Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is it possible for someone to hack into your webcam? Watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    it relates to what i was discussing earlier.

    did you watch it?

    about Iraq
    I had to go back and search for posts mentioning Iraq since it wasn't in your posts aimed at me, you mentioned it in response to Naruke. But again I still don't see what is relevant about it. It's just arbitrary wikileaks material.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)
    I had to go back and search for posts mentioning Iraq since it wasn't in your posts aimed at me, you mentioned it in response to Naruke. But again I still don't see what is relevant about it. It's just arbitrary wikileaks material.
    i asked you to watch it, because i watched one of your videos

    this relates to hacking the us military by bradley mannings, and also the wikileaks hacks, started by julian assange...

    please watch it now, then we can discuss the details, thanks,...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    i asked you to watch it, because i watched one of your videos

    this relates to hacking the us military by bradley mannings, and also the wikileaks hacks, started by julian assange...

    please watch it now, then we can discuss the details, thanks,...
    Is that the only reason? Because like I said it was still totally irrelevant to what we were talking about.

    I flipped through bits of it but I don't intend to get into a wikileaks, abuse of power, etc. discussion. This thread was never about that. If you want people to discuss it, make a new thread
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)
    Is that the only reason? Because like I said it was still totally irrelevant to what we were talking about.

    I flipped through bits of it but I don't intend to get into a wikileaks, abuse of power, etc. discussion. This thread was never about that. If you want people to discuss it, make a new thread
    This is about hacking, or did you forget.

    Specifically the way a lone, or few, individuals have been able to hack the US military infrastructure, by the release of a single video. Of civilians being slaughtered. And I believe this was only one of many such incidents, just this was the only one reported.

    As i said already and i will say again, lay off the personal ad hominem attacks. This isn't a quest for who has the biggest D. There is more at stake here than you or i....
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    This is about hacking, or did you forget.

    Specifically the way a lone, or few, individuals have been able to hack the US military infrastructure, by the release of a single video. Of civilians being slaughtered. And I believe this was only one of many such incidents, just this was the only one reported.

    As i said already and i will say again, lay off the personal ad hominem attacks. This isn't a quest for who has the biggest D. There is more at stake here than you or i....
    Well the thread was about hacking a webcam. None of what has been discussed is anywhere near that. Regardless though I'm not getting involved in stupid political crap like this. It's been bad enough trying to explain simple hacking and overviews without going into something political and subjective like wikileaks and the military.

    I do find it funny that you have "evidence" of hacking the US military yet were completely adamant that a bank can't be hacked. Also worth mentioning that wikileaks in general is not entirely composed of material gained from hacking. The link you provided specifically doesn't mention hacking at all. Specifically:

    "intelligence analyst with the United States Army in Baghdad, was charged with disclosing this video"

    If he was an intelligence analyst it's more likely he would have had some form of access to this material. It is specified as being disclosed. Nothing about this suggests hacking. So yeah, the thread is broadly about hacking now but based on the link you provided, there's no mention of hacking. Even if there were it would still be irrelevant because there's no mention of how or what was hacked. Wikileaks are far more focused on the material being released than the procedure. It's not unrelated to hacking but it's not really relevant either.

    Wasn't a personal attack, general forum etiquette is not to go off tangent and introduce unrelated material. Of course this tangent into hacking started 5 pages or so ago but we don't need another tangent into wikileaks. If you want to bring in a new topic, you make a new thread rather than subverting an existing thread.

    I think you're the only who sees this as a quest, I've got nothing to prove. It really makes no difference whether anyone on TSR thinks I know my stuff or not. I haven't taken this thread seriously since the tangent started. The only bit that mattered was that it is possible to hack a webcam. Everything else was purely for fun. I go into these threads with the possibly of discussing ideas with like minded people. It's a potentially entertaining networking opportunity where I may learn something. If there's nobody to discuss ideas with then it's a chance to share knowledge and help other people. In this case it's a chance to teach others a bit about security and help them better protect themselves. This thread has been entirely the latter.

