It's no secret that RFID isn't the most secure thing in the world, so we mostly took Adam Savage's story about Discovery telling the Mythbusters to back off an episode exposing the tech's flaws after a conference call with various cred card company lawyers as a bit of laughable corporate insecurity, but it looks like Adam got himself in a bit of trouble by sharing -- Discovery's now sending out a release in which he basically retracts the whole thing. "There's been a lot of talk about this RFID thing, and I have to admit that I got some of my facts wrong... Texas Instruments' account of their call with Grant and our producer is factually correct [and] the decision not to continue on with the RFID story was made by our production company, Beyond Productions, and had nothing to do with Discovery, or their ad sales department." Sure, that doesn't explain why he said that Tory "still gets a little white" when he remembers the phone call, or why he said RFID was "on Discovery's radar," but we're guessing it has more to do with simple exaggeration than devious conspiracy. At least we hope so.

Although it's no secret that RFID is easily hacked (see: train passes, passports, credit cards, one billion other cards, etc.) it's still not necessarily common knowledge, and it sounds like the major credit card companies want to keep it that way -- according to Adam Savage, Mythbusters was all set to do a show exposing the weak security behind most RFID implementations but was shut down by lawyers from "American Express, Visa, Discover, and everybody else... [who] absolutely made it really clear to Discovery that they were not going to air this episode." Since Discovery is an ad-supported channel, it's not surprising that it backed down, but we'd say that the credit card industry would be far better served spending money on actually improving security rather than lawyering up and trying to keep consumers in the dark. Video after the break.

[Via Wired]

They're about as far from myths as you can get, but MythBuster Jamie Hyneman nonetheless took it upon himself to explore seven tech headaches that many of you are likely all too familiar with in the latest issue of Popular Mechanics, and he's offered a few suggestions on how companies could fix 'em. Those headaches include the ever-popular cordless tools with endless varieties of battery packs and chargers (which he suggests should be replaced by stackable 6-volt modules), fancy flashlights that use pricey batteries (which he thinks we'd be better off without), and cars with obnoxious electronics and near-impenetrable encasements. Of course, cellphones and their myriad of charges and connectors aren't spared either, although Hyneman sees some hope in the Open Mobile Terminal Platform that aims to make micro-USB the standard, and, as you might have guessed, he pays particular notice to computers that come pre-loaded with scores of unnecessary software. On that last note, he also offers some action consumers can take themselves: switch to Ubuntu.

[Thanks, Niall]

There's an old adage in the security community that any lock can be picked. Well in this modern age of digital doorlocks with fingerprint scanners, you can't exactly pick them with a bump key, nail file or other such assorted tools, now can you? Luckliy for budding criminals, the smart cats on "Mythbusters" discovered that one of these "never been broken" digital fingerprint scanner locks (they didn't cite the manufacturer) -- which also comes with thermal sensors (to detect if there's a real human behind that print) -- can in fact be quite easily duped. So how'd they do it? By copying the master fingerprint onto a piece of latex and attaching it to his thumb, Adam Savage was able to open the lock without a problem. Savage and his team then duplicated the feat by making another copy with ballistics gel. And to top it all off, they did it a third time (check the video link below) with a just a photocopy of the master fingerprint and a little saliva. Perhaps our own Marc Weber Tobias should have a word with the makers of these schlocky locks.