Under Review

web cam protection

Userlevel 2
Hi my ideia is to add web cam anti hyjack anti cam logger to web root thanks

12 replies

Userlevel 2
i have  had my web cam turned on form an out sider and it took pics of me undressing and they try to black mail me but did not work so i think this is and good i dea  along with   key board anti loggers thanks makke it so there is am alert to let you know if you cam is being hyjacked qand you acn deny it
Userlevel 7
An interesting idea that I will cautiously kudo.For your information please see:https://community.webroot.com/t5/Webroot-SecureAnywhere-Complete/Does-webroot-protect-against-hacking-and-web-based-attacks/td-p/45422andhttps://community.webroot.com/t5/Security-Industry-News/Webcams-taken-over-by-hackers-charity-warns/td-p/46066previous threads on the topic, the second of which include some guidance on how to avoid the unfortunate incident that you experienced.Baldrick
Badge +11
I recall looking at the features of the PC gamer version of Webroot. I am not sure if the other versions include this protection but the gamer eddition definetly includes web cam protection. If not then it shoud definetly include it to stop incidents as described above. 

Userlevel 7
Indeed, Brad, I too looked over the current specs of all the versions and could only find the Gamer version making specific reference to this feature.Had wondered if it was just a case of registering the web cam components under the Identity Shield but again could find no reference to that this would work.Baldrick
Badge +11
Good idea with the identity shield, but either way I will follow your lead and kudo this to hopefully get a definitive answer. 
Userlevel 5
Good idea , i vote that 🙂
This is where I get really concerned about the gap between Webroot marketing versus reality.
This kind of serious security issue really should not be happening and I seem to recall that I read somewhere deep in the features of WR that this cannot happen - but perhaps that was on the business product not the consumer one, I'm not sure?
Regardless, there are plenty of solutions out there that block unauthorised webcam access, the OP really should not be experiencing this kind of security issue with Webroot; it's appalling that she did - but for one such feature request here there must be hundreds, or thousands, of other women who were compromised by their webcam whilst using Webroot. That we are 5 months on from it being raised without an offical Webroot reply is...disgusting.
I have used Prevx / Webroot for probably 7 years, but it seems that 1) these kind of fundamental issues persist and 2) the great majority of Feature Requests are simply igmored / discarded...so whay do we bother as a community to post them and spend our valuable time and effort trying to help Webroot?
I agree that this would be a useful addition.
I don't agree with cavehomme's assertions, however. Just wondering, cavehomme, where does it say in iankirk1313's post that this happened to him/her while using Webroot? It doesn't, plain and simple. It's quite possible that the OP even allowed apps/programs to have access to the webcam. Do you read every word of the EULA when you install programs? These settings are also part of the Flash Global Settings and could have been enabled that way.
So please, can we have a discussion on the merits of the suggestion without all of the sabre-rattling?
Burndaddy - I'm not Sabre-rattling, I'm just stating the obvious and real experience. I think it's pretty obvious that this request relates to a failure of WRSA, otherwise why would it even be here?
Not only that, in my own tests about a year ago in a VM the webcam was not effectively disabled with quite a few malware samples. Webroot support / community would typically reply that WRSA monitors new samples and sees what they do do....but clearly the damage is being done in the meantime.
Better to have something like a default-deny method, as a precaution, than get a supposedly great piece of anti-malware technology not covering the basics and failing users.
Time to wake up and smell the coffee; Webroot is good but we have a few holes, this being one of them, that needs filling, whether you accept that reality or not.
Userlevel 7
I sould have to beg to disagree with you once again cavehomme...there is no way that one could infer what you are inferring here.
What I meant to say Baldrick is apps designed to test security effectiveness, not actual in the wild malware. Anyway, why you would would doubt the OP and their feauture request is puzzling to me. There is clearly a problem, it's raised, and now thankfully it's reviewed. Well done to Webroot for taking this matter seriously, I know at least one other AV company that still struggles to accept they have the same major issue.
Userlevel 7
And why you would not is puzzling me...so we will have to agree to disagree. ;)