/ Forums
New To The Forum? Click Here To Read The How To Guide. -- Developers Click Here.

What Can the DK2 IR Camera See?

13

Comments

  • YukonJackYukonJack Posts: 7
    Virtual Boy (or Girl)
    ofGoldsun wrote:
    InteriorD wrote:
    yes someone can disable the light that says its active.

    Seriously? I tought those were hardwired in the camera to light up whenever they're active... whats the use of them then?
    Do you have any source on that? (not doubting, just really want a source)... (and some post-its)

    Whenever I use the DK2 with UE4, the head tracker camera is working just fine even though the blue camera light is off.
  • EarlGreyEarlGrey Posts: 854
    Art3mis
    I am very worried about the camera, I don't think Oculus gives this enough seriousness.

    The world today is very different than it was just couple of years ago. In case you haven't been keeping track of all the privacy violation news then webcams are pretty unsafe, and countless of examples of webcams being hacked exist. The American law enforcement even has a special program to take over webcams, without the webcam light being active!

    I have no interest in having the Oculus webcam on top of my monitor, with a potential hacker watching me or some privacy right violating spy agency monitoring everything in my life and logging it into a database for "safe keeping". I physically unplug the camera and put it away when I don't use the rift.

    It's only a question of WHEN the Oculus camera is hacked, not IF, and you'll end up seeing photos of some innocent girl or guy being leaked on reddit or 4chan or whatever. Then some time later we'll find out Oculus has a U.S. court ordered gag order enabling access to their systems via a backdoor. I mean this is the world we live in today. Nothing can be trusted and everything should be treated and malicious.

    I'm sorry. I use my computer and internet knowing everything I type, browse and do is potentially monitored and logged. But I prefer not to be watched when I'm not using the computer. Having this "eye" on top of my monitor just creeps me out.

    Already you have a Oculus employee stating that the camera can't see anything, and then you have developers that claim otherwise.


    That's just one aspect of this all, personal privacy. Then when you put in the mix the attitude of all sorts of different countries towards "spy technology from america". At some point China will simply ban U.S. companies selling "webcams" in China, including Oculus Rift which uses a "webcam", albeit infrared, that won't matter. Then you'll see France, Germany follow suit. Already China has banned Windows 8 from government computers. In the near future this will ramp up.

    The camera is risky business, not just for the potentially violated consumer, but also for Oculus itself if their product gets caught up in some privacy/spying/trade-war.
  • TwitchmonkeyTwitchmonkey Posts: 1,121
    This is an important issue and I commend the people that have looked into what exactly the camera is capable of. If there is a vulnerability, it can and likely will be exploited in some instances. I'm not sure unplugging the camera and putting it away after every use is necessary, I don't believe any webcams can see through solid matter, so it seems like some felt or construction paper taped over the lens would suffice, but whatever works. I certainly won't be leaving mine free of any obstructions when I don't need it.
  • EarlGreyEarlGrey Posts: 854
    Art3mis
    This is an important issue and I commend the people that have looked into what exactly the camera is capable of. If there is a vulnerability, it can and likely will be exploited in some instances. I'm not sure unplugging the camera and putting it away after every use is necessary, I don't believe any webcams can see through solid matter, so it seems like some felt or construction paper taped over the lens would suffice, but whatever works. I certainly won't be leaving mine free of any obstructions when I don't need it.

    I don't think that's sufficient, to simply say to people "cover up the camera if you want privacy". There should be no potential to violate your privacy in the first place. With DK1 you didn't have to worry about this.

    Also, what about the time when you're actually using the Rift and the camera is active, are you not entitled to privacy then?

    And obviously, if you want to bring VR to mobile, then a distant camera won't do the tricky anyway.
  • TwitchmonkeyTwitchmonkey Posts: 1,121
    EarlGrey wrote:
    I don't think that's sufficient, to simply say to people "cover up the camera if you want privacy". There should be no potential to violate your privacy in the first place. With DK1 you didn't have to worry about this.

    Also, what about the time when you're actually using the Rift and the camera is active, are you not entitled to privacy then?

    Fair enough, it should only be able to capture as much as is necessary for the positional tracking to function.Unfortunately, I'm not educated enough on this matter to know what that entails. Is there a way to disable this sort of image capturing functionality without breaking the IR functionality? If so then Oculus needs to make those alterations immediately.
  • Jedi2016Jedi2016 Posts: 114
    What exactly is it you expect Oculus, or any other webcam maker for that matter, to do? No webcam is "hack proof". There is nothing Oculus can do via software to make it happen. Whatever they tried, someone would find a way around it if they wanted to. The only surefire way to prevent it is to either cover it (which is why many webcams have built-in covers, as I expect CV1's camera to have), or to unplug it. Make it physically impossible for anyone to use it against you.

