
FBI director: Cover up your webcam - grej
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/295933-fbi-director-cover-up-your-webcam
======
6t6t6t6
From all they ways I can be spied, the webcam is the one that concerns me the
least.

At the end, all they will see is a bearded man staring to the front. May they
be able to see me naked? Well, probably, but I honestly don't think that they
will make a lot of money by selling my naked pictures... My wife tells me that
I still look good, but I suspect that she is being nice to me.

What would scare more is that they manage to capture what is on my screen, or
install a keylogger, or activate the microphones to hear my conversations, or
that they access my hard disks and steal data, including my private keys.

Hey, but putting a sticker on your webcam is a way to show how 1337 your are!

I prefer not to have to bother removing stickers every time I want to do a
Skype call.

~~~
matt_wulfeck
You're displaying a common trope I see sometimes with security:

> "because this particular thing does affect me personally, it doesn't matter.
> And because it doesn't matter to me it doesn't matter at all"

Blackmailing people with pictures taken from webcams is not theoretical. It
happens[0] and it's good advice to tape up your cam. It may not affect you
personally, but it may affect your wife, daughter, or sister in a much more
sinister way. Believe it or not this kind of thing can ruin someone's life.

[0] [http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240209018/US-teen-
hacker...](http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240209018/US-teen-hacker-
pleads-guilty-to-webcam-blackmail)

~~~
iceman99
I know someone whose camera and microphone were taken over. A window showed on
her computer where the person watching her chatted with her and told her
things that he only knew because he was watching her. It scared her to death
and made her cry.

Beyond blackmail, it is probably close to the psychological equivalent of a
stranger just suddenly appearing in your home watching you.

I think that every electronic camera and mic device should have a hard
switch/button that physically disables both the camera and mic. Having to use
tape or a cover does not keep you from being spied on; it only eliminates the
visual spying. The attacker can still listen.

~~~
zyngaro
Smartphones represent a bigger security risk in that regard. Front facing rear
facing, mic all ones personal data, pictures and so on.

~~~
JohnStrange
Hardly. You put your phone on the desk and it's going to show the ceiling. In
contrast to this, people do all kinds of weird things in front of laptops.
I've even heard once of someone who allegedly masturbated (!) in front of a
laptop. Of course, that must have been an extreme outlier ...

------
janvidar
Isn't this really just a sign of flawed hardware design?

In my opinion hardware should be designed so that the camera LED lamp should
always be lit if the camera is used. If there is a malfunction with the LED,
then the camera should also not work. Also there should be a hardware LED for
when the microphone is being used which should work in the same fashion for
laptops with built-in microphones.

In the webcam drivers I have looked at the LED is controlled independently of
capturing, although drivers do enable the LED when the camera is used. This
essentially means that hackers can record and disable the lamp.

I've been considering hacking together some piece of software that will
continuously use the camera (/dev/video) in order to block it for other
applications, and have it fail with visible alerts if unable to block the
camera. Not sure if the same thing can be achieved for the audio recording
devices due to multiplexing.

~~~
awesomerobot
>If there is a malfunction with the LED, then the camera should also not work.

Many would argue that this is the more flawed design.

~~~
Kadin
It seems like a "fail safe" to me. The current design is a bit closer to a
"fail deadly" in that it creates a mode that's the worst-case from the user's
perspective: the camera works but the indicator doesn't.

It is probably worse to have an unreliable indicator light than it is to not
have any indicator light at all.

------
_Codemonkeyism
"The head of the FBI on Wednesday defended putting a piece of tape over his
personal laptop's webcam, claiming the security step was a common sense one
that most should take."

One needs to ask why is the head of the FBI telling you this? Cui bono?

This is a red herring.

The FBI has no interest in filming you through your webcam.

They want to listen to your microphone, watch your screen, get the keys you've
typed, see the websites you've visited, read the emails you've sent.

Watch you on video? Nah. This is a red herring.

