I think it needs to be said that some people place covers on the cameras not out of paranoia or security concerns, but rather that they might inadvertently activate the camera themselves when it is not desired.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I thought this was common knowledge... simple, cheap, and yes, you can change colors.
Although for my work laptop, I now have a neat sliding camera cover that I got as part of a swag bag. I liked their company logo so I used it. If it wasn't for that it would be a little square of a post-it note. I'm concerned with spying at work because that's what companies do.
If someone manages to get my personal laptop or MBP to turn on, they won't see anything more than various faces of emotion and the occasional picking of teeth. Can't tell what turns people on these days.
These words are meaningless where computers, software, or people are involved.
How about a physical switch to turn off the camera and mic?
Apple this month published a support document that warns customers against closing their Mac notebooks with a cover over the camera as it can lead to display damage.
Apple says that the clearance between the display and the keyboard is designed to very tight tolerances, which can be problematic. Covering the camera can also cause issues with automatic brightness and True Tone.The warnings from Apple likely stem from complaints from MacBook Pro owners who have seen their displays crack after covering the camera, and there are multiple reports and warnings on sites that include MacRumors and Reddit. The issue appears to be especially bad with the new 16-inch MacBook Pro models that have thinner bezels.
MacRumors forum member Dashwin, for example, put a webcam cover on his 16-inch MacBook Pro in April and the result was a crack in the display under where the camera is located.Damage from applying a webcam cover to the camera is considered accidental and can be repaired under AppleCare+, but it's quite possible it's an issue that Apple won't fix for customers that don't have AppleCare+, and it's an expensive fix.
Apple says that customers concerned about illicit camera access should watch for the green light that comes on when the camera is activated. The camera is engineered so that it can't be accessed without the indicator light turning on.
MacBook owners can also control which apps have access to the built-in camera as users must grant permission for camera use on any operating system after macOS Mojave. For those who do need to cover the camera, Apple recommends a camera cover that's not thicker than the average piece of printer paper (0.1mm) and that does not leave adhesive residue.
Article Link: Apple Warns Against Closing MacBooks With a Cover Over the Camera
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....
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....
Ok let me give you some actual brilliant ides $0.10 Physical cover Built into laptop. business card folded over cover. Tape over camera. Have I earned my millions in CEO compensation?
There's an important distinction that needs to be made. A cover on the camera prevents viewing regardless of the green light for the camera being on or off. If I'm not looking at my MacBook and the camera shows green, then I'm visible. If I'm looking at my MacBook and the camera shows green, then I'm visible.
[automerge]1594431399[/automerge]
I spend far more time walking around a room that my laptop has visibility of as well as sitting in front of my MacBook than I do my iPhone. I don't spend 12+ hours a day working off an iPhone. Do you?
Apple was caught and fined for using Siri to spy on people in Europe, just in case you did not know.
Because he's a former head of the FBI, whose data bad people are actually interested in, and not some random dude with a MacBook who nobody gives jack **** about. He probably has a security detail and an armoured car, should we all have that as well?
Long time InfoSec guy here. Its funny and sad reading how many people have a false sense of security when it comes to especially their Macs.
the only reason there is less malware that attack macs is because there is little incentive to do so. 5% of worldwide endpoints.
dont be fooled into thinking OSx is any safer than Windows.Code is code.Vulnerabilities exist on both sides of the fence.
I recommend blocking your cam.
the only reason there is less malware that attack macs is because there is little incentive to do so. 5% of worldwide endpoints.
dont be fooled into thinking OSx is any safer than Windows.Code is code.Vulnerabilities exist on both sides of the fence.
I recommend blocking your cam.
The green light is not helpful. What if you are not facing the laptop? Say, you are changing in your room and have left the laptop open.
Also, is it hardwired into the camera or can a hacker use the cam without activating the green light?
In any event, I think Apple should make computers with a small enough space to put a little sticker. It's so common these days. I don't want them to say again "You're using it wrong".
Also, is it hardwired into the camera or can a hacker use the cam without activating the green light?
In any event, I think Apple should make computers with a small enough space to put a little sticker. It's so common these days. I don't want them to say again "You're using it wrong".
Yes, because iPads have cameras on them.
Single shutter clicks aren't going to light that LED long enough for you to see it.
Then I'm consistent. And yes, the mics are a big danger.
Its literally not known to have been hacked. Thats not the same as it never happening. There's a certain infosec company in the middle east that has accomplished some unbelievable things against Apple's amazing security. I think it'd be a safe bet to say they got right on this little challenge.
Yep. The Librem phone, for example, makes hardware camera and mic switches a selling point. And people are buying the phone, despite it being a couple years behind, technology-wise. I'd say Apple could grab some market share by doing it as well. Of course, China will not be happy.
I'm sure you don't have drapes and/or blinds in your home then.
I saw many posts in this same train of thought: my life is boring, I have nothing to hide, if they want to watch go right ahead and waste your time. I just picked these two as representative posts, and I'm certainly not calling you two guys out over anyone else.
People with this mindset look at the most shallow situations here. You're right, "they" simply don't care about you picking your noses or playing with yourselves. They don't care if you've shaved, if you're doing your work-from-home in your sweaty bunny suit, or if you're smoking a big fat blunt while your at your keyboard. But, I just want you to consider something...
It was just twenty years ago that zombie botnets became a thing. Background processes on peoples' computers were hijacked, bots were installed in root, and distributed attacks from compromised machines became commonplace while the machine owners were none the wiser. Banks were hacked, utilities were disrupted, pranks were played. Money was also wasted, as well as taken.
Now, I'm pretty sure of two things :
1). Most if not all of the affected people had absolutely no intention of participating in criminal activity, and
2). Criminal activity did occur, to the tune of billions of dollars over time.
