Live data from Hacker News

Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

blog.mozilla.org

111–120 of 215 posts

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#111
post #93
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would be nice if it also worked on local IPs, like 192.168... That would defeat the security purpose. Anyone within your local network (which practically speaking very often means the next Wifi your device could find) could attack you.

But how do you do local development when you can't get an SSL cert for your dev machine's server? No, self signed certs don't always do what you need, especially on mobile where you can't just add your cert as a trusted cert easily.

If you own a domain, you can add a subdomain that points to the local network IP, and get Let's Encrypt to give you a certificate using the dns-01 validation method (which doesn't require Let's Encrypt to actually access the IP address in the A record).

This is clearly more complicated than ideal, but it should work.

Edit: You can also use a custom CA root certificate, which can be installed on iOS etc. mkcert is a good starting point:

https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#112
This sucks, my community[1] has a local offline-first video/audio call app that we run on a physical mesh network.

This will make it impossible for people to talk to each other, without first needing to be connected online to some certificate authority, or without some extraordinarily difficult pre-installation process, which is often not even possible on a phone.

HTTPS was important, but now its being used to shoe horn dependency on centralized online-only authority. Perfectly ripe to censor anyone.

1. https://gitter.im/amark/gun

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#113
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my understanding, Apple has done sort of what you're asking for, they've hooked up the physical wiring of the camera LED to the camera itself, so it is physically impossible to power the camera without the LED being turned on (as opposed to the "turn on LED" being part of firmware logic that could be hacked).

This is a better solution overall, as it's "by default". A hardware switch relies on the user to be privacy conscious. An LED which is physically connected to the camera circuit (!) is immediately noticeable if it turns on unexpectedly.

This is not a better solution overall and there's no reason we can't have both, other than manufacturer design choices. How often are you looking directly at your camera? Even if you are, once the camera comes on unexpectedly, it's too late.

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#114

This sucks, my community[1] has a local offline-first video/audio call app that we run on a physical mesh network. This will make it impossible for people to talk to each other, without first needing to be connected online to some certificate authority, or without some extraordinarily difficult pre-installation process, which is often not even possible on a phone. HTTPS was important, but now its being used to shoe h…

A browser doesn't need to connect to the certificate authority to validate a cert; only the server hosting the app 'needs' to be online (at least long enough to obtain a signed certificate every so often).

The bigger problem is that there has to be a single server hosting the app in the first place, which IMO is a severe flaw in the Web's architecture. But this change doesn't really make the situation worse.

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK. That has caused me to update my beliefs. I still think that there is relatively little risk -- like, you should be much more worried about being in a car accident -- but I no longer think it's on par with being struck by lightning.

Why would this be of little risk? The good thing about software is that it is automatable. That's also the bad thing. Create a malware (which due to some big company fuckups can be even embedded in a webpage these days). Capture frames indiscriminately. Add some image recognition algorithms (from OCR to machine learning, depending on what you want to do) to flag interesting hits. Voila. Massive dragnet. Applications…

I'm not saying I can't picture it. Just saying it doesn't seem likely to happen on a large scale basis.

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#116
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a layperson in this arena, I'm skeptical as to whether it's a great solution. Is it possible to turn the camera on and off very quickly? If so, a smart hacker could do that really quickly and if the owner ever notices they would probably think there is a problem with the electrical rather than thinking they are being monitored.

How long did it take you, a self-proclaimed layperson, to come up with the idea of quickly pulsing the camera? Now, how likely do you think it is that someone who's actively trying to prevent camera shenanigans would think of this idea as well, and mitigate by e.g. introduce delays or latch the light on for a couple of seconds?

How likely? Who knows? It could be an intern that implemented it for all we know. I've seen more critical things implemented by interns at a medical device company I was previously at. Do you sincerely think Apple is more concerned with secure operation of a camera (that people are going to put tape over anyways if they are that concerned with security) than a full fledged (successful) medical device company is with medical devices?

Moreover, even if it wasn't an intern, how experienced do you think the engineer is at understanding human behavior in response to hacks? Many engineers I have met have difficulty conversing with other people and have even more difficulty in actually understanding their behavior. I can almost guarentee you that even switching it on and off at slow rates will convince most people that there are electrical issues.

