Cybersecurity

5652 readers

48 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
No Ads / Spamming.
No pornography.

Community Rules

Idk, keep it semi-professional?
Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !cybersecurity@lemmy.capebreton.social !securitynews@infosec.pub !netsec@links.hackliberty.org !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub

Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

kid@sh.itjust.works

Lanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social

Is it unnecessary to cover one's webcam on Linux? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works to c/cybersecurity@sh.itjust.works

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Cross-posted to: https://sh.itjust.works/post/15859253

From other conversations that I've read through, people usually say "Yes, because it's easy on Windows", or "Yes, because they simply don't trust the webcam". But neither of these arguments are enough for me. The former I feel is irrelevent when one is talking about Linux, and the latter is just doing something for the sake of doing it which is not exactly a rational argument.

Specifically for Linux (although, I suppose this partially also depends on the distro, and, of course, vulnerabilites in whatever software that you might be using), how vulnerable is the device to having its webcam exploited? If you trust the software that you have running on your computer, and you utilize firewalls (application layer, network layer, etc.), you should be resistant to such types of exploits, no? A parallel question would also be: How vulnerable is a Linux device if you don't take extra precautions like firewalls.

If this is the case, what makes Windows so much more vulnerable?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

Most of the security benefits of desktop Linux is that it's less popular, and thus less likely to be targeted. Add to that the diversity in Linux and you're unlikely to be hit by most attacks. But security through obscurity isn't real security at all, so take that for what it's worth.

Linux also has some benefits due to security architecture, but that again depends a lot on your specific setup (which distro, which settings, etc). Most Linux distros are probably pretty resistant, but some have larger holes than others.

So I guess it comes down to what you're worried about:

script kiddies - you're probably fine since they'll mostly target Windows
state-level actors - you're definitely not okay

Personally, I don't bother, but the effort required is quite low so there's really no reason not to.