4 ms·
This is the sort of thing that should absolutely be baked in at the lowest reasonable level. Browser-level requests for camera/mic permission are obviously nic
by Bartweiss 8y ago
This is the sort of thing that should absolutely be baked in at the lowest reasonable level.
Browser-level requests for camera/mic permission are obviously nice, and it's even better to see OSX offer the request to catch more cases and prevent workarounds. Requests for control transfers are also an obvious improvement; at a certain point the easiest way to curtail sandbox escapes without restricting normal functionality is to just talk to the user.
Honestly, a same-circuit "camera on" light is my preferred solution to this whole question, and I'd be happy to see the mic get a separate light or be tied into the camera circuit.
- danieldk 8y agoHonestly, a same-circuit "camera on" light is my preferred solution to this whole question, and I'd be happy to see the mic get a separate light or be tied into the camera circuit. The problem is that this doesn't help if you have a desktop machine, but you are not literally sitting behind it to notice the light. Software could still eavesdrop on conversations during that time. The nice thing about Micro Snitch is that it also keeps a log. Ideally, we would of course have all these levels of protection: a light, a physical switch to disconnect the camera and mic, sandboxing with camera/mic permissions, and logs like those provided by Micro Snitch.
- saagarjha 8y ago> This is the sort of thing that should absolutely be baked in at the lowest reasonable level. It's baked into the kernel, if that's what you're asking.
- Bartweiss 8y agoYes - my reaction is that Micro Snitch is great in the absence of a kernel feature, but this sort of thing is best handled at the kernel and hardware levels.