even a couple percent is
unacceptable. These mostly go by the euphemism "high value goods,"
which depending on your career trajectory you may have encountered in
corporate expense and property policies. High-value goods tend to be
items that are both attractive to theft and where theft has
particularly severe consequences. Classically, firearms and
explosives. Throw in classified material for good measure.

I wonder if Stevens was surprised by RuBee's market trajectory. He
came out of the healthcare industry and, it seems, originally
developed RuBee for cold chain visibility... but, at least in
retrospect, it's quite obvious that its most compelling application
is in the armory.

Because RuBee tags are small and largely immune to shielding by
metals, you can embed them directly in the frames of firearms, or as
an aftermarket modification you can mill out some space under the
grip. RuBee tags in weapons will read reliably when they are stored
in metal cases or on metal shelving, as is often the case. They will
even read reliably when a weapon is carried holstered, close to a
person's body.

Since RuBee tags incorporate an active microcontroller, there are
even more possibilities. Temperature logging is one thing, but
firearm-embedded RuBee tags can incorporate an accelerometer
(NIST-traceable, VAI likes to emphasize) and actually count the
rounds fired.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Sidebar time: there is a long history of political hazard around
"smart guns." The term "smart gun" is mostly used more specifically
for firearms that identify their user, for example by fingerprint
authentication or detection of an RFID fob. The idea has become vague
enough, though, that mention of a firearm with any type of RFID
technology embedded would probably raise the specter of the smart gun
to gun-rights advocates.

Further, devices embedded in firearms that count the number of rounds
fired have been proposed for decades, if not a century, as a means of
accountability. The holder of a weapon could, in theory, be required
to positively account for every round fired. That could eliminate
incidents of unreported use of force by police, for example. In
practice I think this is less compelling than it sounds, simple
counting of rounds leaves too many opportunities to fudge the numbers
and conceal real-world use of a weapon as range training, for
example.

That said, the NRA has long been vehemently opposed to the
incorporation of any sort of technology into weapons that could
potentially be used as a means of state control or regulation. The
concern isn't completely unfounded; the state of New Jersey did, for
a time, have legislation that would have made user-identifying "smart
guns" mandatory if they were commercially available. The result of
the NRA's strident lobbying is that no such gun has ever become
commercially available; "smart guns" have been such a political third
rail that any firearms manufacturer that dared to introduce one would
probably face a boycott by most gun stores. For better or worse, a
result of the NRA's powerful political advocacy in this area is that
the concept of embedding security or accountability technology into
weapons has never been seriously pursued in the US. Even a tentative
step in that direction can produce a huge volume of critical press
for everyone involved.

I bring this up because I think it explains some of why VAI seems a
bit vague and cagey about the round-counting capabilities of their
tags. They position it as purely a maintenance feature, allowing the
armorer to keep accurate tabs on the preventative maintenance
schedule for each individual weapon (in armory environments, firearm
users are often expected to report how many rounds they fired for
maintenance tracking reasons). The resistance of RuBee tags to
concealment is only positioned as a deterrent to theft, although the
idea of RuBee-tagged firearms creates obvious potential for security
screening. Probably the most profitable option for VAI would be to
promote RuBee-tagged firearms as tool for enforcement of gun control
laws, but this is a political impossibility and bringing it up at all
could cause significant reputational harm, especially with the
government as a key customer. The result is marketing copy that is a
bit odd, giving a set of capabilities that imply an application that
is never mentioned.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

VAI found an incredible niche with their arms-tracking application.
Institutional users of firearms, like the military, police, and
security forces, are relatively price-insensitive and may have strict
accounting requirements. By the mid-'00s, VAI was into the long sales
cycle of proposing the technology to the military. That wasn't
entirely unsuccessful. RuBee shot-counting weapon inventory tags were
selected by the Naval Surface Warfare Center in 2010 for installation
on SCAR and M4 rifles. That contract had a five-year term, it's
unclear to me if it was renewed. Military contracting opened quite a
few doors to VAI, though, and created a commercial opportunity that
they eagerly pursued.