That is the reason the head of the FBI tells you to cover your webcam.

I wish the The Last Psychiatrist would come back.

~~~
tingol
The FBI isn't telling you this so you could protect yourself from the
government. They are telling you this because they know how easy it is for
someone else to take control of the camera and make your life hard. So it is a
common sense step for you to take if you're concerbed about security.

You took a pretty huge jump from that to the FBI listening to your mic.

------
ipsin
If you're so concerned about having your webcam subverted, it seems like the
first step would be to insist on a hardware LED that can't be subverted in
firmware. If nothing else, it would serve as a canary, indicating that your
machine has been thoroughly compromised.

~~~
gkoberger
And who do we trust to do that? More importantly, is it even possible?

~~~
krastanov
In terms of electronics it is fairly trivial and it can be inspected by eye
(or microscope) if the manufacturer decides to not encapsulate everything on a
chip (which presumably would be the point of such a feature).

Just have the only positive voltage rail going to the camera be the same one
that is directly powering the LED. The firmware will be turning this rail on
and off, hence turning the camera and the LED on and off simultaneously.

~~~
1_2__3
Idle though on possible attack vectors:

Convince the firmware to use a lower voltage, one that doesn't hit the
breakover voltage on the LED but still powers the camera.

Strobe the line, get snapshots without the LED doing more than very faintly
glowing.

~~~
umanwizard
LED activation voltage is less than what cameras typically require.

------
white-flame
I said it then, and I say it now:

\- Encryption is our webcam tape.

That tape cannot be thwarted by any remote attacker, legally warranted or not.
It's perfect, unbreakable security from webcam visuals being exfiltrated,
exactly the security features that Comey says we shouldn't be allowed to have
for our data.

~~~
pdkl95
"What if everyone believed that law-abiding citizens should use postcards for
their mail? If a nonconformist tried to assert his privacy by using an
envelope for his mail, it would draw suspicion. Perhaps the authorities would
open his mail to see what he's hiding. Fortunately, we don't live in that kind
of world, because everyone protects most of their mail with envelopes. So no
one draws suspicion by asserting their privacy with an envelope. There's
safety in numbers. Analogously, it would be nice if everyone routinely used
encryption for all their email, innocent or not, so that no one drew suspicion
by asserting their email privacy with encryption. Think of it as a form of
solidarity."

~ Philip Zimmermann, "Why I wrote PGP"

[https://www.philzimmermann.com/EN/essays/WhyIWrotePGP.html](https://www.philzimmermann.com/EN/essays/WhyIWrotePGP.html)

~~~
drvdevd
A brilliant point and a salient quote. Why must we continue to live,
collectively, with our heads in the sand?

------
meowface
I know this thread will probably get politicized, but I see nothing wrong (or
necessarily hypocritical; he's law enforcement, not IC) with his advice here.

~~~
waterphone
It's not a bad thing to do, it's just hypocritical of him to value his own
privacy but tell everyone else they need to give up theirs and let the FBI and
NSA have access to everything they want to keep private.

~~~
nathancahill
Why would you be concerned about the FBI or the NSA knowing about the content
of your digital communiques if you have nothing to hide? Even the most ardent
supporter of personal freedoms will admit that the government observing you
over a network is the same as taking pictures of you with a telephoto lens on
a busy street. The truth is the same: there are too many people and you aren't
special enough to deserve personal surveillance.

~~~
anexprogrammer
> there are too many people

Oh _please._ They can probably harvest the lot. It'll be some algorithm that
deems you worthy or otherwise or gets you on an "of interest" list. Let's keep
"personal surveillance" for '50s spy movies and Banksy murals.