    It's not entirely on Oculus to make your computer "safe". You've got to at least put in a little effort yourself. Look at me, I don't even have a webcam because of how vulnerable they are, even though my computer is pretty heavily protected and locked down. And I'm not pissing myself over the DK2's camera, I'll simply cover it up when I'm not using it.
  • andrewtekandrewtek Posts: 969
    Art3mis
    Fair enough, it should only be able to capture as much as is necessary for the positional tracking to function.Unfortunately, I'm not educated enough on this matter to know what that entails. Is there a way to disable this sort of image capturing functionality without breaking the IR functionality? If so then Oculus needs to make those alterations immediately.

    Some of us would like to potentially integrate with the IR camera to track other points... I guess we can have our users put another camera on their desk ... But why not just reuse the one already hooked up?

    Some people are concerned about what the Microsoft Kinekt sees too; but that camera is still able to see full color and IR. If you really want to be secure, disconnect the device when not in use... Or perhaps put a light filter in front of your IR camera that only allows the light from the headset through...
    OS: Win10 Pro x64, GPU: EVGA GTX 980, CPU: i7-6700K @4.0GHz, Mobo: ASRock Z170 Extreme7+, Ram: 32GB@2133, Main Drive: Samsung SM951 512GB, Monitor: 50" 4K @ 60hz
    Tools: UE4, Blender, VS2013, PSP 4.12, Fre:ac
  • TwitchmonkeyTwitchmonkey Posts: 1,121
    I can understand wanting to utilize the webcam functionality of the Rift camera, but I think it's more important in this case that the camera functions as it is stated to function and no more. If they wanted it to be a webcam/IR camera then fine, state that and we'll act accordingly, but promoting it as something that is just able to track the dots on the DK2 and having it have hidden, secret functionality is not in anyone's best interest. If you want developers to be able to use that functionality of the device isn't it a better idea to publicize what it's capable of?
  • andrewtekandrewtek Posts: 969
    Art3mis
    I can understand wanting to utilize the webcam functionality of the Rift camera, but I think it's more important in this case that the camera functions as it is stated to function and no more. If they wanted it to be a webcam/IR camera then fine, state that and we'll act accordingly, but promoting it as something that is just able to track the dots on the DK2 and having it have hidden, secret functionality is not in anyone's best interest. If you want developers to be able to use that functionality of the device isn't it a better idea to publicize what it's capable of?

    Well, it has been asked on this developer forum. A response from OVR:
    viewtopic.php?f=26&t=10694#p139968
    I don't think we are exposing the raw camera data right now, but I guess in theory it's possible.

    As this is a developer kit, doing things like this is what is expected... And if developers tie into the IR tracking for additional features, the CV1 might tout that it's IR tracker works with various accessories.

    EDIT: Obviously, OVR's response was not an endorsement for using the IR camera for tracking additional accessories. I was merely pointing out that the question was asked and we were not told "No".
    OS: Win10 Pro x64, GPU: EVGA GTX 980, CPU: i7-6700K @4.0GHz, Mobo: ASRock Z170 Extreme7+, Ram: 32GB@2133, Main Drive: Samsung SM951 512GB, Monitor: 50" 4K @ 60hz
    Tools: UE4, Blender, VS2013, PSP 4.12, Fre:ac
  • I would love to see some evidence that a webcam has ever been 'hacked', I can't find any examples that weren't RATs or open IP cams, let alone anything that even a basic firewall wouldn't stop very easily.
  • DarrenMDarrenM Posts: 236
    Hiro Protagonist
    I don't mean to cause a panic, but they may be able to hear you even if the camera doesn't have a mic

  • andrewtekandrewtek Posts: 969
    Art3mis
    Lol. That video FTW.
    OS: Win10 Pro x64, GPU: EVGA GTX 980, CPU: i7-6700K @4.0GHz, Mobo: ASRock Z170 Extreme7+, Ram: 32GB@2133, Main Drive: Samsung SM951 512GB, Monitor: 50" 4K @ 60hz
    Tools: UE4, Blender, VS2013, PSP 4.12, Fre:ac
  • DarrenM wrote:
    I don't mean to cause a panic, but they may be able to hear you even if the camera doesn't have a mic

