×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

453 comments

The question is (4, Funny)

cainskltn (847151) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303824)

What is the search keyword.

Re:The question is (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303832)

goatse

Re:The question is (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303837)

Re:The question is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303847)

That might just have been the most disgusting i've ever seen.

Arrrgh me eyes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303889)

Why did you have to say that now you made me look too...

Re:Arrrgh me eyes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303949)

I'm gonna be sick!!! :-(

Re:The question is (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303838)

inurl:/view/index.shtml

Security vs. Stupidity (5, Insightful)

bigattichouse (527527) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303831)

This just underlines the engineer's problem with making something secure, yet making sure every moron in the U.S. can plug it in and turn it on and have it basically work.

Re:Security vs. Stupidity (5, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303868)

This just underlines the engineer's problem with making something secure, yet making sure every moron in the U.S. can plug it in and turn it on and have it basically work.

Well, it's really just another example of engineers doing the job right, only to then have a PHB of some ilk tell them, "Now I want to be able to watch this from my office or my cell phone or from home, etc." Where the Engineer exclaims, "Doh!" and does it because he/she's not paid to THINK.

Where are the naked coeds? (3, Funny)

glrotate (300695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304147)

Ok, I've clicked on the links mentioned and the results from google and I'm getting weather cams and empty offices.

We all know why we jumped on this story so now somebody needes to deliver!

Re:Security vs. Stupidity (2, Insightful)

GrunthosTheFlatulent (735599) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304179)

When given a choice, every manufacturer out there will make something easy to set up at the cost of being safe, out of the box. Just look at wireless access points: plug them in and they simply work. (Of course, you've just created a hotspot for your whole neighborhood) Clearly they have calculated that if they do not require you to go through the extra step of securing it, you are that much less likely to call them for tech support, or return the product.

The URL I use (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303841)

I use http://www.google.ca/search?q=inurl%3A%22axis-cgi% 2Fmjpg%22&btnG=Google to find them. It works great.

a search string for the lazy/stupid among us (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303843)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2 coff=1&q=inurl%3A%22MultiCameraFrame%3FMode%3D%22

Run your own surveillance (2, Interesting)

Brushfireb (635997) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303851)

This is why you should never trust some other company with your own surveillance needs. There are plenty of camera + software combinations that can do TCP/IP stuff and you can tinker with it yourself and set it up on your own apache server.

I am sure someone will post with OSS software solutions.

Aside from that, how many people really need web-enabled surveillance? Just record it to HD or have it monitored live in closed-circuit fashion.

Brushfireb

X10 anyone? (2, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303887)

This is why you should never trust some other company with your own surveillance needs. There are plenty of camera + software combinations that can do TCP/IP stuff and you can tinker with it yourself and set it up on your own apache server.

Sure, and if you're inexperienced or a moron then you can do it wrong, just as these people have. High quality tools can still be misused by dolts.

I am sure someone will post with OSS software solutions. Aside from that, how many people really need web-enabled surveillance? Just record it to HD or have it monitored live in closed-circuit fashion.

Does anyone remember the article, couple years back about people using X10 cams for survelience, which were easily monitored from, not a black suburban, but so much as a Yugo with a coathanger antenna out in the street? It's about understanding the deployment needs and big picture of security.

"hey, I can see myself in the bathroom in the internet.... uh..."

Re:Run your own surveillance (1)

dnoyeb (547705) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303908)

How else you gonna make sure you wife isin't gettin it on with the pool boy?

Re:Run your own surveillance (3, Funny)

Fishstick (150821) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304079)

chastity belt? :-)

man, I hate it when the wife gets 'rooted' by the (pool|mail|ups)guy!

Re:Run your own surveillance (2, Funny)

GaryOlson (737642) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304177)

This is slashdot...

do you really have a wife?

your pasty white complexion tells me you don't have a pool either.

Re:Run your own surveillance (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304012)

Perhaps beacuse a lot of regular people cant even figure out which hole to put the usb camera into? " there are 2, which one does it go into ".

Remember the maket for these things are NOT techies.. ( few products really are, regardless of what many of us like to belive.. )

Why webenabled? Well, a most small business owners want to know what is going on with their 'baby' 24/7. This way they can sit at home and check up on things without driving across town at 2am.

Re:Run your own surveillance (5, Insightful)

wankledot (712148) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304025)

I work with IP video surveillance (among other things) for a living.

This is a good example of why you SHOULD trust some other company. Chances are that company knows more than you do about setting up a system. Choosing the right people to work with is obviously important. I wouldn't trust myself to set up an alarm system for my offices, I would hire someone who knew what they were doing.