Those same criminal types who had no trouble gaining access to private citizens' computers to plant bots, and able to generate billions of dollars in damage as well as profit in theft - what could those kind of people do with access to a camera? Plenty of still frames of peoples' faces taken over days, weeks, months, in various lighting situations. The mics? Sample those voices under a wide range of circumstances, stresses, and seasons. Put it together with criminal intent and what do you get?
The word "deepfake" comes to mind.
Do you think ransomware is bad? Thats just a bank account being held, or a business site blocked. See how it goes when your very life is held for ransom. Most people who don't care about those cameras and mics also glibly post all the details of their daily lives on social media feeds. What would prevent someone from doing a perfect deepfake of you - voice as well as face - committing a crime, along with an incredible amount of evidence that dovetails into your media posts. A malicious party could wield such a fake to take you for everything you own with no fear of retribution. Or they could simply frame you for their crimes by adjusting the evidence to fit your life and placing you deep in the middle of those criminal activities.
This doesn't even hold a candle to the potential harm that could arise from our government adopting a social credit score like China has in place, and the deep fake being used as one tool to administer it. If you think it won't happen here, sorry to tell you it already has started in the private sector. VISA has begun blacklisting people who hold outspoken conservative views as of June of this year. How long until the government does it?
So when people say to me "what do you have to hide?" I say, "My life".
Whats even more amazing is how many people have become aware of the dangers these technologies represent, and are actually taking action instead of just saying "oh well, green light isn't on, I'm safe".
I have to wonder - does Apple make a separate version of the MBP for the Chinese market, to satisfy the CCCP requirements for total intrusiveness? Or do they just have that ol' T2 switch disabled on Chinese market laptops?
So you think. Wait and see.
Unless they changed something this is not correct. While the green light is tied to the sensor in firmware, it is not a hardware interconnect. So if malware decides it is worth turning on the camera without the light, that will become part of the off the shelf attacks.
[automerge]1594438326[/automerge]
Eyebloc Webcam Cover for All... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B088YW4WVN?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share
for anyone interested, this is ultra thin, will not scratch the screen, and does not block the ambient light sensor.
After using an older model from another computer, I quickly notified my touchbar was perpetually dimmed. This avoids that issue.
It is more expensive than I think it should be, but the least intrusive solution I have seen.
p.s. I have used both post-it and tape before. The down sides for those options that they do not hold up to frequent changes and will eventually leave a film on the glass/camera that is annoying to clean.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
2 reasons to be paranoid: 1. Your up to some **** you don’t want the world to know about. 2. You aren’t on MacOS.
Being on MacOS doesn't make you safer and in some cases worse such as this exploit through Safari that achieved kernel-level execution and highest prize money.
https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/blog/2020/3/19/pwn2own-2020-day-one-results
I’m pretty sure the led is hardwired to have to be physically on for the camera to be receiving power.
Webcams have been built into our Macs for the last 15 years. I can think of one single story about a camera being accessed without the user's knowledge, and that was on an iPhone, whose obscure bug was quickly patched up. Also notable that the iPhone does not have the green LED that is hard-coded to turn on.
I'll worry about covering it up when someone gives me a reason to worry about it.
I'll worry about covering it up when someone gives me a reason to worry about it.
If you're so paranoid, why not just close your laptop while not in use? -- Even campy, corny, B horror movies mock this. Seriously. As stated by many, what do they see while you're working? Your face, you walking around, eating cereal, etc. And those bridging the argument to an iMac... Fine, cover it. However, that example is not relevant to the article as the primary point of the article is advising possible Mac damage by covering the camera and that (beyond adhesive) wouldn't damage an iMac.
If someone has breached your system, whether by you allowing it via software download or not, don't you think there's much more to worry about than them accessing the camera?
To those covering their camera because they're worried about Zoom or some other video communication app will activate the camera before or when they aren't expecting, I say, be more observant of settings, dialogs, app behaviors, and so on. Covering a webcam lens (to me) is like adding very plush padding to a staircase because you frequently slip and slide or tumble down due to careless stepping on your way down.
Lastly...
Unless you're a person with a lot of authority or fame, such as a system admin, thieves do bulk attacks, the broader the better. There aren't dumpster divers, there are credit card reader skimmers. Phishing far outweighs direct attacks. Searches for insecure databases, including clones, rather than brute-forcing single accounts. The same focus on 'weight' goes for law enforcement against criminals. You use resources on targets with the potentially biggest return. It's simple logic. Basically, you're much more likely to unsuspecting hand over sensitive information via a clever scheme than someone forcibly taking it from you, and that's often preventable with observation and moderate caution.
If someone has breached your system, whether by you allowing it via software download or not, don't you think there's much more to worry about than them accessing the camera?
To those covering their camera because they're worried about Zoom or some other video communication app will activate the camera before or when they aren't expecting, I say, be more observant of settings, dialogs, app behaviors, and so on. Covering a webcam lens (to me) is like adding very plush padding to a staircase because you frequently slip and slide or tumble down due to careless stepping on your way down.
Lastly...
Unless you're a person with a lot of authority or fame, such as a system admin, thieves do bulk attacks, the broader the better. There aren't dumpster divers, there are credit card reader skimmers. Phishing far outweighs direct attacks. Searches for insecure databases, including clones, rather than brute-forcing single accounts. The same focus on 'weight' goes for law enforcement against criminals. You use resources on targets with the potentially biggest return. It's simple logic. Basically, you're much more likely to unsuspecting hand over sensitive information via a clever scheme than someone forcibly taking it from you, and that's often preventable with observation and moderate caution.
Last edited: