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

761–770 of 990 posts

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

#761

Post by sangnoir »

foolfoolz wrote: post #703
bloody-crow wrote: post #648

This statement has a number of issues. First, you have to trust Apple that the indicator _really_ can't be disabled. You also have to trust that there isn't a vulnerability Apple is not aware about that could allow rolling the camera without the light coming on. This has happened in the past [0] and there are known Apple products that are vulnerable, yet the statement never mentions this making you believe it's impos…

i don’t understand the argument that you trust apple enough to use their os but not be enough to believe their green light

They trust the physics, simplicity and verifiability of a cover more than they trust the invulnerability of Apple's black-box software & hardware implementation.

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

#762

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

jmull wrote: post #677
m00x wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the circuit turns on when the camera is on, how does it have always-on True-Tone? Is it a different sensor or is Apple just full of shit?

True Tone is a different sensor ( which isn’t a camera)

I wonder if the TrueTone sensor (which is most likely similar to a 1-pixel "camera") can be used to determine if the user is near the laptop, then only turn the camera on when you think they're not paying attention.

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

#764

Post by teekert »

ziddoap wrote: post #85
teekert wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're catering to Siemens when you refrain from putting your dog in the microwave?

What a ridiculously hyperbolic reply. But no, this analogy does not follow, because your microwave will still work after you put your dog in there -- and I have not seen guidance from Siemens telling me that microwaving my dog voids my microwaves warranty.

Replace dog by CDs, you will break your microwave. The macbook just wasn't designed to puy something over the cam. I don't get all the excitement.

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

#765

Post by alexeichemenda »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #758
alexeichemenda wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re focused on the wrong part of the chain here. As the camera system is only as weak as it’s weakest link, if Apple indeed made a circuit connected to the LED (and I fully trust you on that), then the weakest link is elsewhere: company provided laptops are often altered prior to be given to an employee. I know of colonies who install software to track messages etc. What’s to say the same companies don’t alter the…

> What’s to say the same companies don’t alter the circuit board The realities of modifying hardware. Is it possible? Sure. Is a company going to do it routinely at scale? Highly unlikely, because unlike software modifications, this would be pretty expensive. Are you aware of any companies that routinely do _hardware_ modifications on employee Macbooks?

Not aware of any that do that for laptops but I know 2 personally that do that for phones. They have a collection of devices (phones) trash to go, so it’s not as unscalable as I initially thought because they re-use the devices.

So I’m assuming if some do it for phones, must be some doing it in laptops.

Again. It’s all about probabilities. 1/ What’s the likelihood of the company doing that? Close to none. 2/ what would be the severity of the issue if they were doing that for me? Very high. 3/ what’s the effort level to prevent that? Very little.

This ratio ultimately tells us what to do.

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

#766

Post by thdrdt »

alexeichemenda wrote: post #752
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, you have to trust Apple that the indicator _really_ can't be disabled. You also have to trust that there isn't a vulnerability Apple is not aware about that could allow rolling the camera without the light coming on. I have made this point several times throughout this thread, so I apologize for repeating myself: Every laptop Apple has manufactured in the last ten years has an LED connected to the same circu…

You’re focused on the wrong part of the chain here. As the camera system is only as weak as it’s weakest link, if Apple indeed made a circuit connected to the LED (and I fully trust you on that), then the weakest link is elsewhere: company provided laptops are often altered prior to be given to an employee. I know of colonies who install software to track messages etc. What’s to say the same companies don’t alter the…

If they take the efford to alter the circuit they might as well place a camera somewhere else, listen to all your network traffic, install a (hardware) keylogger and what not.

I think you are taking this too far.

People who fear to be tracked buy a laptop in a random store and don't use a provided one.

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

#767

Post by throwaway373438 »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #715
bloody-crow wrote: post #648

This statement has a number of issues. First, you have to trust Apple that the indicator _really_ can't be disabled. You also have to trust that there isn't a vulnerability Apple is not aware about that could allow rolling the camera without the light coming on. This has happened in the past [0] and there are known Apple products that are vulnerable, yet the statement never mentions this making you believe it's impos…

> First, you have to trust Apple that the indicator _really_ can't be disabled. You also have to trust that there isn't a vulnerability Apple is not aware about that could allow rolling the camera without the light coming on. I have made this point several times throughout this thread, so I apologize for repeating myself: Every laptop Apple has manufactured in the last ten years has an LED connected to the same circu…

"If you manage to find a vulnerability in this system, I don't think I even mind, "

Taking a quick photo doesn't illuminate the LED for long enough for a human to reliably notice.

"because you've also broken physics "

Or merely recognized the role of the human element. A shame, Apple was once good at this.

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

#769

Post by davesque »

dschuetz wrote: post #735
davesque wrote: post #709

It's a bit surprising to me that this is trending so much. Apple has been making functionality compromises for years at the expense of hackers and power users of all kinds. Is it really so shocking that MacBooks aren't compatible with camera covers?

No, it's shocking that Apple doesn't seem to understand that their assurances do not even remotely touch what users of physical cover have in mind. A LED showing that the webcam is active means that it's too late. It doesn't matter what app is using the webcam, with permissions or not. The users apparently want to prevent the webcam to make any clear pictures. Apple just doesn't seem to get it. Instead Apple say, it'…

Right and I don't disagree with any of what you said. I'm just asking, why is this surprising to anyone? Why are people suddenly acting like they care when this has been open and obvious for a long time?

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

#770

Post by Antrikshy »

throwandcatch wrote: post #716
bloody-crow wrote: post #648

This statement has a number of issues. First, you have to trust Apple that the indicator _really_ can't be disabled. You also have to trust that there isn't a vulnerability Apple is not aware about that could allow rolling the camera without the light coming on. This has happened in the past [0] and there are known Apple products that are vulnerable, yet the statement never mentions this making you believe it's impos…

Not to mention the CIA had an exploit for Samsung TVs that recorded audio even when the TV seems to be turned off[1]. It is better to have peace of mind by blocking the camera physically. [1] https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-cia-mi5-hacked-your-smart-...

Well yes but those are Samsung TVs.
Post reply on HN