Most of the good cameras out there have built-in webservers. Sending motion JPEG over a network from the embedded webserver on the camera is the most common and efficient way to manage a larger camera installation, especially if you are recording. If you have a school district with 10 sites, 5 cameras each, using a network video system and central recording is a fraction of the cost of a traditional CCTV or even DVR (digital recording of analog cameras) setup. Configuring the camera incorrectly leads to problems like this, taking a step backwards to CCTV or other technology is not the answer.

Requires ActiveX Control (0)

bigtallmofo (695287) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303853)

Most of the ones that are found via Google require an ActiveX control. Don't get too excited.

Re:Requires ActiveX Control (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303907)

?

RTFA.

Re:Requires ActiveX Control (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304009)

All the Axis cams also run an MJPEG stream which will work in ActiveX-free browsers.

Re:Requires ActiveX Control (1)

wankledot (712148) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304048)

If you can get in to manage the camera's preferences, you can switch from ActiveX to Java video. Hopefully they've locked down the setup page, but you never know.

Re:Requires ActiveX Control (1)

moon-monster (712361) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304163)

Try searching on:
inurl:"axis-cgi/mjpg"

This gets you the mjpg stream every time. Works fine here on firefox 64-bit.

some cameras (4, Informative)

cat.os.mandros (842677) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303862)

For the curious, here there is an article (in spanish, sorry) with some links to cams and what terms to search to find more, happy watching :)

http://sindominio.net/suburbia/article.php3?id_art icle=146 [sindominio.net]

Re:some cameras (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303941)

This links to one of the first [mnm.uib.es] blogs that mentioned this issue. Furthermore, it found a better search term to search for axis cameras. It's a pity is in Spanish.... those Spaniards :-)

Dino still lives! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303863)

When some wag placed Dino in front of a volcano monitoring camera on White Island it was claimed that he would slowly disintegrate from noxious fumes and gases emitted from the volcano. And yet, Dino [geonet.org.nz] is still smiling back at us in defiance...

The best ones so far (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303870)

I got a jump on this from the Boing Boing post a couple days ago. I use inurl:"axis-cgi/mjpg".
This one seems to show every page printed off of some printer. http://81.72.76.218/view/index.shtml [81.72.76.218] . Right now it's some photo.
This one http://217.148.2.106/view/index.shtml [217.148.2.106] shows somes bar (German?) that seems very active.
This one http://24.173.235.172:8001/axis-cgi/mjpg/video.cgi ?camera=&showlength=1&resolution=640x480 [24.173.235.172] Shows animals under the knife, I've yet to catch a surgery yet.

Anybody find any other cool ones?

Hey buddy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303873)

This is slashdot - where are the nudie shots...

The search queries are... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303877)

Use Google and search for the following:
inurl:"ViewerFrame?Mode=" [google.com]
or:
inurl:"MultiCameraFrame?Mode=" [google.com]

Re:The search queries are... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303962)

and:
inurl:"axis-cgi/mjpg"

search keyword - find the most interesting place! (2, Interesting)

Janek Kozicki (722688) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303881)

one [google.com] two [google.ca]

I have clicked some of them, and indded some provide pictures of various random places, like shopping center, bureau, or parking lot. But I've noticed that some of them are asking for a password, or simply refuse to connect. Does it mean that admins had fast response to this issue? :)

And btw - slashdotting thousands of cameras around the world is really funny. Karma prize for a person that finds the most interesting places!

Re:search keyword - find the most interesting plac (1)

Lanoitarus (732808) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303900)

Now the real question is, can the slashdot effect destroy all 1500 camera servers? ... Ive got 100 bucks on "yes".

Re:search keyword - find the most interesting plac (1)

Tuxedo Jack (648130) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304031)

According to a Google search, the default settings for these are as follows:

Username: root
Password: pass

I'll lay odds there are complacent admins out there.

THIS INFORMATION IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. DON'T BE A FUCKHEAD.

so-so interesting stuff, links (1)

davids-world.com (551216) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304066)

A couple of half-way interesting sites are linked from here [davids-world.com] . Airports, a shoe store, and the like. Many building sites.

All in all CCTV is kind of funny, but doesn't really make my day :-(

This is exactly why... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303882)

negroes should never be put in charge.

Search Keyword (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303888)

The search keyword is inurl:"axis-cgi/mjpg"

interesting (4, Informative)

mr_tommy (619972) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303893)

On pages with non-enlish text (E.G. this one http://aquashop-es.miemasu.net/MultiCameraFrame?Mo de=Motion&Language=1)

change language=1 to language=0 to get english text.

