New macOS 'Compatibility Mode' Options Let Developers Decide How Fullscreen Apps Handle the Notch

[svenmany]

To be extra clear, I’m not talking about the screen, I’m talking about the bright green LED indicator that is hard-wired to activate whenever the camera is on.

Others on this thread have said it is signed firmware that controls that activation. You are asserting that there is no programmable aspect to it; it's just circuitry. I do wonder which is correct.

 

[TrapDoorSpider]

So that’s a no, then, on you having any source for someone being able to hack your MacBook webcam and turn it on without the warning LED lighting up and alerting you it’s on?

Because it’s wired that way? And no amount of “hacking” can physically disconnect the power to the warning LED if the camera’s on?

Which is what I said from the very beginning: if the camera is on, the LED is on. There’s no way around it, so if a hacker turns your camera on, you’ll know it the instant you look at your computer, making taping over your webcam both silly and pointless.

Edit: okay, wow, I just realized you are confusing the LCD (screen) with the LED (the bright light that turns on whenever a Mac’s camera is active). I wondered why you were randomly talking about some hacker dimming your screen.

To be extra clear, I’m not talking about the screen, I’m talking about the bright green LED indicator that is hard-wired to activate whenever the camera is on.

The cameras have been hacked before (Google it), and the tiny green indicator is useless unless you notice it on. Also, have you never had the camera activate (such as when Zoom launched), taking you by surprise? This happens all the time! I bet Toobin wished he had a $4 latch over his webcam before he brought out the lotion bottle.

The purpose for the cover may not even be exclusively because of hacks in the first place. Someone may just not want any hope of the thing ever turning on inadvertently. And peace of mind is a big thing with people. Take the door lock most people use that can be busted or picked in a split second to the demise of the occupants inside. I don’t get how you can’t see all of this in your quest to make a fool out of other people.

If people don’t want any potentiality for their webcam to be hacked, or feel more comfortable with it covered, even in spite of a hack or accidental activation, leave them be. I don’t particularly love the exposed camera myself, even on the iPhone; it’s a convenience to me but a point of occasional concern/discomfort because I didn’t design the thing and have to take it at face value that it works the way we conceive it to.

There are way more ludicrous and pointless propositions in the world than a webcam cover. If the webcam is covered up, there is no potential for data to be transmitted, LED or not, so just accept it and go grab some electrical tape.

 

[Mockletoy]

The cameras have been hacked before (Google it), and the tiny green indicator is useless unless you notice it on. Also, have you never had the camera activate (such as when Zoom launched), taking you by surprise? This happens all the time! I bet Toobin wished he had a $4 latch over his webcam before he brought out the lotion bottle.

The purpose for the cover may not even be exclusively because of hacks in the first place. Someone may just not want any hope of the thing ever turning on inadvertently. And peace of mind is a big thing with people. Take the door lock most people use that can be busted or picked in a split second to the demise of the occupants inside. I don’t get how you can’t see all of this in your quest to make a fool out of other people.

If people don’t want any potentiality for their webcam to be hacked, or feel more comfortable with it covered, even in spite of a hack or accidental activation, leave them be. I don’t particularly love the exposed camera myself, even on the iPhone; it’s a convenience to me but a point of occasional concern/discomfort because I didn’t design the thing and have to take it at face value that it works the way we conceive it to.

There are way more ludicrous and pointless propositions in the world than a webcam cover. If the webcam is covered up, there is no potential for data to be transmitted, LED or not, so just accept it and go grab some electrical tape.

You clearly haven't read the thread, because the "hacks" you're talking about happened in models produced before 2008 and Apple has since changed the hardware design, as -- again -- others in this very thread have pointed out, with references.

As for why people do whatever they do, okay, fine, I don't care. All I said was that the camera can't turn on without the LED turning on to let you know it has been powered up. That's it. For some reason that simple fact made a lot of people super mad.

Of course, if you actually think about it, a lot of people probably also tape over the LED indicator when they tape over the camera lens, since they're so close together, so then if someone did hack into their machine and turn the camera on, they wouldn't even notice, because, well, they taped over the security feature meant to warn them of that very thing.

Oops.

 

[svenmany]

As for why people do whatever they do, okay, fine, I don't care. All I said was that the camera can't turn on without the LED turning on to let you know it has been powered up. That's it. For some reason that simple fact made a lot of people super mad.

Thanks to this thread, I've learned that Apple has made efforts, and advertised them, to make it very hard to turn on the camera without the LED turning on.

How do you know it "can't" turn on? And, how do you know it can't be turned on for every recent model of Mac? It's a very strong thing to assert as a simple fact. Perhaps you've read some recent iFixit teardowns that discuss this. I'm ready to believe you, but I challenge you to defend your statement of fact with evidence. Actually, I'd appreciate you doing that, because I want to believe it's true.

 

[Mockletoy]

(Weird double post removed. Sorry!)

 

[Mockletoy]

Thanks to this thread, I've learned that Apple has made efforts, and advertised them, to make it very hard to turn on the camera without the LED turning on.

How do you know it "can't" turn on? And, how do you know it can't be turned on for every recent model of Mac? It's a very strong thing to assert as a simple fact. Perhaps you've read some recent iFixit teardowns that discuss this. I'm ready to believe you, but I challenge you to defend your statement of fact with evidence. Actually, I'd appreciate you doing that, because I want to believe it's true.