    That was awesome. i knew about laser microphones but i didn't thought it was possible to do this just with a camera.
    Plastic bags are a treat to privacy i am going to do a petition to make them illegal. I wait for your signature Paul33993
    Knowledge, the ever growing and most powerful tool known. Pick it up! the common fools are scared of it!
  • andrewtekandrewtek Posts: 969
    Art3mis
    Lol! I wonder if a tin foil hat will transfer sound through video better?
    OS: Win10 Pro x64, GPU: EVGA GTX 980, CPU: i7-6700K @4.0GHz, Mobo: ASRock Z170 Extreme7+, Ram: 32GB@2133, Main Drive: Samsung SM951 512GB, Monitor: 50" 4K @ 60hz
    Tools: UE4, Blender, VS2013, PSP 4.12, Fre:ac
  • menionemenione Posts: 45
    Judging from Aux's reply on the first page, I don't think Oculus knew or considered the other stuff the camera could see.
  • Freebirth001Freebirth001 Posts: 73
    Lawnmower Man (or Woman)
    menione wrote:
    Judging from Aux's reply on the first page, I don't think Oculus knew or considered the other stuff the camera could see.

    i just dont think they considered how many nutjobs there are on these forums. this kind of thing specifically gets me riled up. someone using weak evidence and a very obvious bias in their conjecture to try and 'poove' how easily something that just wont happen could happen. yes security is an issue. but if you think there is going to be a wave of people suddenly able to 'hack' into your infrared camera. when they dont do it to webcams that see regular light is just absurd. the few cases where someone has illegaly spied on someone has been somone gaining access or using access to a webcam they already had been given (like in the case of the school's IT guy spying on teenagers while they undressed this person had access to these laptops using a program they knew was on there when the students where given the laptops) piggybacking on a stream from a webcam in progress. (watching what you think is a private interaction as it happens because they are capturing it as it is sent) or just stealing video recording that you or another has made with the webcam.

    anything more is baseless conjecture with little or no evidence.

    expecially when the answer to this concern is so simple. first unplug it while its not in use, and second if its that much of an issue for you dont use it in the first place. its your loss, but stop faning the flames of psuedo scientific thinking
  • menionemenione Posts: 45
    The answer to this is simple but I'm sure it's more common than you think.
    You have to remember that someone getting hacked isn't exactly front page news material unless they're famous.
  • Freebirth001Freebirth001 Posts: 73
    Lawnmower Man (or Woman)
    menione wrote:
    The answer to this is simple but I'm sure it's more common than you think.
    You have to remember that someone getting hacked isn't exactly front page news material unless they're famous.

    more common than you might think? no, i know it is possible. and does happen. however just because while someone has access to someones webcam while they are in the system it doesnt mean they are interested in it. the vast majority of people getting into your system arent doing it to see your room. they want your files. or want to install a keylogger to get at your accounts. its like being concerned that the person robbing your house is going to drink your milk. i'm much more concerned about the cash, guns, and jewlery they just stole.

    and the point most people are missing i think is that this has nothing to do with oculus or any other webcam producer. this is your computer that is being hacked into. not the webcam. invest in some decent web security, keep flash, javascript, windows, linux, and all your other programs up to date. and the chances of you getting hacked and virtually nil.
  • menionemenione Posts: 45
    You're underestimating voyeuristic tendencies in human nature. Why do you think reality television was such a hit?
  • Freebirth001Freebirth001 Posts: 73
    Lawnmower Man (or Woman)
    menione wrote:
    You're underestimating voyeuristic tendencies in human nature. Why do you think reality television was such a hit?

    ok..lets go with that.

    it takes something like 300 hours of film to make one hour of reality tv. this is assuming it is not a semiscripted or outright scripted program like most reality tv is.

    even if you cut out half of it due to bad angles in that 150 hours of life. only fourty minutes of it is remotely exciting to view. and that is after the mundane stuff is snipped out to make everyone seem as crazy as possible (i was a low level assistant during the second season of big brother, trust met that shit is BORING though they have perfected the art of getting them drunk and goading them but thats probably one of the more 'realistic' reality shows) . honestly think about what you are doing while using your computer/laptop. assuming you are actually infront of the screen. how exciting will you typing or watching youtube be to a voyer? maybe they catch you watching porn. or undressing or something. and yes its creepy and a violation of your privacy. but its still not oculus to blame. all of these programs that let people into your computer are malicious bits of code that you unwittingly download. be it by clicking on a lick or downloading some file. or they are using a security risk from an outdated program with high level access to your pc. java, and flash and norton are the biggest. its not your camera, its your pc.
  • At this point, I think this discussion has veered way off topic and is now on a bad trajectory. I'm not a mod, and I know I fanned the flames a bit, but let's keep things within acceptable distance of the topic before the mods get involved.