More generally, what about the chilling effect on legal and legitimate
conversation?

~~~
jeremysmyth
_It 'll be some algorithm that deems you worthy or otherwise or gets you on an
"of interest" list._

...or your association with "Occupy" or some other political protest movement
that someone in power disagrees with, or that your wife bullied some
politician's wife for two weeks in school, or that your interfering neighbour
with a petty dislike of how you landscape your garden works as a government
clerk and can access your data.

There are many reasons why some individual might want to know private things
about some other individual. When individuals with some tiny (or vast) power
want to wield it over _anyone else_ , especially when they can do it with
little oversight, it's very tempting.

That "the government" has access to my private information does not mean it's
blind and faceless. It's made up of people with complex motivations.

------
sotojuan
The webcam cover up is interesting to me because it's the only "weird privacy
thing" I've seen regular, non-technical people do. A good amount of people at
my university, most of which use social media liberally and don't care about
encryption, cover their camera up.

~~~
pseudonymcoward
This is only idle speculation but:

A web cam resembles an eye staring at you all the time. This makes people feel
weird, like something is staring at them. The threat to privacy is right in
their face and on a gut level.

That's the reason so many people cover them even when they won't take other
basic online privacy precautions.

~~~
Sylos
Also just in general, people understand what a camera does. It's much harder
to understand the implications of abstract "data" going off onto the internet.

------
rdtsc
This is like the coal burning power plant telling you to make sure to sort
your recyclables into appropriate containers, to make the environment cleaner.

Also people enjoy and feel good about accomplishing small things. Putting a
sticker on your laptop is a small easy task. Do it and they feel more "secure"
in an instant.

------
benevol
Every electronic communication device (laptop, mobile, tablet, etc) should
have _1 hardware switch per sensor_ (camera, mic, motion/acceleration, etc)
which disables the sensor.

Why manufacturers still haven't introduced this is beyond me.

~~~
pwg
>Why manufacturers still haven't introduced this is beyond me.

Expense and lack of demand.

Some older laptops used to feature hardware kill switches for the wifi (this
was prior to the advent of a camera in every laptop). The old Dell D820 model
was one such laptop. Eventually they were dropped all around because from the
makers point of view, the presence of the switch had no effect on the sales of
the laptops.

Anything you add to the BOM (Bill of Materials) for the device raises the
final net cost, and there is still enough competition in the laptop/phone
space that keeping the costs down is necessary to compete. Additionally,
twenty-five cents per unit does not sound like much, until of course you
multiply that by 10+ million units built (where a twenty-five cents difference
per unit amounts to $2.5+ million difference in the end). So if having the
switch or not having the switch made no difference in sales, the maker could
either raise their profit, or lower their price (or more likely split the
difference) by dropping the switches.

The lack of demand is that not enough purchasers are telling manufacturers
they want hardware on/off switches (the purchasers do this by buying only
laptops with them, and by not buying laptops without them [which may be
difficult to bootstrap now, given that almost no laptop has a hardware on/off
switch anymore]).

~~~
jcadam
I've found many of those supposedly 'hardware' wifi kill switches were
software controlled (When I installed Linux on an old Dell, it completely
ignored the state of the wifi switch).

I want a switch that physically cuts power to a device, but no... :(

------
Hilyin
I guess this is just as good place as any to bring this up. In current OS X,
you cannot disable your mic. You can turn down the input volume, but never
disable. All malware needs to do is raise the input volume and it can listen
to you to its hearts content.

And its worse with your iPhone.

~~~
the_common_man
Can someone confirm if this is actually true? Sounds too far fetched that you
cannot disable the mic (i.e not muting, I assume?).

~~~
Hilyin
Just look around on the internet, you'll find the same thing. I researched
this a few weeks ago and was amazed.

You basically have to disable the audio driver in OSX to disable it, and doing
that, means you can't play audio at all. And even that isn't enough, it
technically can be hijacked at an even lower level.

------
ssebastianj
I was looking for a way to cover the mics and webcam integrated in my laptop
which doesn't require a tape. So, I grabbed a couple of those magnets stripes
usually found on fridges and then , using a scissor, made two little
rectangular stripes and a larger one. Next, I glued the little stripes on the
laptop, near close the mics. The nice thing is that the large stripe covers
both, the mics and webcam. For me, it's an easy way to cover/uncover fast.

------
boxkite
I keep mine covered because I work remotely a lot and I don't want to
accidentally shirtless video chat someone from bed when I meant to make a
different type of call.

