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

781–790 of 990 posts

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

#781

Post by saagarjha »

Simon_says wrote: post #724
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…

Can one power up the camera for only a few milliseconds? Enough to take a still photo, without the LED getting bright enough for a human to notice?

This used to be a thing, where you’d flash the LED briefly and hope the user didn’t notice. But new Macs prevent this by having a minimum duration the light will remain on.

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

#782

Post by saagarjha »

harha wrote: post #757
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 think the third point is especially strong argument for having the cover. It gives you a second physical layer of security rather than possibly a button you might automatically click away and it gives you the opportunity to join the call first and then decide to actually share (e.g. if the setting is more formal than expected or if the other side isn’t sharing). Relying on the light going on after the fact is a muc…

> Now if apple were to release an os Level protection that automatically pulls up a screen showing what is shared from the view of the camera and asks for that approval, that would improve this situation.

That doesn’t help for the attack that many people are using here, which is if the software on your machine is compromised.

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

#784

Post by saagarjha »

ccktlmazeltov wrote: post #619
gtm1260 wrote: post #20

I was very skeptical of the camera covers, but then through conversations with some of my co-workers, I realized that they weren't being used because people were worried about spies secretly turning on the camera. It was 90% of the time just peace of mind that their camera was actually off, instead of having to find the sometimes hard to see options in video chat programs etc.

Yeah, I started using to LARP, but it's actually huge for peace of mind. When I'm in meetings and I want to make sure that nobody can see make butt naked, I place the webcam cover. The person caught peeing on a zoom VC[1] would never have happened with a webcam cover. Also, I am really worried about microphones. I have 2 google homes, 6 siris (iPhones and apple watch), a portal, a number of macbook pros and airs, a P…

Until they take their laptop anyways and forget to slide the cover?

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

#786

Post by a9entroy »

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…

> You cannot send power to the camera without also sending power to the LED, which will in turn cause the LED to light up. Unless the LED is broken, in which case you will know because it will never light up.

You make multiple assumptions here

1) You assume that the during the time that passes between the LED breaking and the user noticing, there was not a single attack or a single blunder that caused the camera to turn on and record/capture something that was unintended.

2) You assume that the LED breaks deterministically. The LED can break randomly. Maybe it lights up when nothing is being recorded resulting in a false positive. The user has no way of differentiating between a false positive and a true positive which can result in unintended captures.

3) Similarly the LED can break in a way where it sometimes doesn't light up when something is being recorded even though power is always sent to the LED when the camera is on resulting in a false negative. Again, the user has no idea of differentiating between a false negative and a true negative.

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

#787

Post by harha »

saagarjha wrote: post #782
harha wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the third point is especially strong argument for having the cover. It gives you a second physical layer of security rather than possibly a button you might automatically click away and it gives you the opportunity to join the call first and then decide to actually share (e.g. if the setting is more formal than expected or if the other side isn’t sharing). Relying on the light going on after the fact is a muc…

> Now if apple were to release an os Level protection that automatically pulls up a screen showing what is shared from the view of the camera and asks for that approval, that would improve this situation. That doesn’t help for the attack that many people are using here, which is if the software on your machine is compromised.

I didn’t refer to that concern, that’s a different discussion - in a corporate setting the policies might help avoid that by limiting what can be installed.

where they don’t help is accidentally activating the camera and only realizing afterwards. That’s a UX issue with so many different video conference technologies that all behave slightly differently.

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

#789

Post by pabs3 »

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…

Fourth, lights are not accessible to blind persons, but switches or covers potentially can be.

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

#790

Post by Drdrdrq »

Antrikshy wrote: post #770
throwandcatch wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Kenneth White, a security researcher and cryptographer, told The Intercept that smart TVs are a "historically pretty easy target," and that there is "zero chance" that the CIA targeted only Samsung.
Post reply on HN