    More at stake than you or I? Are you serious? There's nothing at stake. The biggest thing at stake here is the security of a few students who really shouldn't have much to worry about in the first place.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Well if you've watched Snowden then yes it is
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)
    Well the thread was about hacking a webcam. None of what has been discussed is anywhere near that. Regardless though I'm not getting involved in stupid political crap like this. It's been bad enough trying to explain simple hacking and overviews without going into something political and subjective like wikileaks and the military.

    I do find it funny that you have "evidence" of hacking the US military yet were completely adamant that a bank can't be hacked. Also worth mentioning that wikileaks in general is not entirely composed of material gained from hacking. The link you provided specifically doesn't mention hacking at all. Specifically:

    "intelligence analyst with the United States Army in Baghdad, was charged with disclosing this video"

    If he was an intelligence analyst it's more likely he would have had some form of access to this material. It is specified as being disclosed. Nothing about this suggests hacking. So yeah, the thread is broadly about hacking now but based on the link you provided, there's no mention of hacking. Even if there were it would still be irrelevant because there's no mention of how or what was hacked. Wikileaks are far more focused on the material being released than the procedure. It's not unrelated to hacking but it's not really relevant either.

    Wasn't a personal attack, general forum etiquette is not to go off tangent and introduce unrelated material. Of course this tangent into hacking started 5 pages or so ago but we don't need another tangent into wikileaks. If you want to bring in a new topic, you make a new thread rather than subverting an existing thread.

    I think you're the only who sees this as a quest, I've got nothing to prove. It really makes no difference whether anyone on TSR thinks I know my stuff or not. I haven't taken this thread seriously since the tangent started. The only bit that mattered was that it is possible to hack a webcam. Everything else was purely for fun. I go into these threads with the possibly of discussing ideas with like minded people. It's a potentially entertaining networking opportunity where I may learn something. If there's nobody to discuss ideas with then it's a chance to share knowledge and help other people. In this case it's a chance to teach others a bit about security and help them better protect themselves. This thread has been entirely the latter.

    More at stake than you or I? Are you serious? There's nothing at stake. The biggest thing at stake here is the security of a few students who really shouldn't have much to worry about in the first place.
    You really haven't listened to a thing i said, right...?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by azizadil1998)
    Well if you've watched Snowden then yes it is
    Snowden and Assange and Manning.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    You really haven't listened to a thing i said, right...?
    3 lines isn't much to go on and I explicitly stated I wasn't going to get involved in this stuff in the first place. I also stated that after your previously demonstrated aptitude for security I was going to take everything you said with a pinch of salt.

    But if you really want to make a point trying explaining it. All of your recent posts have been a few lines are fairly insubstantiated. You told me to watch the video, you told me what happend in the video but you failed to present any sort of argument for why I should care. Your entire tangent onto wikileaks had nothing to do with hacking banks, hacking in general and so on. If you want to relate it back, explain why it's relevant. I'm really not sure why you bothered to bring it up several pages ago either. It really seems like you just wanted to name drop it for the sake of it, rather than bringing it up because it is relevant. But then all your posts have been structured around dropping buzz words (IP bouncer, trojan, DoS etc.) when they're not relevant or used in the wrong context. So I can't say I'm surprised that we've now moved onto wikileaks.

    So I'll say again, what does wikileaks and in particular this situation with Manning have to do with hacking a webcam? Why are you bringing this up specifically and not providing context?

    And on an unrelated note, why are you obsessed with using ellipses at the end of your posts?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)
    3 lines isn't much to go on and I explicitly stated I wasn't going to get involved in this stuff in the first place. I also stated that after your previously demonstrated aptitude for security I was going to take everything you said with a pinch of salt.

    But if you really want to make a point trying explaining it. All of your recent posts have been a few lines are fairly insubstantiated. You told me to watch the video, you told me what happend in the video but you failed to present any sort of argument for why I should care. Your entire tangent onto wikileaks had nothing to do with hacking banks, hacking in general and so on. If you want to relate it back, explain why it's relevant. I'm really not sure why you bothered to bring it up several pages ago either. It really seems like you just wanted to name drop it for the sake of it, rather than bringing it up because it is relevant. But then all your posts have been structured around dropping buzz words (IP bouncer, trojan, DoS etc.) when they're not relevant or used in the wrong context. So I can't say I'm surprised that we've now moved onto wikileaks.

