Microsoft Version of WebRTC

Microsoft, is not on the WebRTC standard path as promoted by their competitors.  Firefox, Opera, and Chrome have already implemented some level of WebRTC as a plug-in for free in their browser thus enabling Webcam Chat.  Microsoft wants to embed Skype into the browser and use their standard called CU-RTC-Web to fix issues they have identified.  As to be expected this move by Microsoft would give more per-to-per control it also comes along with finical incentive.  This could be an uphill battle for Microsoft since the W3C has already adopted the WebRTC standard.  

Either standard that the W3C agrees on will ultimately open the window for more webcam spying.

Stop Webcam Hacking with the BEST webcam cover C-SLIDE.

Ravi Released After Serving Only 20 Days.

Dharun Ravi, the former Rutgers University student convicted of invasion of privacy and other crimes for using his webcam to spy on his gay roommate Tyler Clementi, was released from jail Tuesday morning after completing 20 days of his 30 day sentence.

Ravi, 20, was found guilty in March of 15 criminal charges after watching Clementi kissing another man on his webcam, then posting about the incident on Twitter, instant messaging programs and text messages.

Several nights later, Clementi took his own life, leaving a goodbye message on his Facebook page before jumping to his death from the George Washington Bridge: “Jumping off the gw bridge. Sorry.”

Ravi is maintaining his innocence and appealing the conviction. During his trial, he defended his webcam use by saying that he set it up to ensure Clementi’s visitor didn’t steal his iPad.

Ravi was awarded one five-day reduction in his sentence for good behavior, and another for working while in Middlesex County, N.J. jail. He’ll still have to undergo three years of probation and more than $11,000 in fines, 300 hours of court-ordered community service, in addition to counseling.

The prosecution in the case is appealing the ruling, arguing that Ravi should be charged with additional jail time. His crimes carry a maximum sentence of 10 years.

Webcam Spying HATE CRIME or NOT?

Webcam Spying Trial against former Rutgers Student Ravi is trying to use the HATE CRIME because Tyler (victim) was a homosexual.  Several Boston University Law Students were interviewed on this case.  Listen to what they had to say.

Ravi, knew his roommate was GAY and according to the facts pointed out during the trial it was a prank because Tyler would not let him in the room.

The prosecution failed during the trial to prove that this was a hate crime because of the testimony of provided by Molly Wei who was in the room with Ravi while spying on Tyler.

One question that was not asked during these interviews is; "Is it the fault of Ravi that Tyler committed suicide?"  When are people accountable  for their own actions?

The simplest way to protect your Webcam Privacy is with a LOW TECH webcam cover.  C-SLIDE makes the best Webcam Cover on the market today and it's fully functional.

Molly Wei Webcam Spying Testimony

Molly and Ravi are shocked when they saw Tyler kissing another guy while webcam spying.  Both were charged for invasion of privacy.  Here what Erin Moriarty CBS legal expert has to say about the case.

The simplest way to protect your Webcam Privacy is with a LOW TECH webcam cover.  C-SLIDE makes the best Webcam Cover on the market today and it's fully functional.

Adobe to Fix Flash BUG That Allows Webcam Spying

 

As student from Stanford University discovered the CLICKJACKING method that turns on the mic and Webcam without their knowledge.  The ClickJacking tricks give permission to a website to open the webcam and mic thus facilitating webcam spying. 

This BUG was discovered in 2008 and Adobe did fix the issue when using frames.  However the Stanford University student found a way to manipulate the player thus the whole is still open.

Protect your internet privacy now with a webcam cover by C-SLIDE.  Don't be the next victim.

Webcam Spying by Teachers and Principal

Here is a video that demonstrates how teachers and principals are spying on kids via Webcamera's in the class room.

You dont have to be a victim.  Protect your privacy with a webcam cover by C-SLIDE.

C-SLIDE Webcam Cover Patent Recieves Approval

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Ron Gustaveson
Tel. 801-758-7255
email: ron@c-slide.com               

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

C-SLIDE WEBCAM COVER PATENT HAS BEEN APPROVED.

C-Slide was notified by its law firm today 9/18/2012 that the C-SLIDE 1.0 webcam cover has been granted a patent by the USPTO.  This is the first Webcam Cover patent to be issued.  C-SLIDE has a second patent pending for C-SLIDE 2.0. 

Since webcam spying has been very active in the media in 2012 these webcam privacy protection products are ready for the main stream.

If you'd like more information about this topic, or to schedule an interview with Ron Gustaveson, please call 801-758-7255 ext 101 or email ron@c-slide.com

ABOUT THE COMPANY

SolPals, LLC is a product manufacturer based in Draper, UT.  It operates a DBA called C-Slide which focuses on webcam security by selling webcam covers for laptops, computers, pads, and TV's.  These webcam covers can be purchased online at www.c-slide.com, Amazon, and Ebay.  Webcam Covers can be customized for any business for a promotional giveaway

See our press release at Release Wire.

