11 ms·

Ask HN: Is it reasonable to cover your webCam?

• zhte415 12y ago
  I fold a namecard in half and sit it on top. My former corp physically removed all webcams from laptops. I know a lot paranoid about them. Mic too.
• linklet 12y ago
  I saw a product like this once on Shark Tank.
• insteadof 12y ago
  Maybe they're fine using a sticker, a sticky note (or Post-its), or even just with unplugging it if they're using an external webcam.
  • slang800 12y ago
    Using a sticker sounds like a great idea - it would be vastly thinner than any 3d-printed clip, and cheaper too. You might even be able to muffle the mic with one (but I haven't tested that). You could probably even market stickers like that specifically for the purpose of covering cameras. Designed to not leave adhesive behind when removed (like the adhesive on post-its), and perhaps even given a shiny black finish that matches common laptop screen frames. Personally, I've never seen a need for covering my webcam through some combination of just not caring if some remote entity is watching me type, and assuming that the risk of my webcam being activated without the little light going on is pretty low. But, if I was offered a cheap well-designed sticker made for the purpose of covering my webcam I'd probably buy a pack.
    • dredmorbius 12y ago
      This is actually something I might consider. Better: labeling to state that the device is explicitly equipped against unwarranted surveillance. The message of avoiding surveillance might be more useful than the act of frustrating it.
      • slang800 12y ago
        Oh, nice! I was thinking of something that would blend into the frame of the laptop, making itself unnoticable (unlike a post-it note - which would look rather ugly). But having that message would probably appeal even more because at that point it becomes a form of protest rather than just a quiet security measure.
• zevyoura 12y ago
  I never seriously considered it until I saw the IT guy covering his at my last job. I still don't, though, which may be irrational or just lazy.
• toast0 12y ago
  Why would i buy a cover when I have all this electrical tape just sitting around?
  • eddieroger 12y ago
    The old Click and Clack special. Check Engine light got you down? Cover it up!
  • logn 12y ago
    Someone went on Shark Tank with a web cam cover and that was their same reaction too.
  • kijin 12y ago
    The cover, depending on what it's made of, might be less messy (no sticky residue) and more reusable than a strip of electrical tape.
    • dredmorbius 12y ago
      A small bit of paper (I use a Post-It dot) under the tape will protect the lens just fine.
      • SAI_Peregrinus 12y ago
        I have a desktop, so the webcam clips onto the monitor. I just face it out the window at my bird feeder when not in use. Anyone hacking it can watch cute finches.
        • dredmorbius 12y ago
          Mind that depending on whom it is that's controlling the camera, that's still information. Daylight, sunrise/sunset, whether or not you've artificial light on (and hence: may or may not be home), etc. I'd prefer a more robust mode of disabling the camera myself. For an external cam, powering it off would be my first preference.
    • 12y ago
• kefs 12y ago
  Yes. But your product might be less convenient than a post-it note/strip of black electrical tape. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/27/gchq-nsa-webcam-images-internet-yahoo http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/27/gchq-nsa-webcam... http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1z33wx/uk_spy_agency_intercepted_webcam_images_of/ http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1z33wx/uk_spy_age...
• samuellavoie90 12y ago
  Yes, if an hijacker got as far as the webcam, it's safe to assume they have access to everything else in your computer. But most webcams have a light to tell you if its being used, other dangers are keyloggers, and how they can be used to steal credit card information/bank loggin info.
  • dsl 12y ago
    The FBI (and most likely other actors) have the ability to activate a PC or Mac webcam without activating the light. http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/12/how-to-disable-webcam-light-on-windows.html http://blog.erratasec.com/2013/12/how-to-disable-webcam-ligh...
  • nitrogen 12y ago
    But most webcams have a light to tell you if its being used... Lights are frequently software controlled, as implied by the sibling comment to this one.
  • tdicola 12y ago
    It's actually possible to disable the light in a lot of cases, either by patching out the driver code or even reprogramming the camera firmware (in really extreme cases). Lots of info on practical examples from google: https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=disable+webcam+light https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=disable+webcam+light
  • zimbatm 12y ago
    iSeeYou: Disabling the MacBook Webcam Indicator LED - https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/36569/camera.pdf https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2...
• hrrsn 12y ago
  > Even if your device is turned off, even if your device is offline, it is possible for hackers to take your images. Really? Fear-mongering at it's finest. I don't bother with it personally, although I've seen many people that do put a sticker/bit of tape over it. One more thing, your landing page isn't really the best. I like the animation of the product in action, but the Instagram-esque filter doesn't look professional at all. Your first paragraph is a full anchor link, and your other paragraphs are broken at random lines which really kills the reading experience. The photo, which I presume is a webcam shot with the product blocker on, isn't actually described at all.
