Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

support.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 990 posts

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#471

Post by neltnerb »

JadeNB wrote: post #399
CydeWeys wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A physical electrical on/off switch for the microphone (that actually interrupts the wires going to the mic).

Doesn't that require the same kind of trust in the correctness of the wiring that is at issue in some other comments? I can see that a camera cover works, but I think I couldn't see that a physical switch was actually interrupting the wiring without doing a teardown.

If you don't assume the internal wiring is as described I do not think there is a way for you to guarantee the microphone is not recording. It's even less obvious than a camera lens being covered or not, and taping over the "microphone hole" won't actually block receiving sound at all.

I do physically disconnect or cover cameras. My desktop computer has no microphone unless I plug one in. Laptop and phone though? I definitely remember in the aughts that the police could remotely turn your phone into a bug without any user indication at all. To the best of my knowledge the only way to actually be sure you aren't being recorded with your own equipment is to remove power... of course now the batteries are soldered on, totally a coincidence I'm sure.

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#472

Post by crazygringo »

zelon88 wrote: post #442

None of the proposed solutions do anything to actually stop the camera from taking a picture of you. Sure, you'll see the indicator light up for 3 seconds. But the attacker still got what they needed. Camera covers have nothing to do with identifying compromise. They are strictly for preventing compromise. This is exactly opposite what a camera indicator light does, and thus the indicator should not be considered a "…

This is a great point.

This could be solved in software at the OS-level with a permission dialog that popped up every time the camera was asked to be activated (as opposed to an ongoing website permission). Which would be overly annoying for most, but appreciated by a privacy-conscious minority.

But unless Apple ever did that (doubtful), once you see the green light it's already too late.

It does make me wonder if something like that could ever be done with a kernel extension or similar?

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#473

Post by simple_phrases »

PascLeRasc wrote: post #367
matwood wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nation states compromising Zuckerberg come in the front door and shake his hand.

Zuckerberg basically is the nation state we should be worried about. If a foreign country wants to spy on someone, they'll do it via a Facebook pixel.

Yep. When the Saudi government wanted to persecute dissidents and journalists, they went to the service providers to get compromising info on them. They just paid employees at the companies that didn't play ball to siphon data and target people clandestinely.

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#475

Post by PascLeRasc »

a_t48 wrote: post #393
PascLeRasc wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attack most people are worried about is your camera being activated while your laptop is open. Huawei's approach seems worse since you can't just apply a cover to it.

What? It's a physical button, you have to press it to open. I don't think there's a software control for it, is there?

Oh I didn't know that, I thought it popped up when the camera was activated. My mistake.

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#476

Post by soulofmischief »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #398
runarberg wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Above in the thread it has been noted that camera covers are not only about security. But also about preventing accidental exposure, e.g. when you accidentally click the wrong button in a meeting app, or if your app is misconfigured to start with the camera on, forget to close an app, etc. Camera covers helps prevent you from these potential embarrassments.

I’d be more embarrassed being seen wearing a camera cover

Are you similarly embarrassed when you close your blinds at night?

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#477

Post by jsjohnst »

solarkraft wrote: post #417
jsjohnst wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plug in a headphone cable that has the wire to the microphone cut. There’s also pre-made plugs on Amazon too (search “microphone blocker”).

That does nothing except switching the default audio source to the blocked channel. Any app that can access the default source can access the still working microphone just as well.

There’s apps (it’s also pretty easy to write one yourself like I did) that monitor when the input source is changed and forces it back immediately. Yes, wish that feature was built into the OS, but I also don’t grant almost any app microphone access.

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#478

Post by soulofmischief »

astrange wrote: post #447
soulofmischief wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have statistics on this? And do they take into account the dichotomy of mostly-mobile and mostly-stationary users?

The camera quality is pretty obvious just by making Webex calls on a laptop. I don’t actually know if getting extra equipment is popular, just seen howto articles recently on dpreview. Fujifilm and Canon have added webcam support to their DSLRs though, which is interesting.

I don’t actually know if getting extra equipment is popular

Then why did you make the claim? You're willing to say things without knowing their validity just for the sake of argument?

This is just detracting from the conversation without actually adding anything useful.

Re: Don't close your MacBook with a cover over the camera

#480

Post by inopinatus »

PascLeRasc wrote: post #360
inopinatus wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t speculation. Opening up hardware to modify the internals is something that covert agencies do, and it’s naive to think that the purpose is equivalent to a simple bug. As someone who posts to Hacker News you are by almost any definition a potential information source or APT vector.

Apple's already addressed this by making their laptops nearly impossible to open up.

I had an Apple on-site support engineer open up a 16” MBP on my kitchen table a couple of weeks ago to replace a cracked screen, and he brought only a small tool roll, a headlamp, and a anti-static work surface and wrist-strap. Took him only a few minutes to strip it down, longer to rebuild and recommission for use.

I must add, I peeked over his shoulder a few times, and my comment that it looks as good inside as it does out was answered with “yes, it’s like being asked to restore a work of art”.

Post reply on HN