 

Webcam Spying Lawsuit and School District

This is a great report of the Webcam Spying Lawsuit.

Protect yourself with a webcam cover by c-slide.

Judge Allows Retailers to Continue to Spy on Laptop Renters.

"Back in May there was a class action lawsuit filed against the rental company Aaron's, which had secretly installed spying software that would turn on a laptop's webcam, take pictures and then send them back to the company. Overall it seemed like a large invasion of privacy, which should at least warrant an injunction to stop use of the software until the case is settled, right?

Not to the judge, who refused to order an injunction on the grounds that the family was no longer in possession of the laptop.

As for everyone else still using their Aaron's laptops, the judge had this to say to them (PDF): 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information.'"

There is a new WEBCAM HACKING Movie

There is a NEW webcam hacking movie being released in Germany.  It's called For No Eyes Only.  Webcam Hacking and Spying is getting a  lot of attention.  Check out the trailer at IMDB.com

Dharun Ravi Gives Up Freedom

A former Rutgers University student Dharun Ravi convicted of using a webcam to spy on his gay roommate has given up his right to remain free while New Jersey prosecutors appeal his 30-day jail sentence.

Webcam Spying is EASY

Spying through webcams has become relatively simple procedure.  All one needs to do is perform a simple Google search to find and download one of hundreds of software programs developed to allow someone to remotely hijack a webcam.  Even tech amateurs can search for easy to follow video descriptions to accomplish these sinister deeds.   In short, it is possible for anyone willing to put in minimal effort to take control of your web cam without the spy needing any personal contact with you or your computer system.  And it's not getting more difficult for them to accomplish this its actually becoming easier with the changes to the web browsers.

Why Would Someone Use My Webcam to Spy on Me?

The technology used to control your webcam was originally developed to monitor areas for security purposes.  However with all new technology comes people who will exploits its capabilities.  There are many reasons why someone would use another person’s webcam to spy, including:

• For fun or for a challenge to test one’s technical abilities
• To take compromising pictures or video of someone for some sort of sexual exploitation
• To obtain personal information of the victim in order to commit credit card or identity theft
• To spy on someone to feel a sense of empowerment
• To obtain embarrassing pictures or video of someone for humor or entertainment purposes
• Corporate espionage
• The reasons are endless...

Webcam Hacking is against the LAW in the USA and those who do it can be prosecuted.  But there is NO reason to worry you can simply protect yourself with the only hack proof webcam cover on the market today C-SLIDE.

WebRTC Facilitates Webcam Spying in any browser based application.

WebRTC is the next gateway for webcam spying.  Anytime you have development for the GOOD there is the potential for BAD.  With webcam spying growing like crazy it's now going to become a little easier.  Before webRTC you had to webcam hacking with Skype, IQC, MSN, and other communitation tools.  But now all application in the browser will have access to the webRTC API's.  Thus opening the access to the microphone and webcamera. 

Google is currently developing on their Chrome Browser and hope to have FireFox join by the end of the year.  It's not if it will happen but when.  Here is Googles latest develpers confrence specifically about webRTC.

Stop webcam hacking with the World's BEST webcam cover http://www.c-slide.com

MAC Technician busted for Webcam Peeping

A California computer technician was arrested for allegedly installing spyware on his female customers’ computers, tricking them into bringing their computers into the bathroom, and then secretly photographing them undressing and showering.
While working at the Orange County-based IT firm Rezitech Inc., Trevor Harwell, 20, allegedly planted software called “Camcapture” on dozens of adult females’ Mac computers he was charged with fixing, the Orange County Register reported.

From there, Harwell’s scheme moved full steam ahead.
According to Fullerton police Sgt. Andrew Goodrich, Harwell is accused of rigging the computers to display a message telling them they need to “fix their internal sensor soon.” In order to do this, the message instructed victims to “try putting your laptop near hot steam for several minutes to clean the sensor.”

Taking the bait, investigators say a number of women brought their Mac laptops into the shower, providing Harwell with a perfect opportunity to remotely take nude photos of them. Police seized hundreds of thousands of still photos from Harwell’s computer, Goodrich told the OC Register.
Fullerton police arrested Harwell yesterday (June 8). He is facing 12 felony counts of computer access and fraud.

Police believe Harwell may have carried out a similar spying scheme on Mac computers connected to Biola University, the La Mirada-based private Christian college he and many of his victims attended.

DON'T BE THE NEXT VICTIM.  PROTECT YOURSELF WITH A WEBCAM COVER FROM WWW.C-SLIDE.COM

Google's Chrome browser has direct access to your web camera and mic. Will this lead to more webcam hacking?

