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

921–930 of 990 posts

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

#921

Post by nine_k »

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…

Any points like "but the LED is directly fed from the power line" are moot.

(1) With a mechanical shutter, the state of blocking can be trivially and reliably inspected. With electrical control, this is not the case.

(2) A mechanical shutter works by making it physically impossible for the camera to see anything, while powered or not. With any electrical control, this is nit the case.

So, either you use a mechanical shutter, or all bets are off.

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

#922

Post by rudewater »

So, their suggestion is to "Make sure the camera cover is not thicker than an average piece of printer paper." and also "Avoid using a camera cover that leaves adhesive residue."? Good luck finding a cover that is thinner than a piece of paper and is also not tape.

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

#923

Post by Natsu »

tim333 wrote: post #850
Reason077 wrote: post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ”the light doesn't prevent the camera from turning on, it merely notifies you that the camera is on.” No, but the OS prevents the camera from turning on without permission from the user. (There have been bugs/compromises to this in the past, but at the browser level - you still had to give camera permission to the browser) Besides, if you’ve got some compromised or surreptitious software on your MacBook trying to s…

Without worrying about malware, several times I've clicked on some Skype like program while trying to make a voice call only to find it trying to transmit ugly video of me.

Yeah, I'm not even worried about malware, I'm more worried about joining a call with video on by mistake using a legit program.

I mean, the thing is that I never want to use video on calls, basically. Waste of bandwidth and no worry about broadcasting the wrong thing by mistake.

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

#925

Post by Kliment »

def8cefe wrote: post #856
Kliment wrote: post #792

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same on all counts, though I went a step further and wired in a microminiature slide switch to completely power off the camera. That way applications see "no camera" unless I go out of my way to power it on. I painted the "on" side of the switch in retroreflective paint so I can see when it's on at a glance too, whether the camera is in use or not. This was on a thinkpad though, I doubt macos would tolerate a disappe…

Do you have pictures to share? Sounds cool.

Sadly no pictures of the insides. I'll give you a description though. I cut a trace on the camera module (should have cut the cable instead on second thought) and soldered in two bits of enamel wire that go to a slide switch. Clipped a little bit of plastic off the lid so the switch was accessible, blind-drilled two tiny holes in the lid for the alignment pegs of the switch to go into, and glued it in place. I then did the painting with a very fine brush under a microscope. The wires are routed around the camera module and the switch is to the left of the camera, in order not to interfere with the little LED on the right of the camera that illuminates the work area. The outside looks like this (I didn't bother cleaning up the cut-off plastic edge): https://imgur.com/a/UpB1dJn

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

#926

Post by gmantg »

Godel_unicode wrote: post #457
gmantg wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike a led light, a piece of tape prevents unauthorized webcam access.

Which, as I said, us hardware prevention. It stops someone from recording you, it also stops you from knowing someone tried to record you (i.e. hardware detection). The hacking consequences I care about are having my bank accounts drained, not having my picture taken.

This is what audit records are for. Unless you expect the bad guys to respect your schedule, you won't be around to see the LED light.

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

#927

Post by alerighi »

crazygringo wrote: post #472
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 so…

It would be annoying as hell. I find annoying having to open the settings to grant the camera permission, if every time I have to make a call I have to give permission to the camera, no way.

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

#928

Post by minerjoe »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #913
minerjoe wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why trust a company at all when you don't have to? Linux, the BSDs, etc.

If someone isn't getting paid, what incentive do they have to patch vulnerabilities in a timely manner?

Not sure what you are asking? As far as I can tell, hackers hack like fish swim. We just do. For a multitude of reasons.

For many people, me included, if you wanted to give me a bunch of money to do something and I bit, not that I would nowadays, that could actually lead to a loss of motivation.

As for vulnerabilities, many open source projects responds to them much quicker that industry. Say for pride in their work. as one motivation.

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

#929

Post by murgindrag »

jorvi wrote: post #910
ColanR wrote: post #900

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skepticism is healthy.

So is trust. You can’t possibly audit the source of every piece of software that touches your life, even if all of it were open source. Hell, things like Heartbleed or Shellshock sat in OpenSSL / Bash for 5-10 years.

Trust isn't healthy, when you're worried about cybersecurity. The economics of trust work differently in real life than at web scale.

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

#930

Post by murgindrag »

fbnlsr wrote: post #880
partyboat1586 wrote: post #846

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a physical lid is ugly and inelegant.

My Thinkpad comes with a physical lid that works perfectly and is in no way inelegant.

My ThinkPad comes with a butt-ugly lid which works perfectly, and I don't care about the ugliness.
Post reply on HN