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

Post by moe » Sat, Jul 11, 2020, 1:16 AM UTC

axoltl wrote: post #169

causality0 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is whether this is a firmware implementation that's just waiting for a 0-day or if the +V for the CMOS sensor is literally wired to the LED. If the latter I'd like to see a picture of it.

Hi! I was the security architect for this feature on recent Macs. The LED is wired to the camera PMIC and is powered by the voltage rail that powers the camera. The PMIC will always remain on if the system has power. Macs newer than 4 or so years also have a feature that forces the LED to stay lit for at least 3 seconds after it has been turned on to prevent the single-frame-grab attack.

Post by valuearb » Sat, Jul 11, 2020, 1:17 AM UTC

macintux wrote: post #358

valuearb wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the hackers still win, cause no one remembers to slide it shut after a call, and they can hack the led so there is no physical indicator when they are watching.

I honestly can't remember the last time I used my camera during a company meeting, and I've been working remotely since March. So, there's definitely value to a built-in cover; in my case it would stay shut permanently.

Post by NileTheGreat » Sat, Jul 11, 2020, 1:21 AM UTC

the-pigeon wrote: post #196

alunchbox wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason Zukerberg's laptop has its mic and camera tapped up. It doesn't matter what device you use unless there's a physical switch to disconnect it'll never be safe. Software can ALWAYS have zero days, just because it hasn't been exploited yet doesn't mean it can't be.

But can't you specifically wire the indicator light to always be lit if the camera has power? I don't see Apple claiming they've done that but a correct design would make the indicator light work that way and be related to software at all. Meaning you could only disable the indicator light by physically modifying the device.

Post by Wowfunhappy » Sat, Jul 11, 2020, 1:24 AM UTC

waheoo wrote: post #554

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the price of a hardware switch would be a concern for Apple, but the size would. A hardware switch would take up space. Apple broke their keyboards to shave a couple millimeters of thickness off their laptops.

You still have a silent mode toggle on your iphone. I think apple can figure out how to add a hardware switch for a camera/mic to a laptop without compromising thickness. It doesnt need to be a hardware cover, just a hardware killswitch to the circuit.

Post by saagarjha » Sat, Jul 11, 2020, 1:24 AM UTC

wl wrote: post #514

neltnerb wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, I'm a little surprised Apple didn't follow the Thinkpad approach of simply having a sliding piece with an aperture that extremely obviously blocks the camera. Surely Apple can't seriously think their users would be confused by this and complain... I don't think my desktop computer's webcam is likely to get hacked either but I'm still going to unplug it when I'm not using it. Complex systems are hard to secure…

The original iSight camera had a leaf shutter. It's not a foreign concept to them.