~~~
3chelon
It was unusually hot and I actually did that myself just the other day -
embarrassing!

------
conradev
I use a MacBook Pro as my daily driver, but I recently purchased a Lenovo
ThinkPad to play around with. Sometimes I forget how awesome it is to have a
repairable and modular computer.

I didn't want the webcam or microphone in the ThinkPad… so I took 30 minutes
and removed it. Easy as that.

~~~
csydas
Well,to be fair you could just open the MacBook Pro and unplug the ribbon for
the webcam. iFixit will have instructions. Removing it entirely granted is
another matter, involving opening the screen, but you'd have to do the same on
any modern laptop with an integrated camera wouldn't you?

~~~
wruza
For my mac I just used a knife to open screen and shoved black paper strip
before camera.

------
greglindahl
I experimented a bit with an Apple laptop microphone, and it took 2 layers of
electrical tape to block the mic. There doesn't appear to be any way to block
an iPhone mic without blocking the speaker, too, and I'm not confident that it
could be blocked at all.

------
mpetrovich
But what about his computer's built-in mic? Unless he's pantomiming all
sensitive info...

------
neom
It's pretty sad that he used the word "authority" in this sentence: You do
that so that people who don’t have authority don’t look at you. I think that’s
a good thing.”

------
throwaway13337
It's relatively common to have access to private security cameras. Some are
even google indexed.

The software included relies on the users protect the web interface.
Obviously, this is the vulnerability. Especially with things like default
passwords.

Here's an article about it:
[http://www.networkworld.com/article/2844283/microsoft-
subnet...](http://www.networkworld.com/article/2844283/microsoft-
subnet/peeping-into-73-000-unsecured-security-cameras-thanks-to-default-
passwords.html)

A lot of these cameras are controllable and have speakers.

People now do live video streams of pranking people through this means.

Pictures: [http://imgur.com/a/0WImd](http://imgur.com/a/0WImd)

------
skybrian
Back in the day, SGI workstations had a hardware shutter. I still think it's a
good idea.

------
24gttghh
My Asus 1015PEM netbook from 6 years ago has a physical screen that slides
over the camera; sliding the screen also turns on the camera. Why don't more
laptops have this feature if this is such a 'big deal'?

------
throw2016
The hacker news readership is focussed on startups and technology. It's a
career, a business and in some cases an interest in technology.

So privacy as a social good may not be the primary perspective and it often
devolves into how this affects readers personally rather than the society they
live in or side tracks into technology nuances.

Technology is enabling new negative possibilities but it does not follow that
technologists can make a difference. There is no ethical code of conduct. Like
everyone else they are another cog in the wheel and software engineers may not
have an interest or priority on privacy, social and political issues.

There are a large number of folks working in the nsa, gchq, google, facebook,
palantir, hardware vendors and elsewhere actively enabling this.

Like technology itself politics, liberty, privacy and the evolution of modern
system from the time of feudalism requires interest and priority. From this
perspective the need to tape up your webcam may have completely different
ramnifications.

------
xcasperx
I agree with what most people are saying on here, but I believe there's a
bigger picture to it.

Let's say that your computer has been completely 'pwned', and that you are
currently reading an article with an ad for Cow Porn, or whatever, on the
right hand hand side of the site. The hacker can write some code to check what
your eyes, and eyebrows, did when you looked at the ad. If it peaked your
interest, the hacker can maliciously add more 'Cow Porn' ads to sites you
visit - via swapping out the regular ones.

Now one day you get curious and click on it, and boom they take a screen shot
and try to blackmail you.