Perhaps most importantly, weapons applications required an impressive
round of safety and compatibility testing. RuBee tags have the fairly
unique distinction of military approval for direct attachment to
ordnance, something called "zero separation distance" as the tags do
not require a minimum separation from high explosives. Central to
that certification are findings of intrinsic safety of the tags (that
they do not contain enough energy to trigger explosives) and that the
magnetic fields involved cannot convey enough energy to heat anything
to dangerous temperatures.

That's not the only special certification that RuBee would acquire.
The military has a lot of firearms, but military procurement is
infamously slow and mercurial. Improved weapon accountability is,
almost notoriously, not a priority for the US military which has
often had stolen weapons go undetected until their later use in
crime. The Navy's interest in RuBee does not seem to have translated
to more widespread military applications.

Then you have police departments, probably the largest institutional
owners of firearms and a very lucrative market for technology
vendors. But here we run into the political hazard: the firearms
lobby is very influential on police departments, as are police unions
which generally oppose technical accountability measures. Besides,
most police departments are fairly cash-poor and are not likely to
make a major investment in a firearms inventory system.

That leaves us with institutional security forces. And there is one
category of security force that are particularly well-funded,
well-equipped, and beholden to highly R&D-driven, almost pedantic
standards of performance: the protection forces of atomic energy
facilities.

Protection forces at privately-operated atomic energy facilities,
such as civilian nuclear power plants, are subject to licensing and
scrutiny by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Things step up further
at the many facilities operated by the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). Protection forces for NNSA facilities are
trained at the Department of Energy's National Training Center, at
the former Manzano Base here in Albuquerque. Concern over adequate
physical protection of NNSA facilities has lead Sandia National
Laboratories to become one of the premier centers for R&D in physical
security. Teams of scientists and engineers have applied sometimes
comical scientific rigor to "guns, gates, and guards," the
traditional articulation of physical security in the nuclear world.

That scope includes the evaluation of new technology for the
management of protection forces, which is why Oak Ridge National
Laboratory launched an evaluation program for the RuBee tagging of
firearms in their armory. The white paper on this evaluation is
curiously undated, but citations "retrieved 2008" lead me to assume
that the evaluation happened right around the middle of the '00s. At
the time, VAI seems to have been involved in some ultimately
unsuccessful partnership with Oracle, leading to the branding of the
RuBee system as Oracle Dot-Tag Server. The term "Dot-Tag" never
occurs outside of very limited materials around the Oracle
partnership, so I'm not sure if it was Oracle branding for RuBee or
just some passing lark. In any case, Oracle's involvement seems to
have mainly just been the use of the Oracle database for tracking
inventory data---which was naturally replaced by PostgreSQL at Oak
Ridge.

The Oak Ridge trial apparently went well enough, and around the same
time, the Pantex Plant in Texas launched an evaluation of RuBee for
tracking classified tools. Classified tools are a tricky category, as
they're often metallic and often stored in metallic cases. During the
trial period, Pantex tagged a set of sample classified tools with
RuBee tags and then transported them around the property, testing the
ability of the RuBee controllers to reliably detect them entering and
exiting areas of buildings. Simultaneously, Pantex evaluated the use
of RuBee tags to track containers of "chemical products" through the
manufacturing lifecycle. Both seem to have produced positive results.

There are quite a few interesting and strange aspects of the RuBee
system, a result of its purpose-built Visibility Network nature. A
RuBee controller can have multiple antennas that it cycles through.
RuBee tags remain in a deep-sleep mode for power savings until they
detect a RuBee carrier during their periodic wake cycle. When a
carrier is detected, they fully wake and listen for traffic. A RuBee
controller can send an interrogate message and any number of tags can
respond, with an interesting and novel collision detection algorithm
used to ensure reliable reading of a large number of tags.