Daycares with cams (3, Interesting)

FerretFrottage (714136) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303899)

While looking ofr daycare for my kids, I came across a few that offered web based cam viewing of the kids/classrooms. My wife thought it was a great idea til I suggested that anyone could potentially view the kids....sex offenders, children theft services, etc. Sure the school offered password based access, but any system that is turned on can be compromised. Maybe it's the paranoid dad in me, but while it may be nice to see what my kids and teachers are doing, it scares me that some pediphile may be watching what kids are doing, learning their favorite activites, and their overall daily schedule. The ped could even be a parent that has a kid registered at the school making access even easier. So in the end, I axed schools that has cams (especially wireless ones) and convinced my wife based on the reasons above.

Perhaps some places have policies where the camera is on only for certain periods of time that vary weekly and IT departments that verify access logs, but I saw no such plans when I checked.

Re:Daycares with cams (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303932)

And what exactly are "children theft services"?

Re:Daycares with cams (1)

fishbot (301821) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303964)

There is one school in the UK trialling this, but each parent has a username and password to prevent unauthorised access. Still, if a username/password combination is all that is required...

Re:Daycares with cams (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303992)

Uh, wouldn't a pedophile prefer to target a facility that isn't loaded with cameras? Also if the pedophile has l33t hacking skills, fuck the cameras, your daycares database contains plenty of info on your child, checkout and checkin times, home address, etc.

Re:Daycares with cams (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304035)

Christ....A little paranoid huh? What happens when the kid has to walk out in pubic, are you gonna shroud it so no one can look at the kid? People have eyes and see other people out in public....When your kid is on the playground at your cam free daycare, how do you know some sicko isn't watching them?

Re:Daycares with cams (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304037)

" it scares me that some pediphile may be watching what kids are doing, learning their favorite activites, and their overall daily schedule. " Typical Ameri-cam FUD!! Go Get Yourself a life!!

Re:Daycares with cams (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304075)

If you agree with the Slashdot mantra that nothing is safe, you don't need cameras to learn the stuff you suggest. Not having the cameras makes it a little harder, not impossible.

Some problem solving skills (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303905)

I got "If no image is displayed, there might be too many viewers, or the browser configuration may have to be changed. See help for detailed instructions on how to do this." from three in four camera`s....

What an elegant solution, just post the problem on slashdot and watch many hundreds of tiny embedded (axis is linuxppc based iirc) webservers get slashdotted completly

detailed links (3, Informative)

pollock (453937) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303911)

graffe.com [graffe.com] suggests searching for inurl:"ViewerFrame?Mode=" [google.com] .

You can do slightly bettter by searching for inurl:"MultiCameraFrame?Mode=" [google.com] , as mentioned on Metafilter [metafilter.com] .

Re:detailed links (2, Informative)

mastervisi (639609) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303990)

Another fun keyword search is inurl:"/remote6/".
Tracker Cam's use this in their urls. These cam's are they type that can be move around and seem to be one of the favs for "in the bedroom" used cam's.

Simple solution (4, Insightful)

Snags (18929) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303912)

It should be obvious, but any web server that doesn't want to be on google should serve up the appropriate robots.txt file. This includes webcams in their default configuration.

robots.txt not obvious (3, Interesting)

Animaether (411575) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304020)

It's not really obvious.

If you don't want your webserver to be 'found' then either :
A. don't put it online. (Right)
B. security through obscurity: don't link to it, don't save a record of it. No links = no crawling/spidering.
C. Put it behind a server-wise password

Because in the end, Google may respect robots.txt but I, for one, don't when creating a local cache of a site using HTTrack .
And I'd imagine there's search engines which ignore it just as well.

Re:robots.txt not obvious (1)

Heisenbug (122836) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304185)

B. security through obscurity: don't link to it, don't save a record of it. No links = no crawling/spidering.

That one isn't so reliable anymore. Doesn't the Google toolbar submit pages it visits for indexing?

Welcome to last October (5, Interesting)

dq5 studios (682179) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303913)

Johnny at IHackStuff has a huge list of fun things like this you can get from google.
Here is the list of searches for network aware stuff: Google Cached since main site is down [64.233.187.104]
Some search phrases for cameras are: "camera linksys inurl:main.cgi" and
"powered by webcamXP" "Pro|Broadcast"

Don't forget that google can limit results to region by using "site:.jp" or similar.