This is obviously quite outlandish but think about purposefully planting
posts, lets say on reddit, by switching out posts. They then look at your head
movements, and, or, eye movements then boom, you're added to some list that
you wouldn't have be added to if it weren't for your eye movements.

------
dingo_bat
I have never covered my Webcam because I trust the light to come on if the
camera turns on. Is it possible to bypass that led?

~~~
Steuard
In addition to the attacks that others have mentioned here, I've also heard
folks comment previously on the possibility of turning on the camera very
briefly, just long enough for a single still shot. If it was done fast enough,
the brief flicker of the LED might not be noticeable.

(Like you, I had always assumed that the power for the webcam was literally in
series with the LED, so that disabling the LED would render the camera
inoperable. That seemed like the obvious way to do it if you wanted to provide
a truly reliable signal. But evidently that's not the case.)

~~~
abraae
Perhaps you mean in parallel. An LED is driven by 20 mA, whereas a camera
requires more like 200 mA, so it's not feasible to wire them in series -
either the LED will burn out or the camera won't power up.

~~~
Steuard
Yeah, I was pretty sure I was being a little sloppy by using the term "series"
(for shame, physics prof, for shame!), but I was hoping to evoke the general
sense of "if current doesn't flow through the LED for any reason, the camera
can't turn on." Honestly, I'm not 100% certain offhand of a way to wire that
(which is why I didn't want to be specific earlier, despite using a specific
term: shoulda added some weasel words :) ). Do the LED and the camera run off
of the same _voltage_? (If not, then parallel wiring won't work, either.)

------
pjc50
Previously: [http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-
tech/yah...](http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/yahoo-
webcam-users-intimate-images-intercepted-by-gchq-spy-programme-snowden-files-
reveal-9158140.html)

------
eosrei
What about the cameras in your phone and the microphones in everything?
Security theater isn't security.

------
krinchan
I'm about to die laughing at the hoops people are jumping through in the
comments to claim they've never pulled up some porn and enjoyed themselves in
front of their laptop. Ever. _EVER_

------
laurent123456
This article describes how to turn off the led light on Windows, which is
surprisingly easy:

[http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/12/how-to-disable-webcam-
ligh...](http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/12/how-to-disable-webcam-light-on-
windows.html)

TLDR: Webcams follow the UVC standard and, according to this standard, the LED
indicator light is controlled by the host software. So a simple hack is to
find the webcam driver DLL, find the function that controls the LED (such as
TurnOnOffLED()), make it return immediately, done.

------
tedmiston
Does anyone feel the need to cover their iPhone front facing camera?

~~~
e1ven
Yes. I cover both the cameras on my phone with tape, and only remove it when I
want to take a picture.

That said, I have a lot more faith in the security of a whitelist-based model
like the App store, versus the blacklist model of a PC with antivirus.

------
foobarcrunch
Unless you're using Prey[0] and want an opportunity to photograph would-be
crooks.

[0] [https://preyproject.com](https://preyproject.com)

------
markyc
in this day and age how come we don't see laptops carry a physical on/off
switch for the microphone and camera?

~~~
Shanea93
This is the day and age of removing headphone jacks to make a phone slimmer,
taking away your disk drive, etc. Most companies care more about aesthetics
than functionality at this point.

~~~
ojii
can I have a laptop without a webcam/integrated mic then?

~~~
soylentcola
How courageous of you!

------
awesomerobot
Also remove your microphone and don't use a keyboard? If I were hacking you
I'd _much_ rather log your keystrokes or hear what you're saying.

The number of scenarios where having a visual would be useful would be
incredibly low by comparison.

Putting a sticker over your webcam is like putting a lock on a screen door.

~~~
maxerickson
Most screen doors I can think of do have locks.