    So I'll say again, what does wikileaks and in particular this situation with Manning have to do with hacking a webcam? Why are you bringing this up specifically and not providing context?

    And on an unrelated note, why are you obsessed with using ellipses at the end of your posts?
    We were talking about hacking. You seem to think that you are the world's expert on it, because you have done some for your bachelor's degree.

    I tried to explain to you, that hacking, both in process and concept, is much bigger than you, or any of your teachers, have ever dreamed of.

    We hacked iraq. Bradley Manning was given twenty life sentences for it. And you still think that it's about stuff you can do on your computer?

    Sure, this conversation started off about webcams, but it's moved on a bit since then, right???
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    We were talking about hacking. You seem to think that you are the world's expert on it, because you have done some for your bachelor's degree.

    I tried to explain to you, that hacking, both in process and concept, is much bigger than you, or any of your teachers, have ever dreamed of.

    We hacked iraq. Bradley Manning was given twenty life sentences for it. And you still think that it's about stuff you can do on your computer?

    Sure, this conversation started off about webcams, but it's moved on a bit since then, right???
    Yawn, you're sounding like a broken record. I never claimed to be an expert on it. I never claimed to have done any hacking in my degree. Correcting you when you make simple mistakes is not equivalent to claiming to be an expert.

    I'm well aware that there is a lot of stuff I don't know, hacking is not "bigger than I can dream of". I'm well aware of the "scale" and I'm sure my teachers are aware as well. They are far more knowledgeable than either of us and would make us both look like idiots.

    "We hacked Iraq. Bradley Manning was given twenty life sentences for it". Who is we? TSR? The UK? Are you implying that we "hacked" Iraq (which is semantically incorrect) and that Bradley Manning is taking the fall for it? Did Bradley Manning do the hacking? There's no mention of it in your link, just that Manning disclosed the material. This is why you need to provide context. I provided links that were within context at the time (bank hacking). You simply provided a link and only because "you watched my video, so now I have to watch yours". That's why it was totally irrelevant. Do you see the issue with not providing context yet?

    Sigh, I still think hacking is about stuff you can do on the computer? We'll just ignore all the times I metioned social engineering then since that clearly went over your head.

    It's moved on but there's been no progress. Some people were asking good questions like whether antivirus would pick up malware designed to compromise the webcam (you asked a similar question when you first posted iirc). You then posted about the trojan that Microsoft infected you with and your IP bouncer that stops you getting hacked. I called you out on this, you got offended and claimed to "clearly know more about it security then most people on this site" and that I "don't actually know that much right" because I "have never accessed illegal information on the net". Everything since then has gone downhill, with you posting
    and me calling out everything that was wrong, you make posts using "hacking buzzwords" or setting stupid challenges like hacking your bank to get your details. I've at least managed to weave in useful information when replying, so that other people reading this can learn something. Your posts have been unsubstantial, full of attacks that "I'm no hacker/expert" when I never claimed to be, you've been getting more and more wound up and frankly it's very entertaining. So no, I don't really think we have moved on that much but thank you for being so easily manipulated.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)
    Yawn, you're sounding like a broken record. I never claimed to be an expert on it. I never claimed to have done any hacking in my degree. Correcting you when you make simple mistakes is not equivalent to claiming to be an expert.

    I'm well aware that there is a lot of stuff I don't know, hacking is not "bigger than I can dream of". I'm well aware of the "scale" and I'm sure my teachers are aware as well. They are far more knowledgeable than either of us and would make us both look like idiots.

    "We hacked Iraq. Bradley Manning was given twenty life sentences for it". Who is we? TSR? The UK? Are you implying that we "hacked" Iraq (which is semantically incorrect) and that Bradley Manning is taking the fall for it? Did Bradley Manning do the hacking? There's no mention of it in your link, just that Manning disclosed the material. This is why you need to provide context. I provided links that were within context at the time (bank hacking). You simply provided a link and only because "you watched my video, so now I have to watch yours". That's why it was totally irrelevant. Do you see the issue with not providing context yet?

    Sigh, I still think hacking is about stuff you can do on the computer? We'll just ignore all the times I metioned social engineering then since that clearly went over your head.