The actual RuBee protocol is quite simple, and can also be referred
to as IEEE 1902.1 since the decision of VAI to put it through the
standards process. Packets are small and contain basic addressing
info, but they can also contain arbitrary payload in both directions,
perfect for data loggers or sensors. RuBee tags are identified by
something that VAI oddly refers to as an "IP address," causing some
confusion over whether or not VAI uses IP over 1902.1. They don't, I
am confident saying after reading a whole lot of documents. RuBee
tags, as standard, have three different 4-byte addresses. VAI refers
to these as "IP, subnet, and MAC," ^2 but these names are more like
analogies. Really, the "IP address" and "subnet" are both
configurable arbitrary addresses, with the former intended for
unicast traffic and the latter for broadcast. For example, you would
likely give each asset a unique IP address, and use subnet addresses
for categories or item types. The subnet address allows a controller
to interrogate for every item within that category at once. The MAC
address is a fixed, non-configurable address derived from the tag's
serial number. They're all written in the formats we associate with
IP networks, dotted-quad notation, as a matter of convenience.

And that's about it as far as the protocol specification, besides of
course the physical details which are a 131,072 Hz carrier, 1024 Hz
data clock, either ASK or BPSK modulation. The specification also
describes an interesting mode called "clip," in which a set of
multiple controllers interrogate in exact synchronization and all
tags then reply in exact synchronization. Somewhat
counter-intuitively, because of the ability of RuBee controllers to
separate out multiple simultaneous tag transmissions using an
anti-collision algorithm based on random phase shifts by each tag,
this is ideal. It allows a room, say an armory, full of RuBee
controllers to rapidly interrogate the entire contents of the room. I
think this feature may have been added after the Oak Ridge trials...

RuBee is quite slow, typically 1,200 baud, so inventorying a large
number of assets can take a while (Oak Ridge found that their system
could only collect data on 2-7 tags per second per controller). But
it's so robust that it an achieve a 100% read rate in some very
challenging scenarios. Evaluation by the DoE and the military
produced impressive results. You can read, for example, of a military
experiment in which a RuBee antenna embedded in a roadway reliably
identified rifles secured in steel containers in passing Humvees.

Paradoxically, then, one of the benefits of RuBee in the military/
defense context is that it is also difficult to receive. Here is
RuBee's most interesting trick: somewhat oversimplified, the strength
of an electrical radio signal goes as 1/r, while the strength of a
magnetic field goes as 1/r^3. RuBee equipment is optimized, by
antenna design, to produce a minimal electrical field. The result is
that RuBee tags can very reliably be contacted at short range (say,
around ten feet), but are virtually impossible to contact or even
detect at ranges over a few hundred feet. To the security-conscious
buyer, this is a huge feature. RuBee tags are highly resistant to
communications or electronic intelligence collection.

Consider the logical implications of tagging the military's rifles.
With conventional RFID, range is limited by the size and sensitivity
of the antenna. Particularly when tags are incidentally powered by a
nearby reader, an adversary with good equipment can detect RFID tags
at very long range. VAI heavily references a 2010 DEFCON
presentation, for example, that demonstrated detection of RFID tags
at a range of 80 miles. One imagines that opportunistic detection by
satellite is feasible for a state intelligence agency. That means
that your rifle asset tracking is also revealing the movements of
soldiers in the field, or at least providing a way to detect their
approach.

Most RuBee tags have their transmit power reduced by configuration,
so even the maximum 100' range of the protocol is not achievable. VAI
suggests that typical RuBee tags cannot be detected by radio
direction finding equipment at ranges beyond 20', and that this range
can be made shorter by further reducing transmit power.

Once again, we have caught the attention of the Department of Energy.
Because of the short range of RuBee tags, they have generally been
approved as not representing a COMSEC or TEMPEST hazard to secure
facilities. And that brings us back to the very beginning: why does
the DoE use a specialized, technically interesting, and largely
unique radio protocol to fulfill such a basic function as nagging
people that have their phones? Because RuBee's security properties
have allowed it to be approved for use adjacent to and inside of
secure facilities. A RuBee tag, it is thought, cannot be turned into
a listening device because the intrinsic range limitation of magnetic
coupling will make it impossible to communicate with the tag from
outside of the building. It's a lot like how infrared microphones
still see some use in secure facilities, but so much more
interesting!