Google's latest release of Chrome may allow for alot more webcam spying because of HTML 5 new features ie webRTC .

Below is an article published by Forbes Magazine.

The new release of Google‘s Chrome browser has a bit of a surprise in it for users who don’t follow the technical side of this stuff. I warn you, at first glance, the idea may seem scary.

Chrome 21, which updates automatically for (most) users who have auto-updates enabled, contains support for a JavaScript API (Application Programming Interface) that allows the browser to access the webcam and microphone built into (or attached) to your computer or device. What, you might say, my computer can spy on me? OK, take a breath, let’s talk this through.

First, you might not realize that this is already possible on your computer through plugins, namely Adobe Flash and Microsoft Silverlight. And, I won’t lie to you, there are examples of evil hackers creating malware that uses these plugins to gain access to the “live stream” from victim’s computers. ComputerWorld reported on just such an scheme a couple of months ago that was used to defraud online banking customers.

Second, as great a headline as it might be to say “Google is spying on you with your own webcam!” this sensationalism would be no more true than saying that Adobe or Microsoft have been spying on you for years. They haven’t been.

Once you get past the scary headlines that are bound to pop up, like, “Google Switches On Browser Spy Cam in Chrome” (on MSNBC), you will realize that (on a security level) not much has changed. Once you have a plugin like Flash enabled in your browser, it becomes a bolted-on part of your computing environment, no more or less secure than if the same functionality were native to your browser.

On the positive side of the equation, though, native support for webcams and microphones, what is know as WebRTC (for Web Real-Time Communication, an HTML5 standard being drafted by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)), creates whole new vistas for what can now be done on the web. I asked web standards advocate Jeffrey Zeldman what he thinks about this development. “Adding camera access via a web standard sounds pretty cool to me,” he writes. “I don’t think this means the end of native apps or a new era of malicious spying (although I suppose the latter is always a concern). I do think it opens new creative possibilities for designers and developers of desktop and mobile web apps.”

But what about that “malicious spying”? I asked mobile consultant Luke Wroblewski, and he replied, “Personally, I think a lot of smart people have thought real hard about this issue.” One of those smart people is Scott Jehl of Filament Group in Boston, the studio that recently helped The Boston Globe become the first major newspaper to switch to a responsive design for its website. “I don’t think users should be concerned about it,” says Jehl. “It’s a great feature.”

Jehl is a performance hacker who eats HTTP requests for breakfast. He is not part of the security task force for this project, but he has done his own testing of the getUserMedia API implementation in Chrome. He likes that the new features “go through the same security verifications that users already see in other existing Chrome APIs, like geo-location,” and that, “this feature was already available in the Opera browser’s desktop and mobile versions, so it has been in the wild for some time for a large number of people. Making this sort of functionality work natively in the browser, rather than having to rely on proprietary plugins, is a big win for users and developers alike.”

The comparison to geo-location permissions is apt, and users should apply the same degree of awareness and caution with real time communication streams as they do with location information or secure (https) connections. Google presents it this way in its official blogpost on the new Chrome release, “What if web apps could see? What if they could hear? In today’s Chrome Stable release, when you give them permission, they can.” [the bolding is mine]. The empahasis on explicit permissions is clearly built into Chrome’s implementation of this standard. Other browser makers are advised to follow suit.

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is holding one of their triannual meetings (this time in Vancouver) this week. This group has been pivotal in geeking out on the details to make those permissions be as bulletproof as possible. Have a look at this slide deck for a (highly encrypted!) breakdown of the technical security considerations discussed at a meeting last year.

What can you do now once you have Chrome 21? The image above shows me playing with the Magic Xylophone (by Romuald Quantin at Stinkdigital in London), a low-end augmented reality (AR) virtual instrument. Move your fingers near the top of your webcams “frame” and you can play the different notes on the scale. It’s no Leap Motion, but it is a fun way to get “input” into a game or app. Webcam Toy, by Paul Neave, lets you apply some fun real time effects to your video stream. Coolest perhaps are the kaleidoscope (self-explanatory) and the filmstrip, which shows you a grid of identical images of yourself offset just slightly in time so that a motion in the top right corner “ripples” through each row down the screen.

Before you are able to launch one of these apps, a standard dialog box will appear at the top of your screen (just like with geo-location apps) asking for specific (one-time) permission for this (and only this) site to access your camera that you can either allow or deny. There is an options button to access alternate camera or microphone sources (if applicable). Once you allow access, a light next to your webcam lens will go on and stay on until you leave the app, or, in some cases, once the required input has been received.