  • dredmorbius 12y ago
    Really. Remember that a hibernating system is actually in a low power state, but there's still some draw. This means that specific processes might be running. Baseboard / preboot / bootloader and other execution environments, including even running within the firmware of specific peripherals, is a concern I've been aware of since ~2005, from people who are taken exceptionally seriously in the security community. Context was a presentation following an RSA conference and Intel's plans at the time for extensive baseboard/preboot environments (which have largely failed to take hold on consumer hardware, though many/most server systems now have same). Do I think the risk is high? No. But it's nonzero.
    • yepnopemaybe 12y ago
      I have heard various FBI/CIA/NSA whistleblowers talk about this issue, so I don't think that the statement is inflammatory or misleading. Thanks.
    • hrrsn 12y ago
      > Remember that a hibernating system is actually in a low power state Not the original quote. The quote was "even if your device is turned off", which I take to mean 'shutdown -h now'. Nowhere is hibernation mentioned. If your EFI/preboot environment is rooted by a three letter agency you have more problems than someone getting your picture.
• clamprecht 12y ago
  I think it sounds like it has potential. As you can see from some of the comments here, some folks (the HN crowd) say "why do I need your thing when I have a piece of tape that works fine?". Well, these same people have cool stickers on their Macbook Pro, I'll bet. No functional value, but the stickers make a statement - it's fashion. So, if you can make your cam cover something that looks cool or interesting, or maybe something that makes a "statement", then maybe that's how you market it. Make it a conversation piece. Remember those stickers from the 90s, "Big Brother Inside" with the intel look-alike logo? Think along those lines.
  • dredmorbius 12y ago
    Stickers serve the role of readily identifying your laptop. This means if it starts walking, you know it's yours. And the potential walker is likely to realize you'll be able to ID the device quickly.
• glhaynes 12y ago
  I don't really have an opinion on your question, but I'd point out that the relevant question to your business isn't whether it's reasonable for people to cover their camera, but whether you can convince people it's worth purchasing something to use to do so. I could see that being an uphill battle since a Post-It would work, is free, and is less likely to make most feel like they might be judged as a paranoiac ... or conspicuously like they have something sufficiently unusual to hide that they need to purchase something that most people don't. (Not saying that makes logical sense, just that it makes "marketing sense".)
• jrockway 12y ago
  I have a webcam on top of my monitor, but since it blends into the bezel and is mostly outside my field of view, I never think about it and don't care. If I sit in front of a laptop with a black camera against a grey/metal bezel, though, I think about it constantly. Humans. Weird.
• bndw 12y ago
  I toggle executable permissions for the iSight-related drivers
• macNchz 12y ago
  My first two thoughts: 1) Every laptop has a microphone built in that doesn't have an indicator light that you'd have to bypass to surreptitiously record audio. I think that, as far as invasion of privacy/corporate espionage goes, this is scarier than the webcam (which in my case, if someone were to hack it, would be hours of me simply staring into the screen, as my laptop is usually closed when I'm not using it). 2) You should try charging more than $3. To me that's so cheap as to inspire some questions about its quality. At least $5, perhaps $10 would make it seem more legitimate.
  • bellerocky 12y ago
    I use Shush on my mac to toggle the microphone. It may be possible to bypass it, but I doubt it would be. It's on the Mac App Store, by the same people who made Divvy.
    • Volundr 12y ago
      It's unfortunate people are down-voting you without explaining the problem with you comment. Basically, if the CIA/FBI/ABC has sufficient control of your computer that they can enable your mic/webcam remotely, they have more than enough control to do anything you yourself can do on your system (with software). That includes the ability to stop shush or simply toggle it. This is why people are talking about physically covering their web cams. What software can disable, software can enable, so this problem can't be solved by software. No about of FBI software can give your camera the ability to see through solid objects however.
• zobzu 12y ago
  A lot of webcams have a hardware LED (ie when the camera the powered the LED goes on because on the current path). Some have it software controlled (either firmware or driver). The first ones are pretty safe since you know when they're in use and the notification is mostly unbypassable. The other thing is that one rarely get interesting data through the webcam thus access to the webcam is generally no something people are looking for when running large scale attacks (for targetted attacks this is different). Also... a piece of tape is nicer, lighter, more convenient and infinitely cheaper than a 3d printed shape :/
  • bellerocky 12y ago
    The LED doesn't help with snapshots though. The light would come one and go off pretty quickly and you'd have to be looking at it to notice.
