Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vtb9na$1pkas$2@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bp@www.zefox.net
Newsgroups: comp.sys.raspberry-pi
Subject: Re: "An application want to turn on your camera..."
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 14:41:46 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <vtb9na$1pkas$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vt1kjp$quqn$1@dont-email.me> <vt5tso$oir8$1@dont-email.me> <vt6opu$ei00$1@dont-email.me> <vt71op$1mj51$3@dont-email.me> <vt85u5$2osog$3@dont-email.me> <vt9n9r$3mlh$3@dont-email.me> <auh*qMJ-z@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Injection-Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 16:41:47 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f457df5eca46f14d6fabd5025e87e592";
	logging-data="1888604"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19lVMqc49MEdWHj4mfMiYgu4ekXgXg8HEw="
User-Agent: tin/2.6.4-20241224 ("Helmsdale") (FreeBSD/14.2-STABLE (arm64))
Cancel-Lock: sha1:18jL62ENVf3pLvIuAl9nV18Ea9c=
Bytes: 2927

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> > On 10/04/2025 01:01, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
>> >> The Chromium browser was running
>> > 
>> > That is probably the culprit.
>> > 
>> Can you explain a bit more? Chromium is a popular and sometimes 
>> justified scapegoat, but it's primarily a display process, not a
>> capture process.
> 
> Browsers use the camera for video calls - Zoom, Teams, ...
> (when you aren't using their dedicated apps)
> 
> Some websites also use it for taking static photos - eg a bank wants to take
> a picture of you and your ID for verification.
> 
> They shouldn't ask for camera permission unless a website wants it, but
> perhaps you went to a website that did.
> 

I wasn't doing anything that would justify a photo ID, but it would
make sense to seek a snapshot for future use. But it seems really dumb
to openly ask that a camera be used when no camera is present.



>> Speaking of chromium, I just noticed the latest upgrade disabled
>> ublock-origin. That's scapegoat-worthy. Can apt revert the change?
> 
> That's a feature (for Google, not for you):
> https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-chrome-disables-ublock-origin-for-some-in-manifest-v3-rollout/
> 
> Your options are using uBlock Origin Lite, or switch to Firefox. See:
> https://ublockorigin.com/
>

Firefox it is. At least for now.

> You could find an old version of the Chromium .deb to install and pin it
> using apt so it never updates, but that would be missing security updates
> and be vulnerable.
>

Agreed, that's a poor solution. Still, there are a number of alternative
browsers (brave, dillo, iridium, opera, vivaldi, palemoon....) 
Do any work?

thanks for writing,

bob prohaska