An example of this kind of low-impact scenario is Google’s Chrome Web Lab’s own Sketchbots experiment. The app asks you for permission to use your webcam to take a picture of your face. If you submit the picture, it is then “converted to a line drawing and sent to a robot in the Science Museum in London. The robot then draws out your portrait in a patch of sand, which you can watch live on YouTube and visitors can watch in person at the museum.” The webcam light only goes on for the time it takes to take the picture and then goes off. It asks you for permission each time it uses the camera if you want to retake your picture. Apps will probably be able to support the “always allow” option, but Google is here trying to set an example by making sure the user knows what is going on at all times.

Moving forward, these capabilities will enable live video conferencing and video calling through websites instead of through native apps or system level controls. Google may be more interested in pushing this through Google+ hangouts than Apple for whom it is a challenge to their proprietary FaceTime video calling technology. Ditto, perhaps, for Microsoft and Skype. Beyond the obvious applications, the improvement of backend processing in the cloud coupled with WebRTC will make all manner of real time video and audio effects possible. Instagram, SocialCam and Airtime are just the start.

Reassured and/or curious enough to want to try it out? Other than updating chrome to the latest and greatest stable version, you can also acces the getUserMedia API with Opera and Opera Mobile at the time of this post. To find out what’s next, you can check for the current status of its availability on the When Can I Use website. getUserMedia is supported in the current “nightly” (pre-release) versions of Firefox, so that could well be next. No indication on the status of Apple’s Safari, though the upcoming versions of Safari for iOS and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer are now listed as “support unknown” instead of the prior “not supported.”

If you’re still concerned about security in relation to your webcam and microphone, you can try these precautions:

1. Choose a browser that does not (yet) support WebRTC.

2. Place a piece of black tape over your webcam’s lens when not in use.

3. Disable or mute your computer’s built-in microphone.

All of these are, admittedly, stop gap measures. If users report a lot of problems, some browser makers will probably devolve WebRTC support to a preference, but I think that is unlikely. This train is leaving the station. Please be careful while boarding!

Obviously there is a better solution then black tape at www.c-slide.com provide webcam covers for laptops, computers, TV's and more.

Does webcam spying deserve a 10 year prison sentence?

The below article from Forbes Magazine outline the argument that is happening in each state.

Under federal law, the penalty for video voyeurism — what Ravi did in secretly watching Clementi’s sexual encounter via webcam — is just one year in prison or a fine. In New Jersey, the penalty for invasion of privacy is a maximum penalty of five years (something state lawmakers considered revising after the Clementi case). But because of the hate crime charge and the jury’s finding that Clementi might have felt intimidated because of his sexual orientation, Ravi faces up to 10 years in prison (as well as deportation to India, where he was born but hasn’t lived since he was 2).

Setting aside Clementi’s death — which Ravi was not charged with — is a potential 10-year prison sentence for webcam spying just? How much prison time should people get for invasions of privacy?

Laws vary from state to state — invasion of privacy is a misdemeanor in some and a felony in others. What doesn’t vary from state to state is that invasions of privacy happen a lot. They’re just too temptingly easy in the digital age when surveillance equipment is cheap and so much digital information is stored in easy reach. Store managers hide cameras in tanning salon rooms and ladies’ restrooms. Teenagers read each others’ email. Paranoid boyfriends and girlfriends sneak peeks at their significant others’ smartphones to review text messages and call histories. Suspicious spouses secretly place GPS trackers on their loved ones’ cars or install spyware on their computers and phones. But few of those guilty of these invasions of privacy actually get charged for it (or even caught).

As a society, we’re struggling with this every day. We cherish our own privacy, but we love to invade that of other people. And we’re still trying to decide just how important privacy is, and how far we should go legally to protect it.

Earlier this year, in explaining why Scotland Yard dropped its investigation into phone hacking by News of the World journalists, a former Scotland Yard official explained that his agency privileged other safety issues over privacy: “Invasions of privacy are odious, distressing and illegal … but to put it bluntly they don’t kill you, terrorists do,” said Peter Clarke.

That’s why the case of Clementi and Ravi has attracted so much attention. It’s the rare case in which invasion of privacy may have resulted in someone’s death. I emphasize the “may” because it’s far from clear that the webcam spying was the direct cause of Clementi’s suicide; despite the overwhelming amount of digital evidence in the case, we have no way to know what was in Tyler Clementi’s head when he jumped off the George Washington Bridge. And regardless, that is not what Ravi is supposed to be punished for. He is supposed to be sentenced based solely on the actual spying he did, his intimidation of Clementi, and his futile attempts to discard the digital evidence in the case.

Should a twenty-year-old go to prison for 10 years for that? Should he be deported from the country? The judge has those options in sentencing, but they don’t seem just. Ravi’s spying on Clementi’s bedroom encounter was shameful and invasive, but he didn’t push Clementi off of that bridge. We shouldn’t sentence him as if he did.