8 ms·
Google has also indexed thousands of publicly accessible Panasonic webcams
These appear to mostly be in China.
I haven't updated the list of cameras in awhile (and I seem to have lost my script to do it)
- hippich 14y agoSo many wasted IPv4s...
- achillean 14y agoThis is a similar website that gathered webcam data using Shodan (http://www.shodanhq.com http://www.shodanhq.com): http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/ http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/
- Nux 14y agolol, someone's taking an exam http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/webcam.php?id=36739 http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/webcam.php?id=36739 awesome resource, connects you to the world in a weird way :)
- rafaelm 14y agoHeh, that's an IP from Chile. Looks like some sort of outdoors classroom or something.
- icebraining 14y agoThis is funny: a dog hotel: http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/webcam.php?id=166 http://cryptogasm.com/webcams/webcam.php?id=166
- davidtyleryork 14y agoSo this has actually been a pretty common 4chan prank for a while now. People give you instructions for Googling webcam IP addresses (very typically just an IP string or something similar) and then try to find something worth sharing. Just like the printer post above, it's incredible how many webcams are left completely unsecured.
- eli 14y agoI'm pretty confident this actually predates the founding of 4chan. I mean, it's not rocket science: if there is a device that can be administered via the web, then you can probably find at least a couple unsecured via a web search.
- cynwoody 14y ago>Just like the printer post above, it's incredible how many webcams are left completely unsecured. My guess is that making a webcam publicly accessible is more likely to be intentional than doing the same with a printer. Of course, if the webcam is for security, then probably not. But people installing security cams should be expected to know what they are doing (LOL!).
- OGC 14y agoAlso on German krautchan. Watching some japanse gas station attendant receiving weird stuff via fax was hilarious.
- kaybe 14y agoI know I probably shouldn't ask, but did you tape it?
- tlrobinson 14y agoI haven't updated the list of cameras in a few years, and seem to have lost my script to do it. I'll see what I can do later.
- bane 14y agoFor fun, I used to troll open webcams in Japan. The best were the ones you can pan around and zoom in and out of. Lots of nice vistas, sea ports, city scenes. I'd put them on in the background and provide some visual "noise" during the day.
- schabernakk 14y agoif you can find those cams via a google search, doesn't that mean they are linked from some other public site (which has also been indexed) which would indicate they were left public intentionally (at least most of them)? If I would set up a web-accessible cam without password protection, how would google find it? Its a crawler right? It doesnt just searches for random IPs and tries to connect to them. I always was under the assumption that there is a pretty big part of the internet which is just not indexed by the major search engines (thus more or less private).
- 0x0 14y agoGoogle is amazingly good at digging up sites out of nowhere. I wonder if it is a combination of URLs passing through Chrome, GMail, any android phone, and so on. It's always a hassle keeping staging/dev sites out of the index if you're not careful with all the right meta noindex and robots.txt tags. (robots.txt with disallow all, on its own, won't keep sites/URLs from showing up in the results, at best just hide the cached body text summary below the link)
- diminoten 14y ago> I wonder if it is a combination of URLs passing through Chrome, GMail, any android phone, and so on. That would be incredibly alarming, and quite possibly the largest breach of trust perpetrated by a company so far this decade.
- hdevalence 14y agoWhen you type into the chrome omnibox, it sends your keystrokes to Google to give you search suggestions. Just using those would be sufficient, and I don't think they really hide that it's sending your input along. If someone does a Google search for a URL, we expect it to get added to the index; why is it different when the search occurs in the omnibox rather than their web interface?
- diminoten 14y ago
- stickydink 14y agoThis might raise a few eyebrows... http://bit.ly/V4VtJJ http://bit.ly/V4VtJJ
- iging 14y agohttp://dcking.ir/ http://dcking.ir/
- dfamorato 14y agoThere is actually a crawler for "Machines and Devices", such as routers, IP Phones, WebCams, Dell Dracs, HP ILO , VMWARE ESX and so on. http://www.shodanhq.com/browse http://www.shodanhq.com/browse Also, check your server ip on Shodan to see if your firewall rules are not exposing a little to much
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- wyck 14y agoThis was news about 6 years ago.