    • dredmorbius 12y ago
      Blinking lights tend to attract attention faster than static ones. It's a bit of a wash.
    • Houshalter 12y ago
      It should be on a timer so it stays on for n seconds after being turned off.
  • mherdeg 12y ago
    I wonder whether the FBI bypasses hardware interlocks. Presumably no. The Washington Post reported in December 2013 that : ""The FBI has been able to covertly activate a computer’s camera — without triggering the light that lets users know it is recording — for several years, and has used that technique mainly in terrorism cases or the most serious criminal investigations, said Marcus Thomas, former assistant director of the FBI’s Operational Technology Division in Quantico, now on the advisory board of Subsentio, a firm that helps telecommunications carriers comply with federal wiretap statutes. "" Good times. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/2013/12/06/352ba174-5397-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/2013/12/06...
• eudox 12y ago
  Who in his right mind would actually buy a webcam cover? Just find a piece of paper and fold it over. Good Christ.
• Mandatum 12y ago
  Very cool, is there options to scale sizing? My webcam is external and I doubt this would suit it. However if it was scaled 2x or even 3x the size, it'd fit perfectly on it.
• steven2012 12y ago
  I cover mine with a post-it note, as do my coworkers. Sorry, but a 3d-printed cover is cmopletely unnecessary.
• masto 12y ago
  I'd be much more concerned about the microphone than the webcam.
• dredmorbius 12y ago
  Your problem isn't that covering your WebCam isn't a good idea (it is). It's that there's little market for a solution -- electrical, scotch, gaffer, duct, or other tape works just fine. A small scrap of paper or Post-It will keep adhesive from marring the lens. That's a $0.01 solution I doubt you could ever hope to compete with (though I hear suckers are born on an aggressive schedule). That said, from a design perspective, I'd very much prefer that devices (laptops, desktops, tablets, phones, monitors, etc.) offered: 1. Hardware indicators of activation of media inputs: camera, microphones, etc. 2. Physical covers or switches to activate/deactivate these. My Thinkpad has a physical switch to activate the WiFi transmitter, but there's no shutter for the camera (I've seen slider doors on some devices), nor can the mic circuits be toggled by a physical control (though I can set my mixer settings via software). Edit: But see comments elsewhere: stickers which explicitly convey a message about security/privacy and cover lenses could be an interesting angle. Much lower cost, fad/awareness appeal. Possibly even a tie-in with privacy groups (e.g., EFF, etc.). Good schwag.
  • userbinator 12y ago
    The WiFi switch on the Thinkpads is not a "hard on/off" that switches power like you think; it's actually just a signal that the processor in the card can ignore if it wants to. On the topic of webcam covering: I agree with others that a separate cover is overly complex of a solution for such a simple problem: a sticker or other opaque material will suffice to block the lens effectively on computers that have integrated non-removable cameras. For a removable webcam, the simplest and safest solution is to unplug it, or if that is inconvenient, aim it at something of little interest like a blank wall.
  • model-m 12y ago
    Funny, I was thinking exactly the same thing this afternoon. The absence of physical switches for wifi/microphone/camera is probably due to a mix of lowering manufacturing cost and cutting on "my computer no work" maintenance calls, but I really would feel somewhat safer if I had them. Fun fact: when I bought a hard drive for my computer (one of those old MFM 20 MB drives, it was the late eighties), I found it very noisy. The hard drive was internal, so I engineered a physical on-off switch by routing its power input through the otherwise unused turbo switch (remember those?) that was on my computer case. When I wanted to write in peace, I would turn the drive off, before turning the computer on, and boot from a floppy disk. I just had to be careful not to turn the drive off when it was already spinning, and I never did.
• preinheimer 12y ago
  If I was in the market for a product, I'd buy mine from the EFF. Simple sticker covers the camera, and supports a good group. https://supporters.eff.org/shop/laptop-camera-cover-set https://supporters.eff.org/shop/laptop-camera-cover-set So there's some competition in the space.
  • goblin89 12y ago
    > If I was in the market for a product, I'd buy mine from the EFF. Simple sticker covers the camera, and supports a good group. So the market's valid, which is good. ;) Perhaps there's a place for something less disposable? Once OP's product becomes popular it would help EFF more in the long run, too—raising public awareness about potential privacy issues with personal tech.
• techman9 12y ago
  no
• Yardlink 12y ago
  You might find a market with those who use it daily and don't want to be always cutting off new bits of tape and making a growing glue mess. For example foreign students from Asia calling their parents (they all do this and they do it every day), long distance relationships, etc. People who almost never use their webcam would probably prefer a sticker.
