[adamwk]

the camera covering never made sense to me and just seems like amateur hacker paranoia. if there truly is a "They" monitoring our every action in front of a computer, why are They more concerned about what we look like over what we're saying or doing on our computer?

[amingilani]

That's not the point of a camera cover. It's not to protect against an APT (which is what I'm hoping you mean by a "they") but rather it is to serve as a last line of defense against an attacker that has compromised your system and hopes to use compromising photographs of yourself to get paid.

This isn't unreasonable. Attackers that have managed to compromise systems do use compromising photos as leverage. Literally it's called sextortion[0]. With the small price of a camera cover, you can be reasonably confident you're not a victim.

[0]: https://www.allure.com/story/online-predators-blackmail-sext...

[adamwk]

She was compromised by social engineering, not by accessing a MacBook camera while bypassing the led

[kevingadd]

https://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/is-your-school-spyin...

There are plenty of other examples of cases where this specific brand of paranoia is reasonable

[johnywalks]

"They" can be anyone with the latest 0-day exploit.