• webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    191
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The problem here is that the led was software controlled which always struck me as more of a bandaid then a solution.

    A proper hardware switch solution would mean the led and webcam are wired so if the webcam receives any power the led jumps on. The computer shouldn’t even know that led exists. Not sure how many devices actually do this though.

    The tape on cam solution works on video but might still record sound which is in many cases more dangerous for sensitive information.

    Of course one also has to wonder how much it matters having typed this on a phone with cam and microphone uncovered and no indicators.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah, this is exactly the problem. Never should have been software controlled.

      And yes, it’s getting harder and harder to control for these privacy issues with the number of devices we routinely carry with microphones and cameras.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      3 days ago

      I believe Framework has their webcam LED setup like this. At a minimum the physical switch cuts power to the whole webcam assembly.

      • Great Blue@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        And the Framework Laptop also has a switch for the mic. So even the mic can be completely turned of on the hardware level.

      • Jay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        That is exactly how the webcam light is setup in a Framework. The light is wired up to the camera sensors power, so whenever the camera has power, so does the light. The switch also fully disconnects it from the computer itself. At least in Linux, you can verify it using lsusb. You can see the camera indicated as Realtek Semiconductor Corp. Laptop Camera. Whenever the switch is flipped though, it disappears all together from the list.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      The problem with that is a USB device is powered even if it’s not being used. You can’t communicate with it to identify it as a webcam without powering it. So the light will be on any time it’s plugged in.

      • VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        3 days ago

        The camera module itself can be powered off if properly designed and the led should be powered from the same source.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yeah, but that’s additional design complexity, and most consumers, given the choice, would pick the cheaper option.

          • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s more complex and expensive to have it controlled by software though.

            Hardware controlled would be the equivalence of using a splitter to add a second lamp on an outlet attached to a light switch. (would only require a change in a trace or two and a transistor/resistor or two.)

            Software controlled is the equivalence having to buy smart outlets and programming them yourself to have the two lamps turn on at the same time. (requires the same as a hardware switch, plus a more expensive or even an extra controller chip along with the need to write and program it.)

          • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            Could be interesting to have a law that made this cheaper option illegal as it is more dangerous to society

      • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        a USB device is powered even if it’s not being used.

        That’s the USB-controller, not the actual cam. It’s certainly possible to couple a LED with the power state of the camera chip and it was already done before.

    • fl42v@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Both android and crapple phones have mic & cam indicators nowadays, tho, and if a piece of software has a level of access high enough to bypass those, you kinda have bigger issues… Also, the webcam receives power by default currently; as the repo mentions, it’s just another USB device (well, it’s 3v3, and not 5v, but it doesn’t really matter here)

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      And you know, the led shouldn’t be fucking firmware controlled!

      It’s a really good idea, but to work reliably, it should be HARDWIRED to light up when the cmos is receiving power.

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      Framework laptops do this- and the switch that kills the camera also slides a shutter over the lens as well.

      • GbyBE@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        Oh, mine only seems to physically disconnect the camera and not slide anything in front of the lens. Do you have the 16?

        That lens cover also seems unnecessary to me. A physical disconnect for the camera and microphone is a nice touch of Framework’s laptops…

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          No, I have the 13. Although I’m not in front of it right now, so I could be misremembering.

  • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    This is why so many laptops, including Lenovo laptops, have webcam covers. You could always put a piece of tape over it lol

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    I just use some gaffers tape to cover the camera.

    One complaint I have is a lot of laptop manufacturers who do put a camera slider in, paint the slider red when it’s closed and black when it’s open. It should be the opposite. Red is dangerous live.

    I fix it just using some enameled nail polish. But it seems opposite of what it should be

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s not possible, because the sensor is black (or at least very dark).

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        3 days ago

        Right, but the ring around the sensor is plastic. That plastic could be red. To indicate that the camera is uncovered

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      They have it that way because it reduces the support calls from idiots who can’t figure out why their webcam won’t work.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Plug in a dummy headphone jack. But some microphones are not disabled in hardware when that happens.

        The framework laptop does have a hardware switch for that, which is nice

  • Kelly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    Most laptops have a physical slider that can mask the camera. But I don’t know of any tablets or phones that offer this feature.

    • jcs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      The Librem 5 offers hardware killswitches on the side of the phone, and the Pinephone offers hardware killswitches in the rear of the device after removing the backplate.

    • PetteriPano@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      I have a thin stick-on slider for my laptops. It’d look clunky, but you can stick it on any tablet or phone.

      • iturnedintoanewt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        Except these days the camera is a hole in the screen in a mobile phone, so you’d be effectively blocking part of the screen too.

        • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          That hole in the screen is always black, so covering up the hole (and only the hole) won’t make you miss a thing.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Those pretty much don’t exist.

              Here are the list of phones I trust, in order:

              1. Librem 5
              2. PinePhone
              3. Pixel w/ GrapheneOS

              I’m on 3, because 1 & 2 don’t function well enough as phones (need reliable MMS, better audio, and better battery life). The first two have hardware switches, the last is controllable by software I somewhat trust. All three have significant caveats. Once 1 or 2 work properly as phones (don’t even need Android apps), I’ll switch.

                • jcs@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Purism is slowly correcting course regarding refund policies, but meaningful improvements take time. Also, the letter from “Purism” to Rossmann came from a Purism volunteer who had no authority to publicly represent the company.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Yup, but that doesn’t change how much I trust the hardware. I’m never going to buy from them, but I do think their phone hardware is decent. If I buy a Linux phone, it’ll be a PinePhone.