• adrianh 12y ago
  The EFF gives out stickers for this purpose to its donors. You might want to contact them and offer your thing (though I agree with other comments that you're making a solution to a problem that's solved more easily and cheaply in other ways).
• agarden 12y ago
  I stuck some Velcro on my laptop to create a removable, reusable cover. Your product looks much nicer. Most people don't seem to care about this. Your job is not to convince everyone that they should, but to get your product in front of the people who already do.
  • yepnopemaybe 12y ago
    Thanks, I think that is wise. It is a very difficult target to isolate in adwords and facebook, but I live and learn.
• MichaelAO 12y ago
  Anecdotal evidence: I came across an article that showed Martin Muench (Founder of Finfisher) with his laptop camera covered. Source: http://www.ringit.com.au/blog/taping-over-prying-eyes-of-web-spies/ http://www.ringit.com.au/blog/taping-over-prying-eyes-of-web...
• Paul_Dessert 12y ago
  I had the same idea a while back. I bought the domain webcamcovers.com. After researching the market for a bit, I came to the realization that people didn't really see the need. Those that understand the potential risk (the HN crowd) choose to use a post-it or tape. Everyone else doesn't give a shit. I did find there was a potential market. For the domain name. I sold it for a few hundred dollars. So, I've got that going for me ;)
• andrewchambers 12y ago
  If someone has unrestricted access to your PC webcam, they probably have unrestricted access to all of your PC. You already will be keylogged, and risk losing usernames and passwords. This is already probably a lot worse than a few photos of yourself staring at a screen being leaked.
  • yepnopemaybe 12y ago
    I would tend to agree with that, except that I imagine that in many corporate environments, important files are protected so that general access to native files would be a smaller concern. Is that right?
  • mcintyre1994 12y ago
    You could get access to a webcam without that access though, with malicious software. I've seen links to sites where you can access unknowing people's webcams and obviously law enforcement have this ability too. I guess it's apples and oranges really - it'd be much worse to have someone with unrestricted PC access, but if someone were physically where your webcam is you might be less likely to compromise yourself.
    • hrrsn 12y ago
      I'm pretty sure the sites you're thinking of are open IP cameras, not behind firewalls rather than rooted machines. I know Flash has always required confirmation for webcam/microphone, whereas a local app doesn't need these permissions (excluding the possibility of a flash exploit).
• xanth 12y ago
  IMO If 'they' are covertly using your webcam you have bigger problems than them catching a glimpse of your naked arse.
• model-m 12y ago
  I tend to worry more about microphones, for which there is seldom an indicator light, and which cannot be shut down by a piece of tape, than cameras. Cameras are visible and you need to be in front of them. Microphones are sneakier and one microphone can record a lot of people at once. Many security cameras (e.g. in public transport) now have the capability to record sound as well as video.
  • jimhefferon 12y ago
    Are laptops with microphone hardware switches available?
• rusew 12y ago
  The idea and product are sound – your device seems to have a clear advantage over duck tape and stickers. However, your site looks like a blog post. Use less copy (like 90% less). The Gif is good. Make it larger and front and center. Make your value proposition in one short sentence in a bold header. Also, I wonder if my laptop would still close if this were on it. You might want to address that somewhere...
• jacquesm 12y ago
  I'd be more worried about my microphone than about my camera.
  • ChrisAntaki 12y ago
    Seriously. One solution would be removing a laptops internal microphone, and plugging in a USB mic as needed.
• thegrif 12y ago
  Those smart enough to realize that integrated webcams pose a security risk are pragmatic enough to just use a sticker. That said, I think your design is a good one - and doesn't detract too much from the aesthetics of the device.
• loupereira 12y ago
  I am currently developing a software solution for this called Webcam Blocker Pro. It's ideal for parents who wish to prevent their children from using the webcam and microphone without their supervision. Once the program is locked, it essentially prevents anyone from using any webcam or microphone attached to the computer, including malware or hackers, unless they have the password.
  • ChrisAntaki 12y ago
    The idea sounds great, but in practice, how will a software implementation compete with the malware, assuming it too gets root access? If you wanted to make a hardware based kill switch, that would be interesting.
    • loupereira 12y ago
      It's called fighting malware with malware logic. I will make the program available to the HN community for free once it's released and put it to the test.
• ChrisAntaki 12y ago
  Newegg offers USB hubs with individual on/off switches for $6. If someone wanted to 3D print an artistic enclosure for that, to the point where it felt like a nice addition to the desk, that might have a market amongst the security conscious.