I think it is funny to see how polarizing it is to cover a camera!
People who are against covering cameras are also the ones who give away everything, to whomever, and just believe the world is this big fluffy magical place. And they download every "free" app anyone asks them to download. Its all so exciting! People are so into.free apps that it is a challenge to find paid apps...and everyone should know that nothing is free.
People who cover their cameras are aware of all the schemes to get data from users, amongst other schemes, and are reluctant to install free apps from unknown creators. They know that there are always "bad actors" coming up with schemes.
Funny story about how my company recommended that everyone download a certain popular free productivity app. Then there was the "oh my god the servers just crashed" moment that happened, due to some malware. Shortly thereafter, everyone was told to immediately delete that particular app, because it is full of trojans and could crash our servers. And btw, maybe we should ask our IT dept before we recommend an app again.
So yeah, IT people will have PTSD from reading this thread. Just sayin....
Well, maybe people fall into these neat categories, but maybe not.
I think (because I can't know with certainty) that a fair number of people are concerned about cameras spying on them but are not necessarily concerned about data security. Different people are concerned about different risks. The idea that someone may be looking through your window (fear of "Peeping Toms") long pre-dates webcams. Stories like this feed that particular concern.
There are probably huge numbers of people who fear cyber-snooping who have absolutely no concept of technology. They read clickbait and fall for it hook, line, and sinker. So I wouldn't assume that people exhibiting "concerned" behaviors are automatically knowledgable.
In my experience there are many people who believe that "hacking" means a person (or more than one person) is
actively watching what they do - someone sitting at a computer all day long, watching what happens on their computer screens (and/or their webcams). Every instance of something unexpected happening while they use their computer is evidence that someone is reaching into their computer and controlling it. As if some anonymous member of the masses is of such interest to someone else that full-time surveillance/interference is a reasonable expectation.
Overall, which is the greater risk to security, a rogue app that opens your webcam, or a rogue app that searches your HD for useful data?
Even if done in an automated fashion, those surreptitious still photos or video clips would have to be analyzed for their content - that takes a whole lot of computing power and even afterwards would require human intervention to be sure of what was captured. On the other hand, automated analysis of text-based data is child's play. So, which risk ought people to be most concerned about?
As far as "cybersecurity experts" blocking their webcams? It can be proof of bowing to their social/business environment, rather than a careful assessment of the current risk. Management is going to mandate an excess of caution, "Just in case." Taping over a camera is an easy way to demonstrate your awareness of potential risks.
There's always going to be a cat-and-mouse game when it comes to security flaws. Flaws are uncovered, flaws are patched. Using a 5-year-old (or older incident) to prove something is possible
today is pointless. The past is the past, unless you're using older hardware and older software that still possesses that flaw.
As far as I'm concerned, the only significant risk of an uncovered camera (for those whose profession does not make them an active espionage target) is the user accidentally opening the camera - placing a FaceTime video call instead opening an iMessage chat, or entering a video conference and enabling (rather than disabling) their personal video. In my experience, all "modern" video conferencing apps (Zoom, etc.) default to camera-off when someone joins the conference. But accidents do happen, and with so much more video conferencing going on these days, the odds of such an accident happening have gone up. Still, "Turn off your microphone when you're not speaking" is by far the bigger problem in the conferences I attend.
And for the person who mentioned that he attended a briefing at a company whose name begins with an "A" and had his smartphone cameras taped-over by company representatives... they weren't worried about spyware operating those cameras, they were worried about the attendees themselves taking photos.
