Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
The next paragraph is also worth highlighting (emphasis added).
The EM Eye method has been tested on 12 different types of cameras, including those found in smartphones, dash cams, and home security systems. The distance required to eavesdrop varies, but in some cases, it can be done from as far as 16 feet away.
Yeah, and how big are the recording antennae?
Guy sitting 2 tables over:
I posted this in another thread originally:
Actual Paper, images on page 10 On the top of Page 10 are example shots, ground truth is original image, sota means the captured feed, EM Eye is the feed with their post-processing (aka “Enhance”). The lengths on top are how long the cable you are snooping on is (ie a cell phone’s cable is only gonna be a few cm, a laptop is probably at the 15cm mark), and how far away you are (Those last pics at 300cm(3m) would be under 10ft). It is definitely impressive but this is up there with stealing passwords from keyboard clicks, you usually have somewhat of an advanced threat in mind to think someone might use this against you.
manufacturers focus on protecting the intentional digital interfaces of cameras, such as the upload channel to the cloud
I think even that is giving them too much credit. Like most "internet of things" devices, cameras that upload to the cloud are generally awful at security and privacy.
The S in IoT is for Security.
This isn't cloud/online vulnerability. It's physical due to a wire in cameras (smartphone, home security, dashcam, etc) that send out radio signals.
It's all in the article.
Parent commenter said that IOT devices are vulnerable in areas that manufacturers do focus on, in addition to areas they don't. They didn't deny or misunderstand the subject of the article.
Wow, we've actually reached the point of Van Eck Phreaking. Time to switch to Memexes!
Is that a reference to Angleton?
Well... I guess if this is our brave new world, I hope the people spying on me find my life as boring as I do.
Cool, I've been looking for some relatable TV!
Are there people who don’t put tape over their cameras??
I actually use the cameras on pretty much all my devices, so disabling them would be a problem.
You don't need to disable them, just get or make removable covers. When you want to film, slip off the camera cover.
The article includes dashcams and home security cameras, I definitely cover those with tape.
No, unless you're actually somebody important, it's incredibly unlikely something like this is going to be used against you. So those covers are just more annoying than anything.
It takes no effort to do so and a lot of laptops even come with camera cover switches built in.
It does take a little effort at a minimum, however, when compared to the relative real world risk it's purely wasted. Unless of course, you're a politician or maybe important executive for a major company.
Keep your shit updated, ad blocking and no installing shady shit will lockout the lowest common denominator "hackers" (AKA script kiddies). All those scary articles about super advanced techniques? Yea, hackers with real skills can implement them and do some wicked shit, but they DGAF about Joe Schmo's jack off session, they're doing shit like targeting companies, politicians, celebrities etc things that can get them $$$$
It's pointless, it's security theater that you've imposed on yourself and yet I'm sure you've complained about the pointless and annoying TSA as security theater...
Oh so you're pulling the "I have nothing to hide because I'm just a normal boring person" argument. Guess you need a physical person stalking you for you to understand.
You're having the same mistake as the people who say "it doesn't matter because I got nothing to hide."
The point of privacy is that you have control over what you want to share with others vs what you prefer to keep to yourself, be it for legal, religious or personal reasons.
It's pretty disgusting how many people in this tread are actively promoting weak digital security practices with laziness as the justification and how little you actually understand about data theft.
Nice try, NSA!
Almost no one even understands how to take digital security seriously, and get angry when you try to help them.
I mean just look at your up/dowvote ratio.
Full disclosure: Am an IT professional with 3 decades of experience. Every camera device I have has a cover, either that came with the device, or one that I made.
Remember that huge fiasco with the schools that were spying on kids bedrooms at night?
Yeah, that tells you all you need to know about how trustworthy any camera is.
well, if you want to see my ugly ass on the shitter or digging my nose without consent that much, joke's on you, i guess
How fucking naive
is it tho. if your phones cams are not coincidentally covered by tables or the fabric of your pocket, where are they pointing, genius?
for most regular people, like me, covering them is pointless. the security measures in place are not perfect, but sufficient. someone who goes over the top to circumvent them will find he just gets to see a regular person doing regular things.
There is a significant possibility that within the next 10 years any western nation can go full authoritarian.
You will laugh naively and say that it won't happen. And it is because of sentiments like this that we have a twice impeached fascist who idolizes shitler on the ballot for president later this year.
So can you imagine your country, with an authoritarian government in power with the ability to spy on literally every citizen?
Can you imagine that authoritarian government 'disappearing' dissidents based on their social media participation?
If you can answer yes to this, then you understand why it is CRITICAL to control every aspect of your identity exposure?
My phones front and back cams are covered with a clip until I want to use them. And that's not even the beginning of what I do to limit my online profile.
you're talking about the problems of a possible future, but taking non-preventative measures against it right now that are useless (for me and other regular people) right now.
if the dark future you're describing becomes reality, i will gladly put a sticker on my phones cam, so the spy in the hallway can't see your chin when you sit near my coffee table
Putting tape over the microphone doesn't work very well.
Which fast and furious plot line was this again?
I need the frequency for that. And a transmitter that can play Rock Astley.
in some cases, it can be done from as far as 16 feet away
Because the wire acts as a radio transmitter, not a cable.
Yeah, my point is just that you'll have to be pretty close to do it, we're not talking "van on the street can see your laptop webcam". Up to 16 feet is probably in ideal conditions (long enough wire, no walls). Anyone doing this is going to be close enough for you to notice them doing it.
Not necessarily. Running a cable through electrical sockets in to a wall will often put someone in the next room well within 16 ft of your smartphone or home security camera.
This attack is against the communication between the image sensor and the device's controller, not the run between a security camera and DVR.
Unless you mean that someone could sneak a sniffer into your walls, which I suppose is possible for cameras with high leakage, but for smartphones, the paper says "smartphone camera emissions only allow adversaries to eavesdrop from a close distance", in their experiment this being on the order of inches.