Nothing new (1)

Rekkr (771729) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303920)

This is nothing new... I have known about it for months. I wonder why it was only mentioned in blogs the past week or so? Anyway, here's the link: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=inur l%3A%22ViewerFrame%3FMode%3D%22&btnG=Google%20Sear ch

Fun but dangerious? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303921)

Following an item on The Reg http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/08/web_survei llance_cams_open_to_all/ I have been looking at some of the result given by google. One interesting one that came up was http://lobbycamera3.abia.org/axis-cgi/mjpg/video.c gi?camera=&resolution=640x480 which turns out to be an airport in Mr Bush's home state of Texas. http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/austinairport/ This just goes to show that even supposed security professionals don't bother to read the instructions on their new toys. Free to air surveillance for Mr. Bin Laden?

Re:Fun but dangerious? (2, Funny)

mikewhittaker (313040) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304001)

I presume the Bushism in the Subject was intentional ;-)

Incidentally, Bush was born in Connecticut, so I often wonder why they call Texas his home state.

Adopted, I suppose.

Re:Fun but dangerious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304093)

robots.txt

Re:Fun but dangerious? (0)

legoleg (514805) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304146)

Because he wants you to... makes him seem less uppity, so NASCAR fans will vote for him... a ranch helps too.

Re:Fun but dangerious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304160)

George H.W. Bush and family moved from Connecticut to Midland, Texas when George W. Bush was ~2 years old. I doubt he even remembers living in Connecticut.

Similarly, Dwight Eisenhower was born in Texas, but grew up in Kansas. I doubt he considered himself a Texan.

Funny (1)

Rekkr (771729) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303931)

The article says, "Video surfers are using this knowledge to peek in on office and restaurant interiors, a Japanese barnyard, women doing laundry, the interior of an Internet collocation facility, and a cage full of rodents, among other things, in locales scattered around the world." Funny thing is, I have seen all of those, like the article is talking about the same ones I was spying on. But I couldn't find one of a women's dressing room. :(

Brookhaven national lab webcam open (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303946)

The Brookhaven National Lab ( http://www.bnl.gov/world/ ) has an exposed webcam at:

http://x12b-cams.nsls.bnl.gov/indexFrame.shtml?n ew style=One&cam=1

I already sent them a note, but if they get a slashdotting maybe they will notice it sooner... who knows, the Terrorists may be watching!

HAH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303950)

we'll never give you the search query!

slashdot the fun? hardly..

it's available to anyone with five minutes of time and half-a-clue :)
(and totally worth finding hehehehe)

Re:HAH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303961)

what sucks is now that it was on slash dot people will start wiseing up god damit slashdot

Slashdot effect on webcams? (2, Interesting)

byteCoder (205266) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303960)

Is this the first recorded instance of a wide array of small webcam servers getting simultaneously slashdotted?

3xpl01tz for these cameras (1)

rubz (719242) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303965)

Alot of these cameras are exploitable too. It was fun along time ago making these cameras mine... ofcourse I always reset the pass...ofcourse... There is an exploit here: http://www.k-otik.com/exploits/08242004.Axis.sh.ph p For those still asking, the search string is: inurl:"view/index.shtml" For those lazy ones here it is wrapped up and packaged for you: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=inurl%3A%22view% 2Findex.shtml%22 The following is a list of servers: http://www.networkpunk.com/?q=node/view/614 Thank you. ViceVirtue

Where do you want to go today? (tm) (1)

PNutts (199112) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303970)

Combine this with the IP address locator (http://www.geobytes.com/IpLocator.htm?GetLocation ) and take your dream vacation from the comfort of your own !

can't seem to find... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303973)

any women's locker rooms. :(

Root Password (2, Informative)

nodnoL (837123) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303974)

There is also a known vulnerability with the root password

http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/archive/bugtraq/2001/ 12/msg00067.html [uni-stuttgart.de]

Re:Root Password (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304070)

One of the things the linked article discusses is ways of setting default passwords that are unique(-ish) to a given unit. This is a solved problem - coded car radios.


Many coded car radios can have the codes recovered or reprogrammed with a new code. Sometimes the codes can be determined from the serial number.

Does it matter they are public? (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11303981)

Since most of them are being used as simple security cameras for simi-public areas, there really isn't much secret data that is going to be discovered..

So you can watch cars in a parking lot.. Or people mill around the mall...Big risk there..

I don't see a big deal that most of them are not being locked down. Unless i missed something here..

Re:Does it matter they are public? (1)

acvh (120205) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304000)

or people in line at the airport security checkpoint [slashdot.org] ?

Re:Does it matter they are public? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304026)

Not sure if that was meant as sarcasm or not..