    It's moved on but there's been no progress. Some people were asking good questions like whether antivirus would pick up malware designed to compromise the webcam (you asked a similar question when you first posted iirc). You then posted about the trojan that Microsoft infected you with and your IP bouncer that stops you getting hacked. I called you out on this, you got offended and claimed to "clearly know more about it security then most people on this site" and that I "don't actually know that much right" because I "have never accessed illegal information on the net". Everything since then has gone downhill, with you posting
    and me calling out everything that was wrong, you make posts using "hacking buzzwords" or setting stupid challenges like hacking your bank to get your details. I've at least managed to weave in useful information when replying, so that other people reading this can learn something. Your posts have been unsubstantial, full of attacks that "I'm no hacker/expert" when I never claimed to be, you've been getting more and more wound up and frankly it's very entertaining. So no, I don't really think we have moved on that much but thank you for being so easily manipulated.
    I don't actually think you are who you say you are. Why would a university undergraduate, take such offence to be being told he doesn't know how to hack. And then, when on the defensive, write reams of nonsense, defending this position. Yes i watched your video, and read the link you sent me. No you didn't watch mine, or click on the link, which you would have seen takes you evidence of widespread hacking done by wikileaks

    if you had done this, you would have found documents relating on how to bypass immigration control in airports, and not just a video of a us gunship slaughtering thousands of iraqis.

    But that's just it isn't it. It is easy to believe what you are told, when it comes from the news, or your lecturers. But when it comes to thinking outside the box, well then things become a little more difficult.


    I know your not a hacker. When you said that, i knew it straight away. But by calling you out like this, i just wanted to see what you knew. Which as it turns out, isn't very much.

    Good luck with your degree, if your alias is honest, or if it isn't good luck with whatever other mission, you are on.

    Just leave me out of it...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah, there's an episode of black mirror were some guys were hacking peoples webcams and using what they found when they just watched them to blackmail them into doing what they wanted
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)



    "We hacked Iraq. Bradley Manning was given twenty life sentences for it". Who is we? TSR? The UK? Are you implying that we "hacked" Iraq (which is semantically incorrect) and that Bradley Manning is taking the fall for it? Did Bradley Manning do the hacking? There's no mention of it in your link, just that Manning disclosed the material. This is why you need to provide context. I provided links that were within context at the time (bank hacking). You simply provided a link and only because "you watched my video, so now I have to watch yours". That's why it was totally irrelevant. Do you see the issue with not providing context yet?

    Just going back to this quote, we hacked iraq, is using English in an acceptable format. Just not the one you were using. You can't say it is semantically incorrect, I was referring to fact by releasing the video, of American soldiers casually shooting up a bus load of children, and also slaughting many innocent iraqis who were just going about their business, Manning exposed the war for what it truly was. A massacre. Even the Lancet journal, a highly respected international medical journal, released a study documenting between a million to two million iraqi fatalities, given from a repeated door to door questionaire of the war, before and after it started. But due to pressure, the lancet has subsequently retracted that issue, and removed all traces of it from their website.

    I don't know if you are a student, who for whatever reason has taken it on themselves, to challenge me over these issues, because i have made a mistake in naming ip bouncer to ip masker, or whatever your motive is. You do realise that tsr is a student forum, for lots of different people. And we are allowed to have debates, which cross different topics.

    But what you also need to be aware of, is that there are children who fled the war that desecrated their country, and still takes lives to this day, on here. So this is both a consequential, and relevant debate.

    Granted they probably never taught you about the cluster bombs, and other munitions the allies dropped on the iraqs, blowing the men women and children to pieces, and lying there for years to come. Or the depleted uranium shells fired. But whatever. I'm done here.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    I don't actually think you are who you say you are. Why would a university undergraduate, take such offence to be being told he doesn't know how to hack. And then, when on the defensive, write reams of nonsense, defending this position. Yes i watched your video, and read the link you sent me. No you didn't watch mine, or click on the link, which you would have seen takes you evidence of widespread hacking done by wikileaks

    if you had done this, you would have found documents relating on how to bypass immigration control in airports, and not just a video of a us gunship slaughtering thousands of iraqis.

    But that's just it isn't it. It is easy to believe what you are told, when it comes from the news, or your lecturers. But when it comes to thinking outside the box, well then things become a little more difficult.


    I know your not a hacker. When you said that, i knew it straight away. But by calling you out like this, i just wanted to see what you knew. Which as it turns out, isn't very much.

    Good luck with your degree, if your alias is honest, or if it isn't good luck with whatever other mission, you are on.

    Just leave me out of it...
    So you actually think I took offence? You think I was on the defensive? How laughable. This is a forum, it's pretty common for people to try and call others out for being wrong. I'm used to people like you. Not offensive at all, I find it quite funny.

    You think I was defensive when told I can't hack? After explicitly stating I'm not a hacker? I'm starting to think you just don't understand the language in general. Time and again I mentioned that I'm not a hacker, all I was doing was calling you out when you were wrong. If anyone needs to be on the defensive it's you. I'm not claiming to be someone I'm not.

    I followed your link and watched a few minutes of the short video. I never had any intention of watching the long video, 40 minutes would be a waste of my time. The links on that page did not link through to any sort of hacking done by wikileaks. Once again you don't seem to know what you are talking about. Wikileaks is a platform for publishing the material, it's technically little more than a website really. Their material often comes from undisclosed sources. Wikileaks won't openly admit that they are the ones doing the hacking. And if you do have evidence of that, it wasn't on the link provided. You gave one link and said watch a video, not trawl through wikileaks.

    I find it quite funny that you even think you're in control of the situation. I called you out (IP bouncer, your complet lack of online security, etc.), not the other way round. You haven't called me out on anything.

    Claims I don't know much, yet I've posted more valid material about hacking and security than you. If you actually think I don't know much then kindly try and refute some of the stuff I've posted. Because all your attacks have been aimed at me, with nothing to back them up



    (Original post by john2054)
    Just going back to this quote, we hacked iraq, is using English in an acceptable format. Just not the one you were using. You can't say it is semantically incorrect, I was referring to fact by releasing the video, of American soldiers casually shooting up a bus load of children, and also slaughting many innocent iraqis who were just going about their business, Manning exposed the war for what it truly was. A massacre. Even the Lancet journal, a highly respected international medical journal, released a study documenting between a million to two million iraqi fatalities, given from a repeated door to door questionaire of the war, before and after it started. But due to pressure, the lancet has subsequently retracted that issue, and removed all traces of it from their website.

    I don't know if you are a student, who for whatever reason has taken it on themselves, to challenge me over these issues, because i have made a mistake in naming ip bouncer to ip masker, or whatever your motive is. You do realise that tsr is a student forum, for lots of different people. And we are allowed to have debates, which cross different topics.

    But what you also need to be aware of, is that there are children who fled the war that desecrated their country, and still takes lives to this day, on here. So this is both a consequential, and relevant debate.

    Granted they probably never taught you about the cluster bombs, and other munitions the allies dropped on the iraqs, blowing the men women and children to pieces, and lying there for years to come. Or the depleted uranium shells fired. But whatever. I'm done here.
    Still doens't explain who we refers to. Nor does a video of US soldiers shotting civilians have anything to do with hacking Iraq.

    IP bouncer and IP masker now? But that wasn't your only mistake. Would you like a list of everything you've posted incorrectly and that clearly demonstrates you lack knowledge?
    --You use an IP bouncer/masker (you actually have a dynamic IP)
    --This somehow makes you more secure and stops you getting hacked (dynamic IP really is not a security measure)
    --You've been hacking since I was little, which would equate to 20 years, or since you were 15 (I find that hard to believe when you're so uneducated, you certainly wouldn't make these mistakes if you had any knowledge on the matter)
    --You said you clearly know more than most people on this site about security (but evidently not when I can find your blog, Twitter, Facebook and so on from a TSR profile, not to mention name some of your close family)
    --You claim to be knowledgeable (and yet your first question was "wouldn't antivirus like malware bytes pick up a trojan that was subverting your webcam")
    --You claim to have a trojan installed and see it as little more than an annoyance
    --You claim Microsoft installed it because you couldn't install Office

    The list goes on. Feel free to rebuke any of that, it'll be hilarious to read

    No, funnily enough my classes don't teach about what happens in wars. Funny how I'm doing forensics and they don't teach me about cluster munitions. Who'd have thought it huh? I'm guessing in your Sociology degree they didn't teach you about differentiation or French. It's amazing how you can go to university to do a course and the material is actually related to that course! What an age we live in! If I'm brutally honest I'm not that concerned about it either. It's not an issue I want to be involved with.

