The method, known as EM Eye, can even capture images through walls, raising huge concerns about the potential for misuse.
The research, led by Kevin Fu, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Northeastern University, targets a vulnerability in the data transmission cables within most modern cameras. These cables unintentionally act as radio antennas, leaking electromagnetic information that can be picked up and decoded to reveal real-time video.
As reported by Tech Xplore, the vulnerability exists because manufacturers focus on protecting the intentional digital interfaces of cameras, such as the upload channel to the cloud, but overlook the potential for information leakage through accidental channels. “They never intended for this wire to become a radio transmitter, but it is,” Fu explains. “If you have your lens open, even if you think you have the camera off, we’re collecting.”
Cross post from https://lemmy.world/post/12081766
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.
Removed by mod
This article isn’t about a web exploit, it is a hardware exploit on the camera itself.
Indeed.
But apparently 23 other people are just as fucking clueless about the discussion.
No, 23 other people actually read and understood what I wrote.
It’s okay to not always pick up on nuance and implied relevance, but being rude to the people who do accomplishes nothing good. Next time maybe consider the possibility that they aren’t the clueless ones in the room.
It’s so frustrating that in the modern age instead of people just admitting they misunderstood, they backpedal and obfuscate in a pile of five dollar words claiming that the people calling them out are the actual misunderstanders.
Reeks of maga so now you are banned from my lemmy experience forever.
deleted by creator
Thank god people watching me is my fetish
haha illegal surveillance of innocent civilians is fine! Let’s joke about it!
Seriously?
Take a chill pill, captain
Both of you should keep your snark/quips on reddit and twitter, please
We can quip if we want to, we can joke about our lives, but if the CIA sees when this guy pees, there will be no more laughing tonight
Removed by mod
Punching nazis good but maybe consider you’re just being an asshole, judging from this little interaction already
I have IEDS, it’s medical and largely untreatable.
Fuck your ableist bullshit.
Removed by mod
Now you’re reported.
Edit: Your sockpuppets too, keep it up.
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!
Wow it sure would be nice if people got angry about this world of near universal surveillance instead of just rolling over and coping through jokes.
What great, impactful action are you taking?
Well seeing as I am an IT admin, locking down every IoT device I own, or am professionally responsible for, and educating my friends andfamily as to why and how they should protect themselves.
Also since the late 90s I’ve written well over fifty letters to local politicians about the dangers of poorly protected sensors and cameras.
And I also come into social media forums where people are being absolutely ignorant fucking idiots and waste my time educating a bunch of fools who would rather harass me than acknowledge the orwellian nightmare we are galloping into.
How bout you?
Learning to hunt, fish and forage.
What exactly would you have me do about it?
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…
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.
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.
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.
Putting tape over the microphone doesn’t work very well.
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
The risk of exposure is great enough that if the chances were only 1% it would still be worth minimizing your online profile.
You can choose to wait until it is too late and I will have zero sympathy.
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.
