Cross-posted to: https://sh.itjust.works/post/15859195
From other conversations that I’ve read through, people usually say “Yes, because it’s easy on Windows”, or “Yes, because they simply don’t trust the webcam”. But neither of these arguments are enough for me. The former I feel is irrelevent when one is talking about Linux, and the latter is just doing something for the sake of doing it which is not exactly a rational argument.
Specifically for Linux (although, I suppose this partially also depends on the distro, and, of course, vulnerabilites in whatever software that you might be using), how vulnerable is the device to having its webcam exploited? If you trust the software that you have running on your computer, and you utilize firewalls (application layer, network layer, etc.), you should be resistant to such types of exploits, no? A parallel question would also be: How vulnerable is a Linux device if you don’t take extra precautions like firewalls.
If this is the case, what makes Windows so much more vulnerable?
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.96K Posts
- 74.6K Comments
- Modlog
It’s better to be proactive than being reactive. Take preventive measures that fit your threat model.
Most malware is writen for Windows, but Linux malware exists, and has been found in the wild. The most common infection method, like with windows is running a trojan, theoretically things like browser exploits could also be used, but these are unlikely unless you are a high profile target like a head of state or CEO.
I would personaly be much more worried about someone evesdropping through my microphone. All they would get from my camera is my face and some glances of the room my computer is in, but my microphone would reveal all sorts of private conversations.
What the hell. They are same vulnerable.
The thing about exploits is that they can exist without there being a wider knowledge of them; that’s the nature of the beast. So I play it safe.
Plus, for 5 cents’ worth of masking tape you’ve solved the problem, so why bother even thinking about it.
One of the key tenets of keeping something computerised secure is ‘Defence in Depth’ - i.e. having multiple layers of defence, so that even if one layer is breached, the next layer (which you thought was redundant and unnecessary) prevents the attack.
Running a fully patched kernel and services / applications should protect you unless someone has a 0-day (i.e. not disclosed) exploit. Reducing the surface area by minimising what services / applications are running, using software (firejail etc…) and firewalls to limit permissions of applications / services to what is needed, etc… serves as another layer of defence. Disconnecting or physically blocking peripherals that might allow for spying is another layer; it serves its purpose if all the other layers are breached.
It is. I run a virtual camera for blurred backgrounds that logs when clients connect and noticed one of my web conferencing type apps like to take a photo ever second. Haven’t taken time to investigate which (likely candidates: slack, zoom, webex, discord).
My take: if your camera is spying on you, there is a big chance that your entire device has been compromised. Ig that happens, it’s game over and me masturbating to bdsm furry porn is the least of my problems. Especially now that AI video exists anyway.
It’s all about reducing the surface area for an attack — if you do become compromised, it’s one less thing to have to worry aobut. It would be preferable to not have to worry about your data and someone bribing you with some video footage.
Linux is not magically more resilient than Windows. If an exploit on windows exists, a similar exploit could also exist on Linux.
You can’t hack a piece of electrical tape. But there are classier webcam covers which you can slide to close available for sale.
removed by mod
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=OhHnBYZINzc&t=15
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I never really understood the obsession to cover cameras. While yes you don’t want someone to hack it and yes I do cover mine. What are they going to do? Watch you fap? I really don’t care. I personally am much more concerned with the mic. I would hate for someone to record me saying something well not so pleasant. You can use your imagination. I rarely see people mention the mic. I see it mentioned a few times here but not much. I much rather have a kill switch for my mic.
That’s a rather self-centered statement, imo. Just because you may not be bothered by the idea, does not mean that it does not have merit for others. That line of thinking is in a similar vein to saying “We don’t need freedom of speech because I have nothing to say.”.
Well? We’re waiting for the first lemmy fap video. Go on, OP.
Cool, then respond to this post with a video of you masturbating. It would be helpful to the scenario to include your full birth name, address, and employer, since that is the scenario that folks who would be blackmailed would be facing.
Since you really don’t care.
It is possible that you mean what you say, but I believe its more likely you lack imagination to what impact the above scenario would actually feel like once you’re in it.
That silly proposition aside, I agree with you about the microphone killswitch. Certainly overlooked.
So sending a video of you fapping to your employer and family isn’t a problem? It still wouldn’t be a problem if you were a teenager or a young adult at the beginning of their career?
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
If you use Qubes then USB devices and mics are by default not attached to any VMs.
This question really begs the point that cam and mic need kill switches that physically disconnect these things with a simple switch.
One of you go make a wall mounted light switch thing with a red LED for Workstations and sell it – I could see this becoming standard.
Laptop world is going to take more inroads from slacker hackers scratching their own itch.
deleted by creator
just buy a little stick-on privacy slider. They’re like 3 for $10
these sliders are very thin, but not thin enough. neither of my laptops close correctly with one equipped. :(
Ah well. Masking tape suffices.
yeah for my macbook, i use gaffer’s tape.
If I had a nickel for every time I bought a privacy slider for a laptop that already had one, or one with a hard-to-notice hardware switch. I would have 2 nickels which isn’t a lot but it’s weird it happened twice.
The device is vulnerable. The webcam is one way that gets exploited.
If it makes you feel safer, cover the camera when you’re not using it. I can’t comprehend why a person wouldn’t cover it up when it’s not in use. It takes one second.
Stay patched up.
Wash your cyber hands, use good quality, cyber soap, cyber shower regularly 👌
It’s really cool how a lot of Laptops nowadays (including mine) have a feature built-in that covers and disables the webcam with a button press. I can have it disabled most of the time and when I need it, I just press the button to enable it.