    Let me rephrase my original question:

    "Ignoring the implications for surveillance and privacy, what exactly is the DK2 Camera capable of seeing without any hardware modifications?"
  • SinisterSaladSinisterSalad Posts: 31
    Lawnmower Man (or Woman)
    Just put on your tin foil hat and everything will be OK.
    DK2 Order date: Mar 27, 2014 12:46 PM PDT
  • menionemenione Posts: 45
    ok..lets go with that.

    it takes something like 300 hours of film to make one hour of reality tv. this is assuming it is not a semiscripted or outright scripted program like most reality tv is.

    You realize they could easily just tape it and fast forward to the interesting bits.
  • andrewtekandrewtek Posts: 969
    Art3mis
    InteriorD wrote:
    Let me rephrase my original question:

    "Ignoring the implications for surveillance and privacy, what exactly is the DK2 Camera capable of seeing without any hardware modifications?"

    I thought you got an answer from the community here:
    viewtopic.php?f=26&t=11385#p152510

    The IR camera can take in light within the IR spectrum +/-. You might be able to get a more meaningful image than the one posted by lazydodo by processing the raw IR data differently.

    Are you looking for an official answer from Oculus? If so, you might want to e-mail Ocululs support directly.
    OS: Win10 Pro x64, GPU: EVGA GTX 980, CPU: i7-6700K @4.0GHz, Mobo: ASRock Z170 Extreme7+, Ram: 32GB@2133, Main Drive: Samsung SM951 512GB, Monitor: 50" 4K @ 60hz
    Tools: UE4, Blender, VS2013, PSP 4.12, Fre:ac
  • andrewtek wrote:
    InteriorD wrote:
    Let me rephrase my original question:

    "Ignoring the implications for surveillance and privacy, what exactly is the DK2 Camera capable of seeing without any hardware modifications?"

    I thought you got an answer from the community here:
    viewtopic.php?f=26&t=11385#p152510

    The IR camera can take in light within the IR spectrum +/-. You might be able to get a more meaningful image than the one posted by lazydodo by processing the raw IR data differently.

    Are you looking for an official answer from Oculus? If so, you might want to e-mail Ocululs support directly.

    You're right, I have my answer already. I wrote that so that this thread I made won't become something it wasn't meant to be.
  • TravidTravid Posts: 3
    edited August 2014
    I just took this picture at night with a desk lamp with NO hardware modification. All I did for processing is turn it black and white.
    cwX7Nk7.jpg
    http://i.imgur.com/cwX7Nk7.jpg

    If you're concerned about your privacy, cover it! And just to fan the flames, no the blue light on the Position Tracker did NOT light up when I was recording that picture.

    Dave
  • jngdwejngdwe Posts: 566
    Most of us own a laptop, or at least a device with a camera. Why worry about one additional camera when most people already own two or three more capable webcams? The DK2 camera is not a privacy risk in the slightest when compared to everything else we have/do.

    This has to be one of the most hyped up and bizarre threads yet.
  • menionemenione Posts: 45
    jngdwe wrote:
    Most of us own a laptop, or at least a device with a camera. Why worry about one additional camera when most people already own two or three more capable webcams? The DK2 camera is not a privacy risk in the slightest when compared to everything else we have/do.

    This has to be one of the most hyped up and bizarre threads yet.

    I think a bit of it comes from the first page where someone from Oculus said no images can be seen with this camera which was later proven false.
  • jngdwe wrote:
    Most of us own a laptop, or at least a device with a camera. Why worry about one additional camera when most people already own two or three more capable webcams? The DK2 camera is not a privacy risk in the slightest when compared to everything else we have/do.

    I'd say treat it like any other camera attached to your computer or other network-connected device: a very low "threat" for spying or whatever but in cases where you are concerned about such things, it's best to cover it or point it away from you.

    For me that's not a big issue. I doubt I am at any real risk of having my webcam used to spy on me but at the same time, out of habit I just keep it pointed at the wall when I'm not using it. I'll probably get into the same habit with the Rift camera but for now, the odds are just so low and I'm not concerned enough to worry about it. In the end, it's still a camera hooked to your computer so treat it with the same concern (or lack thereof) that you would a webcam and things should be OK.
  • ThreeEyesThreeEyes Posts: 2,230
    Virtual Boy (or Girl)
    A small "tinfoil hat" over the camera should take away all fears.

    Or unplug it. Or do this... :D

    Tinfoil-hat.jpg
    But... but... but... I just NEED to know about the Baba! The Baba has me hypmotized! :shock:
Sign In or Register to comment.