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

Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

insecam.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#31

Post by netsharc »

bchanudet wrote: post #23
andreasley wrote: post #19

A few years ago, while browsing the feeds from my country, I had spotted a camera showing a bedroom with a young child playing. The camera in question was using UPnP to enable port forwarding by default – with a standard password. After looking up the ip address, I notified the ISP which in turn notified the customer and the camera was taken offline within hours. While it may not be unexpected to us that such insecur…

Some time ago I went through the list of my country (France), and some were definitively not supposed to be here. One was in a retail shop like 100m from our office, one of my colleagues actually went there to warn the personel, and it was taken down in the next minutes (I think they cut off the power of the cameras until necessary action was taken). An other one was in a restaurant, right above the cashier and (most…

Couldn't you have made a throwaway email address? Plus, connect through a VPN just in case they refer the case to the authorities.

It'd be ironic if they threw more resources at finding the "hacker" than at securing their network...

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#32

Post by jibolso »

lozf wrote: post #29
vmilner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, St Michael's Mount in Cornwall seems to have been moved to London... https://www.insecam.org/en/view/845188/#details

Indeed, and this is very far from Brixton! https://www.insecam.org/en/view/370031/

Exactly! I suppose users are trying to view the status or their print job. https://www.insecam.org/en/view/805349/

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#33

Post by bchanudet »

netsharc wrote: post #31
bchanudet wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some time ago I went through the list of my country (France), and some were definitively not supposed to be here. One was in a retail shop like 100m from our office, one of my colleagues actually went there to warn the personel, and it was taken down in the next minutes (I think they cut off the power of the cameras until necessary action was taken). An other one was in a restaurant, right above the cashier and (most…

Couldn't you have made a throwaway email address? Plus, connect through a VPN just in case they refer the case to the authorities. It'd be ironic if they threw more resources at finding the "hacker" than at securing their network...

I had thought of that, but I think that would only have decreased the probability for the receiver to actually open the email. At this point it hit my own "Return Over Time Investment" threshold, and I figured I'd better use my time helping my own circle to secure their stuff.

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#35

Post by achillean »

wadkar wrote: post #16

How’s this different from shodan? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shodan_(website)

Shodan isn't a directory of webcams the same way Google isn't a directory of webcams. Shodan indexes metadata about all devices connected to the Internet, some of them are webcams. Compared to the rest of the index though they make up a tiny fraction of the data. Shodan also indexes light bulbs, refrigerators, power plants, Minecraft servers, Kubernetes clusters and anything else that runs on a port.

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#37

Post by myself248 »

nefitty wrote: post #21
andreasley wrote: post #19

A few years ago, while browsing the feeds from my country, I had spotted a camera showing a bedroom with a young child playing. The camera in question was using UPnP to enable port forwarding by default – with a standard password. After looking up the ip address, I notified the ISP which in turn notified the customer and the camera was taken offline within hours. While it may not be unexpected to us that such insecur…

It’s great that you went through the trouble to alert them. It would be nice to automate this flow as much as possible to reduce the friction for concerned people.

I like that idea. Maybe one of those auto-lawyer websites could send it, like to absorb blowback in case the recipient flips out. Because they often do.

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#39

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

andreasley wrote: post #19

A few years ago, while browsing the feeds from my country, I had spotted a camera showing a bedroom with a young child playing. The camera in question was using UPnP to enable port forwarding by default – with a standard password. After looking up the ip address, I notified the ISP which in turn notified the customer and the camera was taken offline within hours. While it may not be unexpected to us that such insecur…

Good work.

It's to be also noted that you live in a country, where ISPs understood what you were telling, understood its urgency, communicated properly with the affected party and remedied it within hours.

There are countries where, in order to talk to a person who understands there is a public facing IP camera it will take extraordinary effort at best and at worst you will be termed 'hacker' for visiting the 'Insecam' website and police will knock on your door within next couple of months to a year; Now good luck finding someone in the police who will listen to you and actually understands it.

Re: Insecam: Directory of Unsecured Surveillance Cameras

#40

Post by creeble »

vermilingua wrote: post #38
jcun4128 wrote: post #36

I guess we can conclude Axis cameras are not secure

No, you can conclude that Axis cameras are by far the market leader in the IP CCTV space.

I believe the original Dropcam was an Axis with reverse-engineered (new) firmware.

They still run!

Post reply on HN