Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cybersecurity Expert Questions Existence of Embedded Camera On SIA's Inflight Entertainment Systems (yahoo.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the privacy-concerns dept.

Vitaly Kamluk, an information security expert and a high-ranking executive of cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab, went on Twitter with concerns about an embedded camera in Singapore Airlines' (SIA) inflight entertainment systems. He tagged SIA in his post on Sunday, asking the airline to clarify how the camera is being used. Yahoo News reports: SIA quickly allayed his fears of unwanted surveillance by assuring Kamluk that the cameras have been disabled, with no plans to use them in the future. Not all of their devices sport the camera, though -- SIA explained that only some of its newer inflight entertainment systems come with cameras embedded in the hardware. In another tweet, SIA affirmed that the cameras were already built in by the original equipment manufacturers in newer inflight entertainment systems. Kamluk recommended that it's best to disable the cameras physically -- with stickers, for example -- to provide better peace of mind. In 2017, entertainment device developer Panasonic Avionics said it was studying how eye tracking can be used for a better passenger experience. As the report mentions, "Cameras can be used for identity recognition on planes, which in turn, would allow for in-flight biometric payment (much like Face ID on Apple devices) and personalized services."

81 comments

  1. Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by ffkom · · Score: 2

    If they are known to exist and "disabled", the most easy thing is to put an adhesive sticker on their lens.

    1. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, we read the summary too

    2. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's handy to know that it's there, though - I'll make sure I pack something appropriate to cover it for my next flight.

    3. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gonna rub my nuts all over it

    4. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing gets by ffkom without a sniff.

    5. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Guys! We got the president himself posting here!

    6. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, sounds like the indochimp "Tech X-Pert 'editor'" at work as usual.

    7. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long before a strip (or oh horror, a whole roll) of tape will be a TSA "problem" at check-in?

    8. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are they the salted variety or the chocolate covered ones?

    9. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice one. If it happens just take stamps with you ... Confiscating a first class American flag stamp would be a hard line to cross

    10. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Until somebody comes by and tells you the aircraft is not safe to fly with your sticker on. Then you get arrested for disobeying aircrew instructions. Good plan there.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    11. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Then you switch to non-metallic, non-conductive, non-toxic, non-flammable opaque marker.

    12. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      It means the airline company will come up with a bullshit regulation that the aircraft isn't safe to fly until all the cameras have a clear view of the passengers. Lawyers love creating such things.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soon, adhesive sticker will be banned from flights.

      I can't wait for the TSA to confiscate my baumküchen!

    14. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I wonder if there is also a microphone. My first thought would be to use it as a webcam, which would mean wanting a mic as well.

      Eventually companies are going to realize that people find it creepy to have a camera pointed at them. Laptop manufacturers are starting to get it, and include a physical sliding cover (although never anything for the microphones).

      Actually microphones are in some ways worse than the camera. With the camera there is usually a light that indicates when it is in use, controlled by the camera firmware so it's pretty much impossible for malware to disable, but the microphone is always on and always feeding in to the audio codec.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Laptop manufacturers are starting to get it, and include a physical sliding cover (although never anything for the microphones).

      Early webcam laptops had a sliding cover. They disappeared soon after on newer models.

      Actually microphones are in some ways worse than the camera. With the camera there is usually a light that indicates when it is in use, controlled by the camera firmware so it's pretty much impossible for malware to disable, but the microphone is always on and always feeding in to the audio codec.

      Early webcams in laptops had the LED wired to the power supply. If the camera had power, the light was on. Now you have to trust the firmware to tell you that the camera is on. Malware getting into firmware is far from impossible, hard to detect, and hard to get rid of.

    16. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Deez.
      Deez nuts.

    17. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Malware getting into firmware is far from impossible, hard to detect, and hard to get rid of.

      Some cases of malware getting into the firmware happened at the factory.

    18. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a penny would work better. glue it on.

    19. Re:Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      The touchscreen Google Home devices have brought back the door over the camera, unlike the Alexa devices. Now if only there was some way of proving the microphone was effectively disabled...