Even quite home made ones often end up with a hook that kids can't reach.

~~~
awesomerobot
That's my point. It does one thing, but it's by no means security.

------
piedradura
I prefer to have a computer composed by parts, so I attach the webcam to the
computer when I need to, same thing for the audio and many other applications.

I only need 1k of ram to send a secret message, so no virus or malware could
be in my tiny computer.

------
zelos
Didn't all Sun webcams used to have little irises that you could close on
them?

It seems like a sensible precaution: makes it less likely I'll accidentally
log into a company conference call in my dressing gown with my camera enabled.

------
whitenoice
Just saw the prescreening of snowden movie with online live event with movie
cast and snowden post movie, and this was exactly what was depicted in the
movie and in the event talk.

------
andrewflnr
So the guy who decries "going dark" when it comes to encryption wants us to
literally go dark with our webcams. It's like a dystopian comedy setup.

------
JustUhThought
At some of my house parties I require guests to check their phone at the door.
Price of admission. (I keep a landline and am ok with giving that number out
as an emergency contact number). Boy does this get the conversation started.

I can tape my phn camera, but what about the other 20 phns in the room? I have
no control over them to keep them from posting photos of me drinking or
whatnot during a party, photos I do not want online.

From the tin-hat perspective one must do (much) better than consider their
personal devices. One must consider _all_ devices in their _personal
proximity_.

~~~
GarrisonPrime
It'd be amusing to have a little Faraday cage by the door for them to deposit
into. :)

------
demonshreder
Aren't these attacks primarily for Windows? Would using Linux (say Arch)
mitigate these?

Edit: Shouldn't we be more concerned about phones and tabs?

~~~
facepalm
Nice attempt at humor :-)

------
codethief
In case anyone's looking for something a little bit more sophisticated than a
sticker to put on his/her webcam:
[https://soomz.io/detail/webcam_covers_a10](https://soomz.io/detail/webcam_covers_a10)
Been using it for a while and it works like a charm. (Though on a phone it
does tend to attract a bit of dirt and the color wears off over time. If you
keep your phone in the pocket of your pants, that is.)

------
chrischen
Quick question for HNers: why isn't something like the camera insicator light
implemented for the microphone?

------
SG-
Anyone know what kind of laptop he uses?

------
wickedlogic
Please cover your webcam, it is distracting while we are trying to listen to
what you are clicking on.

------
listentojohan
What I don't understand is why he has to defend it? (Yes, it might seem
hypocritical.)

------
bobsoap
Instead of a sticker, one could also use this clever, simple, magnetic gadget
(not affiliated):

[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1893116150/nope-20-live...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1893116150/nope-20-live-
free)

~~~
bobsoap
Seriously, downvoted without an explanation? That's quite poor. If something
about my post offends anyone, I'd love to know about it.

------
mangeletti
I swear this is a true story:

I worked at Staples when I was 19, and when I first started I was a "front end
lead" (read: the only full-time cashier), so I would work behind the service
counter at the front.

Once, I was standing up front while there were no customers when all of the
sudden the voice of the general manager (we'll call him Bill) popped onto the
phone's speaker, "Hey, Michael". I looked up and noticed the light next to
"Manager's Office" was on. I instinctively replied, "Hey, Bill; what's up?",
despite the fact that it nearly gave me a heart attack.

Bill proceeded to tell me to run something he needed to the back, which I did,
and that was the end of that.

Then, one day I was helping a customer with some Cross pens behind the
counter. I stood up to grab a key that was next to the register when I noticed
out of the corner of my eye that the phone's "Manager's Office" intercom light
was on. It made my heart jump because I hadn't talk to anybody through it, and
I knew that Bill was in the back office. I immediately realized, 'oh my god,
he's probably spying on me to see how my service is!'. It made me feel
uncomfortable, until I realized it was an opportunity to be extraordinarily
helpful and jovial with the customer and be "candidly" observed by my manager.
So I did that. I rang the customer up and she left. The light went off after a
few minutes of silence.