Its still a simi-public area. You could go down and stand there in person and watch..

You would look silly, but its legal ( today ) to look at people..

Re:Does it matter they are public? (1)

surprise_audit (575743) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304083)

The "big deal" to us on SlashDot is that a bunch of so-called security people have installed *something* without taking basic security precautions. The "big deal" to the general public is that, not only are they being watched at the mall or wherever, but the id10ts who installed the cameras are letting anyone, including terrorists, access the cameras.

On the other hand, the general public won't give a damn about it, until someone convinces them that they have a right to walk through the mall without anyone seeing them on camera, and never mind that a thousand people have seen them...

Exploitable.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303983)

I discovered quite along time ago that if you search for a certain firmware version of the Axis cameras, (Axis Network Camera 2.XX) you can find exploitable cameras that have not had their firmware upgraded to fix a security bug.

http://camera//admin/admin.shtml will bypass the passwords of cameras that don't have the newest firmware. (I found this on security focus)

I fear what happens when someone discovers that they can enable telnet and get root access on tons of cameras, and starts them churning spam....

why public IP? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303986)

Why in the hell do people assign public IPs to camera's directly?

I know that some maybe public for a reason (news, weather stations, etc...), but I bet the majority don't need to be opened to the public.

Come on people...get with the program.

Before you start slashdotting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11303999)

I would recommend you not underestimate the intent of some cameras out there.
I wouldn't meddle (ie. admin control) with certain camera's, lest I be visited by such people with gray cadillacs and brown raincoats...

A more clear example is this camera [216.123.238.206] which is absolutely public. I did however encounter similar cameras with a more restricted character (page 16/17 of 2nd google link).

Google Links to Web cams (5, Informative)

Numeric (22250) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304003)

Session Restore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304050)

Remeber, use the session restore plugin to save the tabs when the java applets crash firefox ;)

Speaking of IP cam, why isn't there higher res.... (2, Interesting)

tcc (140386) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304051)

If you look on axis's site, you see most of them atre ~640x480 resolution, one being 1280x960, toshiba also has one megapixel version but it's astronomically out of price reach for simple applications.

With all of those sub 100 cameras that are going up to 3mpix these days, how come there aren't "HD"webcams or anything similar in the cheap end of the spectrum? it would be good enough for low-level consumer home security, and I'm sure it would sell like crazy. I know the image quality wouldn't be equal to the top webcam using CCD out there, but some application would require more resolution before perfect color reproduction.

Anyways just a thought... If anyone could point me to something that already exists, it would be nice, as I am sure a lot of people here would jump on this... :)

Wireless (1)

Gary Destruction (683101) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304052)

Instead of using wireless on cameras, they could have used wired connections and allowed a VPN login. That might have been a *little* safer. So much for Closed Circuit TV.

Google and web cams... (1)

Tempus61 (847908) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304068)

Most of the links coming up probably originated from a site thats been up for years called "Earth Cam". They have so many they have to categorize them...Google's just doing what it's supposed to finding everything...Well almost everything...L8r all...

They still wont know (2, Interesting)

KhalidBoussouara (768934) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304074)

Even eafter this story has been posted and many of the cameras have been slashdotted the admins still wont have a clue.

These have been known for a while. It's hardly breaking news. I visit the site soetimes. There is a lot more than cameras. There are links for usernames, passwords, databases, etc.

Guess the Location... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304081)

ok, where hell is this:

http://219.96.71.76/control/userimage.html

fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11304099)

Hey, there's even some naked people passing by this cam [axiscam.net] . Wonder where in the world that might be.

iSight (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Writer (746272) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304122)

I heard about this sort of security problem when CU-SeeMe first came out years ago and I'm surprised it has become an issue again. Apple's iSight has a built-in iris that closes when you twist the lens, and twisting the lens also doubles as a switch for turning the camera on and off as well as launching iChat AV. Plus, there's a little LED that lets you know when it's on. I always thought that webcams should always have a physical lens cap on them because just for that added security, and never considered getting one until the iSight came out.

Blame the Users (1)

eno2001 (527078) | more than 9 years ago | (#11304126)

This is not a design problem. Because if it was a design problem, then we should be abandoning TCP/IP altogether. The real problem is that the Internet was given to the masses while it was still in a "beta" or "release candidate" stage. One of the things that should have been in place before everyone and his brother got internet access is VPN. These cameras wouldn't be a problem if they were behind a firewall and the only access is via VPN or some other method of tunneling. Perhaps if the boxes were labelled "Use Behind a Secure Firewall" then this wouldn't be as common.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...