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    20. Re: Nothing a simple sticker could not solve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both

  2. Video chat from $5 min now on sias air! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Video chat from $5 min now on sias air!

    1. Re:Video chat from $5 min now on sias air! by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Video chat from $5 min now on sias air!

      Present your face within 10 inches of the screen to accept. If you don't want to accept, then upgrade to a seat where you can move your face further away for the special price of S$2000 per hour of flight.

  3. It's a privacy concern by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    I mean, if they can tell that you're on the plane in your assigned seat ... I got nothing.

    1. Re:It's a privacy concern by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      But what about the Freeze Peach?!

      It gonna solve the puzzle. It was RICO. In the repository. With the Logan Act.

    2. Re: It's a privacy concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Self-satisfied buffoons sure do hate freedom of speech.

    3. Re:It's a privacy concern by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Face match passport application at embassy, at airport, after security, in aircraft?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re: It's a privacy concern by astrofurter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So much surveillance, so little benefit.

      It's still unsafe to walk down many streets at night. The rich are still above the Law. American workers wages are still depressed by an army of (fully lawful) imported guest worker scabs. The real economy is still in a state of near collapse. The 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, and 9th Amendments are still de facto repealed.

      But Big Brother is always watching. Don't worry, because Big Brother loves us all.

    5. Re: It's a privacy concern by tofus · · Score: 1

      I was waiting for an "...and the Earth is still flat", but luckily you stopped at Big Brother.

    6. Re: It's a privacy concern by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Pray tell, what do flat Earth trolls have to do with cybernetic totalitarianism?

    7. Re: It's a privacy concern by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      CCTV doesn't do much to reduce crime. At best it displaces it.

      Random anecdote. A friend bought a 4 channel dashcam system for his car. Covers the front, back and both sides, and works while parked. He was fed up of people hitting his car with their doors in car parks. Eventually he caught someone scratching his paintwork. Of course they had already driven off so he had to get their details from their insurance and put in a claim that way.

      Problem is his own insurance premium then went up as the result of having made a claim. He's now trying to get the third party's insurance to cover his increased premium too.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re: It's a privacy concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are in a plane in your assigned seat, the video device in front of you knows your name. Countdown until airplane infotainment screens show constant targeted ads. (Unless you pay an upgrade fee of course.)

    9. Re: It's a privacy concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah But CCTV helps TV stations fill their schedules.

    10. Re: It's a privacy concern by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      CCTV works as people still expect to do crime in the areas of the city they know and understand.
      Once police are politically allowed to stop crime they can get crime numbers down.
      The "reduce crime" is a real thing as the criminals are in prison for decades due to the math of consecutive sentences.
      Same with matching passport images to embassy applications to people entering and then leaving a nation.
      Now the trick is to watch them on the flight in and out too :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re: It's a privacy concern by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      It's still unsafe to walk down many streets at night.

      Only in American cities, and places like Buenos Aires.

      Unlike the USA, other western nations have said being able to walk down the street safely at night is important and they've created environments where that's possible.

    12. Re: It's a privacy concern by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      My brother - you know those streets I mentioned, where it's unsafe to walk at night? They're positively bristling with surveillance cameras. Mass surveillance does NOTHING to protect ordinary citizens.

    13. Re: It's a privacy concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget about the 5th.

    14. Re: It's a privacy concern by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      When law enforcement is held back, thats down to the politics of a city, state.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  4. All non-jew men: Beware jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Beware jews for your little girls' sake https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    1. Re:All non-jew men: Beware jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From JEWS' talmud. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

    2. Re:All non-jew men: Beware jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So non-Jews are into little girls.

      Well that's what I heard.

    3. Re:All non-jew men: Beware jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your a knight of the KKK too.

    4. Re:All non-jew men: Beware jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I read in that link's outputs Jews say it's ok to rape little 3 yr. old girls. Specifically non-jew ones. The KKK is right about jew sickos.

    5. Re:All non-jew men: Beware jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's against laws asshole jew. Don't tell us "it's ok because our talmud says we can rape 3 yr. old little non-jew girls". Anyone that does is a sicko including jews.