After that, I noticed the light come on a number of times on different days,
which surprised me. I even ran to the back after helping a customer once,
while the intercom light was still on, sneaked around the corner, and looked
into his office window to see if it was really him. He was sitting there
looking at his phone. I looked for just a moment when I heard from the speaker
above, "<beep!> cashier to the front". I ran.

Bill was probably the greatest manager I've ever known, such a hard worker, a
really cool guy to talk to, well respected by everyone, etc. In fact, if all
managers were like him, Staples would probably still be a force to be reckoned
with. So, it never bothered me the way it probably would have, had it been
some creepy manager. This is necessary for the rest of the story, because had
it not been the case, I would have probably called him out, etc.

Eventually I started being extra jovial all the time, because I never knew
when I'd miss seeing the light come on and miss the opportunity to impress
Bill.

Bill was so impressed with my service that I was given a raise and promoted to
manager of the copy & print center about 6 months later, which eventually led
to me opening my own print company and quitting Staples (after seeing how high
the margins were), which led to me learning how to use Adobe Creative Suite
and graphic design, which led to me shifting my focus to print design for
clients (brochures, cards, etc.), which led to me meeting some guys who ran an
Internet marketing company one day while trying to sell my print design
services. They wanted to hire me full time, and did, so I began learning web
design, then web development, then back end code, etc.

I always tell myself, 'I was probably destined for this kind of work', but the
reality is that my entire life might have been changed by simply knowing I was
being spied on by my Boss. I realize that it probably worked out for the
better in my case, but the fact is, knowing that somebody is watching you
causes you to change who you are. It's a form of control in and of itself. In
fact, it doesn't even need to happen to you. Now that we have all seen that
the government does spy on people, it's hard to imagine all the tiny ways that
it might change your behavior and the things you say (e.g., online).

~~~
repler
I worked at Staples too (Business Machines!), the management was not shy about
reminding us about mystery shoppers.

My managers would always walk around the corner right at the instant I would
sit down for a minute when it wasn't busy 5 hours into my shift. Never failed.
Ugh.

I know we didn't have surveillance cameras in the store at the time though,
because it was a sore point (and against Staples policy at the time).

------
mmaunder
I wonder if he covers front and back cellphone cameras.

------
caub
Laptops have a LED showing when webcam is in use

------
stanislavb
Hypocrite!

------
orthogon
What about the part where we stop buying products with integrated cameras?

What about the part where we stop buying devices that we have seeemingly no
hope of control over?

What about that?

Is boycott a word too strong?

Gee, you're right.

We should all just give up, and accept that what we're sold, is that which we
must buy.

~~~
deathanatos
I think you're being a bit quick to judge people here…

Having an integrated camera is obviously a lot easier to deal with,
logistically, than lugging along an external USB camera.

I think a lot of the people here would love to have hardware-level kill
switches for their video camera. And mic. And WiFi. (I would; I used to own a
Thinkpad with a hardware kill switch for WiFi. It was useful, even aside from
the privacy benefits.)

~~~
orthogon
I think you're neglecting a key detail: alternatives are hardly even on the
shelves, and NO ONE QUESTIONS IT.

    
    
      > Oh, well, that's just 
        supply and demand, of 
        course!
    
      > Everyone just WANTS an 
        always on internet connection!
    
      > Why would anyone ever remove
        the battery from their 
        cell phone???
    
      > It's more cost effective
        to build the device
        like that. Common sense!
    
      > Everyone wants a unique 
        identifier, GPS and 911
        service. It's safer!
    

Yup, no one would ever want things any other way. It's silly to question why
the invisible hand of the market works as it does.

~~~
derogator
The really amazing part about the downvotes here, is that HN is unable to
reconcile the realities of mass surveillance that tend to conflict with profit
motives, and yet the collective overtone of HN professes itself to be a
bastion of progressive futurist space exploring tranhumanism. Few seem to
notice the cognitive dissonance.

Sort of a cruel prank. Those in the best position to release the yoke, are
only motivated to tighten it.