- brd 14y agoIn school I had done a little research project to see if there were opportunities to map out these cameras and use them for disaster response scenarios. It seemed like a promising approach but I don't believe my prof ever took it past my proof of concept. We were even able to track down some cameras located on campus which made for some hilarious phone calls.
- Ao7bei3s 14y agoHow?
- smallegan 14y agoClearly wasn't made for the frontpage of HN, it'd be nicer if it polled them server side, cached them and then reserved it up refreshing it every so often for the previews.
- franze 14y agook, i just googled https://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3A%22viewerframe%3Fmode%3D%22&pws=0&hl=en https://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3A%22viewerframe%3Fmod... 10 600 results when you click on one result i.e.: 202.212.193.26:555/CgiStart?page=Single&Mode=Motion&Language=0 then you see in the head of the frameset (and similar in every framed html document) <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="none"> <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="noindex,nofollow"> <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="noarchive"> so basically, these HTML abominations should not get indexed if google would follow these indexing directives (basically google invented these meta tags themselves) google is evil? nope - they really follow these directives. so why is this indexed? take a look at http://202.212.193.26:555/robots.txt http://202.212.193.26:555/robots.txt User-Agent: * Disallow: / the robots.txt is a crawling directive, google can't crawl the (current) version of these pages, so google doesn't see the indexing directive. but as crawling is optional for indexing URLs, this gets indexed. how could this be solved, well: either get rid of the robots.txt or User-Agent: * Disallow: / Noindex: / the noindex robots.txt directive is specified nowhere, but it works nonetheless.
- MiguelHudnandez 14y agoCan you elaborate on how crawling is optional for indexing? Isn't crawling a prerequisite to indexing? The only exceptions I can think of are scary, like operating a caching proxy and scraping the cached data. Or scraping data from browsers that have loaded pages by user request.
- nostrademons 14y agoYou can discover a URL through finding a link to it on a publicly-accessible web page, even if crawling that link itself is not possible.
- MiguelHudnandez 14y agoOhh, got it, thank you. So Google is aware that the URL exists, even though they know nothing about the content served at that URL. I am just surprised that a URL with no associated content would be included in the index. But now that I think about it more, why not? It will not show up except in extremely specific searches, and in those cases it is useful to the searcher.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- uptown 14y agoLooks like Heisenberg is ready to cook: http://207.68.47.143:8080/anony/mjpg.cgi http://207.68.47.143:8080/anony/mjpg.cgi
- mr337 14y agoI couldn't agree more
- NathanKP 14y agoWhile we are on the topic of Google indexing things and revealing security holes I think that VoIP devices should also be mentioned. I remember when I was taking a network security class in college the professor was guiding us through the steps required to scan a network for vulnerabilities, specifically detecting services and control panels which are left open and vulnerable. Naturally we were using the college network for this, and in addition to the expected control panels of printers in different professors' offices I accidentally found the control panel for the school VoIP system, and it was not properly secured. I believe it was a Cisco system. Anyway the control panel seemed to offer access to modify various settings of the college VoIP phone system, with no password protection. Now granted it could be that I only had access to this because I was doing the scan from "inside the system" instead of outside via the web, but I'm sure there are vulnerable VoIP systems which have accidentally exposed their control panels to the internet.
- gizmo686 14y ago>Now granted it could be that I only had access to this because I was doing the scan from "inside the system" instead of outside via the web If 'inside the system' means from a University internet connection, that it is very much a security hole, as anyone physiclly present could exploit it. (Or at best any person who the Univeristy allows on their network, which is much larger than the group of people who should be able to touch those settings)
- kvasan 14y agoSo anyone want to take on the challenge of building a "Person of Interest" like system and hook it up to these publicly accessible cams, it would obviously be less early-warning as its fictionally one. Maybe I would try it but I assume the computing resources needed would be large, but wouldn’t a bot-net solve that. Or maybe my first brush of ML experience has left me naive of its capability’s. Of course a 'Global Citizen Operative' would have to take action also, it is not like I proposed a "Global responsive network of autonomous drone to enforce peace and harmony" to would do that instead. Sorry for the up in the clouds comment but the merciless hand of insomnia grabbed me and prompted my mind to wander.