  5. Wait, what? by msauve · · Score: 1

    Sia has her own inflight entertainment channel? With a camera, so she can watch you while you're watching her? I didn't know they had that on planes. (not that there's anything wrong with that)

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re: Wait, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a fee you can watch any passenger live - a reality show. ðY

  6. Yeah Right by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    The camera is never disabled, neither is the microphone, neither is the wireless transceiver. If it exists it's recording and if it's not provable recording at a given moment it's an unrequested update away from being switched on.

    1. Re:Yeah Right by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I love how people are just ignoring the obvious reason for it - video calling.

      they just want to charge , but didn't actually finish building the system and nobody would use it anyways for their prices.. much like "free wifi" on flights for 10 megs of data or whatever.

      charging for calls and all that was always a wet dream for the airlines. problem is nobody wants to pay for it and the systems outdate themselves before they're even in use. like for video calls they would need to choose what app to use nowadays.

      on many flights you can call or instant message another seat. another feature nobody uses ever.

      my favorite useless feature was usb slot for viewing photos and pdf files on the crap screen. why no movies? because it was outdated already and they want you to view their inflight library, which they give you free anyways. but let's be honest who in their right mind would prepare to read pdf files off an usb stick on a plane? friggin nobody thats who.

      this one flight had a smartphone looking wired remote for the inflight system. also totally useless and unly useful because the ui for skipping forward in a movie in the actual device was so goddamn laggy..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Yeah Right by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      USB port that can charge at more than 2.5W would be nice. Bring your own movies on a phone/tablet. AC socket is even better.

      The on-board media libraries seem to vary a lot, but are always kinda small. You get 3 episodes of some TV series in over-compressed 480p. Maybe aviation rated hard drives are really expensive or something.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re: Yeah Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure to bring a USB charging condom. Unless you want the airplane to download the contents of your phone.

    4. Re:Yeah Right by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 2

      I love how people are just ignoring the obvious reason for it - video calling.

      Bullshit.

    5. Re: Yeah Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure to bring a USB charging condom. Unless you want the airplane to download the contents of your phone.

      it's called a charging only usb cable. no data wires, only +5v and Ground.

    6. Re:Yeah Right by khchung · · Score: 1

      I love how people are just ignoring the obvious reason for it - video calling.

      People don't buy that excuse because it did not pass the sniff test.

      A sensible location for the video calling camera would be on the handset dock and covered when the headset is docked, visible only when you take out the handset to make calls.

      Another sensible setup for video call would be a physical cover for the camera such as a sliding door, so you can cover it to receive a video call even when you happened to be in a not-so-presentable state (putting on make up, just woke up bleary eyed, etc).

      Putting the camera below the screen without any cover so it can see you all the time only made sense if the use cases include monitoring the passenger for the entire flight.

      --
      Oliver.
  7. All this (paid) infotainment on airplanes by thrillseeker · · Score: 1

    and all we've been wanting for years is bigger seats, free wifi, and beer.

    1. Re:All this (paid) infotainment on airplanes by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure beer is wise, but if they'd sell the people next to me some pot brownies so they can sleep it would really help.

    2. Re:All this (paid) infotainment on airplanes by mentil · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I'd want to spend a long plane ride next to two Cheech & Chong wannabes. OTOH if I were riding next to Robin Williams, please get the man some cocaine! RIP

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  8. Smarter people than you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thankfully there are smarter people than you who know better:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/technology/personaltech/mark-zuckerberg-covers-his-laptop-camera-you-should-consider-it-too.html

    1. Re:Smarter people than you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I covered laptop camera long before Zuck so i must be real smart.

  9. Cameras by bagofbeans · · Score: 2

    Just because the airline isn't using the cameras, that doesn't mean that the inflight entertainment system supplier isn't logging activities, and then grabbing the logs when possible.

    So the big question is, does the inflight entertainment system supplier have telemetry or other access to their system after fitment?

    1. Re:Cameras by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Or you know, just even rogue airline employees with a grudge and a boot disk.