Also do you honestly think the average electrical engineer is that well-versed with hacking paradigms? I would conjecture that software engineering is one of the leading fields to be a gateway to understanding hacking and during my electrical engineering degree, most of them acted like writing software was a nuisance they had to do to get through the degree. Hell, even most of the lab instructors we had from JPL looked down on software engineering and talked the same way to bad EE students that a cliche high school instructor would talk to bad high school students; instead of telling them, you better like asking, "do you want fries with that" they would say (in the same tone), "you better be good at writing software."

How do you even know what the budget for the department the engineer is in? How do you know they have the budget to spend weeks on securing a camera most security minded people are going to put tape over anyways? How do you know it wasnt some off the cuff, in a meeting comment, saying I can implement this feature in an hour and everyone was like that's nice, you should do that and the thought of security never went further than that?

Unless you were there, you dont have the slightest clue as to how well thought out the whole thing is.

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#118
post #111
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how do you do local development when you can't get an SSL cert for your dev machine's server? No, self signed certs don't always do what you need, especially on mobile where you can't just add your cert as a trusted cert easily.

If you own a domain, you can add a subdomain that points to the local network IP, and get Let's Encrypt to give you a certificate using the dns-01 validation method (which doesn't require Let's Encrypt to actually access the IP address in the A record). This is clearly more complicated than ideal, but it should work. Edit: You can also use a custom CA root certificate, which can be installed on iOS etc. mkcert is a g…

> This is clearly more complicated than ideal, but it should work.

Exactly.

Imagine you're someone who just wants to play around with cool web technologies. Maybe you're fairly new to web dev; maybe you're fairly new to the world of programming in general and you're using the web to learn it, which has historically been one of the huge strengths of the web. You suddenly encounter a brick wall, where you figure out that programming isn't enough; you have to fork over money for a domain and learn how SSL works and how to set up let's encrypt and how to make root certs and how to install them on your phone, just because you wanted to play with something you found interesting.

The web looks like it's going away from being a good platform to learn and play with programming in the name of security. It will be annoying but workable for most professional programmers who can just do whatever hacks they need to get by, but we're erecting some monumental barriers to learn this stuff. You already can't even include a fucking javascript module file from an html file without learning how to set up and configure a web server because Chrome blocks modules when using file://.

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#119
post #114

This sucks, my community[1] has a local offline-first video/audio call app that we run on a physical mesh network. This will make it impossible for people to talk to each other, without first needing to be connected online to some certificate authority, or without some extraordinarily difficult pre-installation process, which is often not even possible on a phone. HTTPS was important, but now its being used to shoe h…

A browser doesn't need to connect to the certificate authority to validate a cert; only the server hosting the app 'needs' to be online (at least long enough to obtain a signed certificate every so often). The bigger problem is that there has to be a single server hosting the app in the first place, which IMO is a severe flaw in the Web's architecture. But this change doesn't really make the situation worse.

Subnet IPs are always different tho. Can I really get a cert for all subnet addresses? That'd be awesome! Please please educate me.

I want to be clear though, I need it so that the user doesn't have to install the cert themselves, or have to be online to approve.

Previously, a user would connect to the local wireless network, then the router would open them up to a directory listing of the local apps available on the network (like the video/audio call), they click the link (just points to the dynamic subnet IP of a static file server) to load the offline HTML page which then connects to call anyone in the network, including users on neighbor and neighbor-of-neighbors routers.

Basically our own decentralized telecom!

Re: Camera and microphone require HTTPS in Firefox 68

#120
post #90
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fantastic that it works with localhost (and I assume 127.0.0.1?), and it's fantastic that it doesn't work with anything else. This is the best middleground.

When it doesn't work on anything other than localhost, you can't host a web server on your dev machine and test how it works on your phone. I've been through the hell of trying to test WebRTC applications on mobile Safari, and it's horrible. Specifically, you need HTTPS for WebRTC, but you obviously have to use a self signed cert because local IP. You can ignore the cert error and load the page, but connecting to the…

You can probably just create your own root CA and install it on your mobile device for testing. I've done this for my internal stuff at home and it works well.

I use xca[0] to create/manage the root CA and the certificates, but there are other tools to do this.

[0] https://hohnstaedt.de/xca/

Post reply on HN