Don't close your MacBook, MacBook Air, or MacBook Pro with a cover over the camera - Apple Support

Closing your Mac laptop with a camera cover on it might damage your display. Designed to protect your privacy, Mac laptops have a camera indicator light to let you know when the camera is on.

support.apple.com

The FaceTime HD camera built into your Mac computer is designed with your privacy in mind and uses a camera indicator light that glows green when the camera is active. So you will always know when the camera is on.

The camera is engineered so that it can’t activate without the camera indicator light also turning on. This is how you can tell if your camera is on.

Direct from Apple. I don’t know what else to tell you.

 

[InuNacho]

Windows compatibility mode: Run old software better
Mac compatibility mode: Solves a problem that shouldn't have existed in the first place and does nothing for older software

 

[svenmany]

Direct from Apple. I don’t know what else to tell you.

Okay. Your level of care regarding security is far lower than mine. Both links have the same verbiage that I had already read. Neither one says that the LED is *hard-wired* to activate whenever the camera is on, as you have asserted. Neither, by my standard, say that the camera *cannot* power up without the LED turning on, as you have asserted.

Both links you provided simply say that Apple has engineered things to make it so.

The camera is engineered so that it can’t activate without the camera indicator light also turning on.

By my standard, that's not even close to a guarantee. Many things that are engineered in some way are circumvented by a bad actor or researcher.

As for why people do whatever they do, okay, fine, I don't care. All I said was that the camera can't turn on without the LED turning on to let you know it has been powered up. That's it. For some reason that simple fact made a lot of people super mad.

I can imagine some people are angered by assertions like yours, that it's a "simple fact" that the camera cannot be "powered up" without the LED turning on. It might be true, but you haven't provided sufficient evidence. Being absolutely certain of something that is true, doesn't mean you actually have knowledge that it's true. Claiming knowledge without actually having it tends to annoy people.

There are people on this thread who probably have a deeper understanding of the issue. They've asserted that the ability to circumvent the LED would be very, very challenging. That, combined with Apple's marketing verbiage leaves me with sufficient confidence to leave my camera uncovered, considering my general lack of concern for what the camera might see. But, I wouldn't regard someone with disdain if they feel differently.

 

[Mockletoy]

Okay. Your level of care regarding security is far lower than mine. Both links have the same verbiage that I had already read. Neither one says that the LED is *hard-wired* to activate whenever the camera is on, as you have asserted. Neither, by my standard, say that the camera *cannot* power up without the LED turning on, as you have asserted.

Both links you provided simply say that Apple has engineered things to make it so.



By my standard, that's not even close to a guarantee. Many things that are engineered in some way are circumvented by a bad actor or researcher.



I can imagine some people are angered by assertions like yours, that it's a "simple fact" that the camera cannot be "powered up" without the LED turning on. It might be true, but you haven't provided sufficient evidence. Being absolutely certain of something that is true, doesn't mean you actually have knowledge that it's true. Claiming knowledge without actually having it tends to annoy people.

There are people on this thread who probably have a deeper understanding of the issue. They've asserted that the ability to circumvent the LED would be very, very challenging. That, combined with Apple's marketing verbiage leaves me with sufficient confidence to leave my camera uncovered, considering my general lack of concern for what the camera might see. But, I wouldn't regard someone with disdain if they feel differently.

Apple says the camera can’t power up without the LED coming on.

If you have evidence that’s not true, by all means, share it. Otherwise, I’m going to believe Apple, based on the fact that no one in this thread can provide a single shred of evidence that what Apple asserts about how they have engineered these devices is incorrect.

See, the way this works is, if you make an assertion contrary to observable reality, then you have to provide evidence to support that assertion. The observable reality is that

- Apple says the camera is designed so that the camera cannot function without activating the LED
- neither you nor anyone else in this thread can supply a single shred of evidence to the contrary, though many of you do go on at length about what might, maybe, possibly, could happen … if …. um … something, I guess?

So, you are the one making the assertion that requires evidence, not me.

Edit to add: this horse isn’t just dead, it’s decomposed and turned to dust, and I won’t be replying further on this topic in this thread.

 

[svenmany]

Apple says the camera can’t power up without the LED coming on.

If you have evidence that’s not true, by all means, share it. Otherwise, I’m going to believe Apple, based on the fact that no one in this thread can provide a single shred of evidence that what Apple asserts about how they have engineered these devices is incorrect.

See, the way this works is, if you make an assertion contrary to observable reality, then you have to provide evidence to support that assertion. The observable reality is that

- Apple says the camera is designed so that the camera cannot function without activating the LED
- neither you nor anyone else in this thread can supply a single shred of evidence to the contrary, though many of you do go on at length about what might, maybe, possibly, could happen … if …. um … something, I guess?

So, you are the one making the assertion that requires evidence, not me.

Edit to add: this horse isn’t just dead, it’s decomposed and turned to dust, and I won’t be replying further on this topic in this thread.

I reserve the right to assert that I have opinions - I trust the security of the camera, I respect others who don't trust the security of the camera, I don't trust your evaluation of the facts, and I wouldn't invite you to join my debate team.