    You're done here? Hahahahaha, no you aren't. You haven't been able to let this drop. I'm confident you'll post again, no doubt with some more insults about how I'm not a hacker. Hopefully your trojan will get you first though
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acsel)
    So you actually think I took offence? You think I was on the defensive? How laughable. This is a forum, it's pretty common for people to try and call others out for being wrong. I'm used to people like you. Not offensive at all, I find it quite funny.

    You think I was defensive when told I can't hack? After explicitly stating I'm not a hacker? I'm starting to think you just don't understand the language in general. Time and again I mentioned that I'm not a hacker, all I was doing was calling you out when you were wrong. If anyone needs to be on the defensive it's you. I'm not claiming to be someone I'm not.

    I followed your link and watched a few minutes of the short video. I never had any intention of watching the long video, 40 minutes would be a waste of my time. The links on that page did not link through to any sort of hacking done by wikileaks. Once again you don't seem to know what you are talking about. Wikileaks is a platform for publishing the material, it's technically little more than a website really. Their material often comes from undisclosed sources. Wikileaks won't openly admit that they are the ones doing the hacking. And if you do have evidence of that, it wasn't on the link provided. You gave one link and said watch a video, not trawl through wikileaks.

    I find it quite funny that you even think you're in control of the situation. I called you out (IP bouncer, your complet lack of online security, etc.), not the other way round. You haven't called me out on anything.

    Claims I don't know much, yet I've posted more valid material about hacking and security than you. If you actually think I don't know much then kindly try and refute some of the stuff I've posted. Because all your attacks have been aimed at me, with nothing to back them up





    Still doens't explain who we refers to. Nor does a video of US soldiers shotting civilians have anything to do with hacking Iraq.

    IP bouncer and IP masker now? But that wasn't your only mistake. Would you like a list of everything you've posted incorrectly and that clearly demonstrates you lack knowledge?
    --You use an IP bouncer/masker (you actually have a dynamic IP)
    --This somehow makes you more secure and stops you getting hacked (dynamic IP really is not a security measure)
    --You've been hacking since I was little, which would equate to 20 years, or since you were 15 (I find that hard to believe when you're so uneducated, you certainly wouldn't make these mistakes if you had any knowledge on the matter)
    --You said you clearly know more than most people on this site about security (but evidently not when I can find your blog, Twitter, Facebook and so on from a TSR profile, not to mention name some of your close family)
    --You claim to be knowledgeable (and yet your first question was "wouldn't antivirus like malware bytes pick up a trojan that was subverting your webcam"
    --You claim to have a trojan installed and see it as little more than an annoyance
    --You claim Microsoft installed it because you couldn't install Office

    The list goes on. Feel free to rebuke any of that, it'll be hilarious to read

    No, funnily enough my classes don't teach about what happens in wars. Funny how I'm doing forensics and they don't teach me about cluster munitions. Who'd have thought it huh? I'm guessing in your Sociology degree they didn't teach you about differentiation or French. It's amazing how you can go to university to do a course and the material is actually related to that course! What an age we live in! If I'm brutally honest I'm not that concerned about it either. It's not an issue I want to be involved with.

    You're done here? Hahahahaha, no you aren't. You haven't been able to let this drop. I'm confident you'll post again, no doubt with some more insults about how I'm not a hacker. Hopefully your trojan will get you first though
    No really, i have had enough...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john2054)
    No really, i have had enough...
    Lol what a surprise. If you've had enough then stop posting. I'm not forcing you to reply to me, although at this point it is entertaining to see how long I can keep this going

    ...
    ...
    ...
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yes they can and there have been cases of it happening, with the hacker blackmailing the victims

    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-a7308646.html

    Even the FBI recommends you cover it, plus Mark Zuckerberg covers his webcam..


    I'm guessing you watched that episode of Black Mirror
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.