zlacker

>>xairy+(OP)
I thought the whole point of these camera LEDs was to have them wired to/through the power to the camera, so they are always on when the camera is getting power, no matter what.

Having the LED control exposed through the firmware completely defeats this.

>>sbarre+T1
An indicator light hardwired is nice but I apparently can't trust hardware manufacturers to design it properly. My work laptop (HP Dragonfly) has a physical blocker that closes over the camera when I haven't explicitly pressed the button that enables the camera. The blocker is black and white stripes so it's very obvious when it's covering the sensor. This should absolutely be the security standard we all strive for with camera privacy.

>>connic+b8
Interesting, my work HP Probook does not have that functionality. I wonder why HP chooses to do this only for some laptop lines.

>>kiwija+b9
I suspect most people don't want it. I can imagine lots of people calling customer service "Q: why doesn't my camera work?", "A: Did you open the cover?"

There's just a valid an argument to do the same for phones. How many phones ship with camera covers and how many users want them?

You can get a stick on camera cover for $5 or less if you want one. I have them on my laptops but not on my phone. They came in packs of 6 so I have several left.

https://www.google.com/search?q=camera+cover+laptop

>>nox101+Kc
I had that exact discussion with somebody recently, and it took me a few minutes to realize that their laptop had a physical camera cover that somehow disables camera permissions in windows too. So yeah, happens a ton I would imagine.