    2. Re: Cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're kidding, right? You think large airplane companies care about writing their own firmware? (Even if they did, you think they won't need to include half a dozen binary blobs that they have no idea about?)

  10. Russian concern for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL

  11. Wrong !!! by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 0

    SIA quickly allayed his fears of unwanted surveillance by assuring Kamluk that the cameras have been disabled

    Too late ... I already do not trust you anymore.

    These cameras should not be there in the first place.

    Just disabling them will not do it !!!

  12. KGB tells us not to worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An expert from a KGB/FSB owned Kaspersky Lab tells us not to worry about spying.

    Eugene Kaspersky is a KGB officer. And no, not a former officer.

  13. new slogan by astrofurter · · Score: 1

    SIA's new slogan:

    "Singapore Airlines - fly the dystopian police state skies!"

  14. Squawk codes with extra secret? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Squawk 7500 and bandwidth goes to camera's?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  15. Come see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the cynicism inherent in the system.

    "Cybersecurity expert is just a scared fuddy-duddy."

    "You're nothing but a moneybag, and we'll get your money through your face."

    And so on, and so forth.

  16. Like Apple ID by misnohmer · · Score: 1

    Do they claim they have multiple cameras now to support IR and 3D face based payment system? Or is it "like a cheap knock-off of Apple" which can be fooled with a smartphone photo?

  17. Component re-use by Going_Digital · · Score: 1

    Almost certain that this will be a screen with a camera that is used for some other system that is being re-purposed as a flight entertainment system. The camera is probably not used and the airline probably had no idea it was even there. It is a standard procedure to use off-the-shelf components that are already available instead of going to the expense of producing your own spec. The best reaction from the airline would be to tell people the camera is not used and simply apply a label with the airline brand over the camera so there is no doubt about it.

    1. Re:Component re-use by Local+ID10T · · Score: 1

      Hush you! Stop with that honesty and thoughtfulness!

      This is about OUTRAGE and INVASION OF PRIVACY... and other whiny bullshit.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
  18. Great plan! by sjbe · · Score: 2

    If they are known to exist and "disabled", the most easy thing is to put an adhesive sticker on their lens.

    Is that all? Now I just have to start carrying stickers on every flight and intentionally disabling a part of the aircraft every time I board. That sounds like a great plan! Not inconvenient or burdensome at all. I'm sure the airlines will be thrilled about people putting stickers all over their airplane that they then need to clean off.

    (yes that was sarcasm for the Sheldon Cooper clones reading this)

  19. Hard to believe they won't be used ... by fygment · · Score: 1

    The reasons and assurances by the companies seem hollow. A natural temptation for any organization would be monitoring of passengers for both marketing and security reasons. On the other hand surely there are more subtle ways to monitor passenger activity so maybe it is as they say.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  20. The reason we ignore it by aepervius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is because the market for video calling is nearly nill, whereas the airline simply buy component in bulk. As long as the component are within spec there is no need to requalify them (air worthyness can be a lengthy process), so it does not surprise me they got component with camera for which they simply do not use the camera, it is far cheaper than ordering the same component without camera.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  21. It's security scanning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Detection of Propensity for Aggression based on Facial Structure Irrespective of Face Race
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3352668/

  22. Thank you by Shotgun · · Score: 2

    Thank you for the article.

    Now we all know what to do with our used chewing gum.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  23. Rogue by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    As a standard, all cameras should have an LED on them that is lighted when the camera is powered, and that cannot be turned off by software (even by rogue EEPROM load).

    If it irritates you, put tape on it, or a little flip cap, or a dimming cap.

    This is the only way.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Rogue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda like the japanese phones make a sound you cannot cut when you take picture to signal perverts.

  24. The Next Time You Fly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...bring a roll of tape.

  25. Proof positive that msmash is illiterate by Qwaniton · · Score: 1

    Here we are: proof positive that msmash is illiterate. Imagine CmdrTaco replying to a comment with something this incoherent. Shame how far this site has fallen.

    1. Re: Proof positive that msmash is illiterate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youâ(TM)re the retarded one here, you dumb fuck.
      Thatâ(TM)s not msmashâ(TM)s real ID.