'Anywhere there's a camera, now there's a risk': Billions of users at risk of Peeping Toms — scientists devise incredibly simple eavesdropping system costing only a few hundred dollars
EM Eye can even capture camera feeds through walls
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.