VAI has built several different product lines around RuBee, with
names like Armory 20/20 and Shot Counting Allegro 20/20 and Store 20/
20. The founder started his career in eye health, remember. None of
them are that interesting, though. They're all pretty basic CRUD
applications built around polling multiple RuBee controllers for tags
in their presence.

And then there's the "Alert 20/20 DoorGuard:" a metal pedestal with a
RuBee controller and audio announcement module, perfect for detecting
government cell phones.

One of the strangest things about RuBee is that it's hard to tell if
it's still a going concern. VAI's website has a press release
section, where nothing has been posted since 2019. The whole website
feels like it was last revised even longer ago. When RuBee was newer,
back in the '00s, a lot of industry journals covered it with
headlines like "the new RFID." I think VAI was optimistic that RuBee
could displace all kinds of asset tracking applications, but despite
some special certifications in other fields (e.g. approval to use
RuBee controllers and tags around pacemakers in surgical suites), I
don't think RuBee has found much success outside of military
applications.

RuBee's resistance to shielding is impressive, but RFID read rates
have improved considerably with new DSP techniques, antenna array
designs, and the generally reduced cost of modern RFID equipment.
RuBee's unique advantages, its security properties and resistance to
even intentional exfiltration, are interesting but not worth much
money to buyers other than the military.

So that's the fate of RuBee and VAI: defense contracting. As far as I
can tell, RuBee and VAI are about as vital as they have ever been,
but RuBee is now installed as just one part of general defense
contracts around weapons systems, armory management, and process
safety and security. IEEE standardization has opened the door to use
of RuBee by federal contractors under license, and indeed, Lockheed
Martin is repeatedly named as a licensee, as are firearms
manufacturers with military contracts like Sig Sauer.

Besides, RuBee continues to grow closer to the DoE. In 2021, VAI
appointed Lisa Gordon-Hagerty to it board of directors.
Gordon-Hagerty was undersecretary of Energy and had lead the NNSA
until the year before. This year, the New Hampshire Small Business
Development Center wrote a glowing profile of VAI. They described it
as a 25-employee company with a goal of hitting $30 million in annual
revenue in the next two years.

Despite the outdated website, VAI claims over 1,200 RuBee sites in
service. I wonder how many of those are Alert 20/20 DoorGuards?
Still, I do believe there are military weapons inventory systems
currently in use. RuBee probably has a bright future, as a niche
technology for a niche industry. If nothing else, they have legacy
installations and intellectual property to lean on. A spreadsheet of
VAI-owned patents on RuBee, with nearly 200 rows, encourages would-be
magnetically coupled visibility network inventors not to go it on
their own. I just wish I could get my hands on a controller....

 1. I have found some conflicting information on the date, it could
    have been as early as 2002. 2004 is the year I have the most
    confidence in.-

 2. The documentation is confusing enough about these details that I
    am actually unclear on whether the RuBee "MAC address" is 4 bytes
    or 6. Examples show 6 byte addresses, but the actual 1902.1
    specification only seems to allow 4 byte addresses in headers.
    Honestly all of the RuBee documentation is a mess like this. I
    suspect that part of the problem is that VAI has actually changed
    parts of the protocol and not all of their products are IEEE
    1902.1 compliant.-

 memories of .us
with love,
j. b. crawford
me@computer.rip

This communication is privileged and confidential. Letters to the
editor are welcome to me@computer.rip, via facsimile to +1 (505)
926-5492, or mail to PO Box 26924, Albuquerque, NM 87125.

Me, elsewhere: Mastodon, YouTube, Bluesky (bridge)

Discuss this, complain, etc: #computer.rip:waffle.tech on Matrix

Support me on Ko-Fi and receive eyes only, a monthly or more special
edition.