R5 Communication function OFF Service

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,658
2,001
Hamburg, Germany
So, I prefer the tech be removed. Why anyone cares or wants to know why is fascinating to me. We have no idea what the full capabilities of spy tech is as much of that is classified. So yes, naive. What's the problem if I have nothing to hide? That's the whole point.
I don't think anybody wants to challenge your preference of having it removed. It is nice to hear the opinion and reasoning from others about something to perhaps get a new view on it. That's why people are asking you about your reasoning for paying to remove something. It is something we did not understand and therefore are curious.

Having heard your reasoning, I for one just wanted to point out one aspect of it that doesn't sound right to me - that being GPS on its own revealing any information. As PBD said, a separate transmitor is required for that. But of course, any time you connect to the internet with a device that alone reveals something about your position and one should not count in Canon having either perfect security or perfect morals.

The point was just that GPS alone is not the culprit. Connecting to a network is, especially combined with undesirable software.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,341
2,188
I don't think anybody wants to challenge your preference of having it removed. It is nice to hear the opinion and reasoning from others about something to perhaps get a new view on it. That's why people are asking you about your reasoning for paying to remove something. It is something we did not understand and therefore are curious.

Having heard your reasoning, I for one just wanted to point out one aspect of it that doesn't sound right to me - that being GPS on its own revealing any information. As PBD said, a separate transmitor is required for that. But of course, any time you connect to the internet with a device that alone reveals something about your position and one should not count in Canon having either perfect security or perfect morals.

The point was just that GPS alone is not the culprit. Connecting to a network is, especially combined with undesirable software.

And the person who wants it removed rather than just "turning it off" has plausible reason, by the way: Any switch in software is suspect. You may think the device with the microphone, gps transmitter (i.e., whatever it is that is transmitting your GPS coordinates, which I agree isn't the GPS receiver itself), or camera is "off" but is it really?

There is a reason a lot of people put tape over the cameras on their monitors. And there are plenty of stories out there about people who started getting targeted for ads based on face-to-face conversations in the presence of electronics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,658
2,001
Hamburg, Germany
And the person who wants it removed rather than just "turning it off" has plausible reason, by the way: Any switch in software is suspect. You may think the device with the microphone, gps transmitter (i.e., whatever it is that is transmitting your GPS coordinates, which I agree isn't the GPS receiver itself), or camera is "off" but is it really?

There is a reason a lot of people put tape over the cameras on their monitors. And there are plenty of stories out there about people who started getting targeted for ads based on face-to-face conversations in the presence of electronics.
As I made clear previously, I am not questioning anybodies decision to take advantage of the service that's being offered here.

Although if one really is concerned with how honest or secure Canon software is when reporting a feature as off, one should also be skeptical of the service at hand. It is after all performed by Canon and by their own admission is just a firmware change, not a removal of hardware. They even point out that there's no guarantees of security with this in the footnotes.

There is nothing wrong with being aware of security risks. I also said previously that there almost certainly are vulnerabilities inside Canon cameras - after all, they are just prosumer cameras. Why would Canon apply the highest security standards to every design aspect?

And with cameras being formidable spying devices, as well as tools used by journalists, there certainly are bad actors like secret service or authoritarian regimes that have an interest in finding vulnerabilities, but not reporting them to Canon in order to have them addressed.

My point was and still is that this is technology and not magic. You can't observe a user's position from the outside just because they use a GPS device. There needs to be some compromised component inside the device that transmits this information to the outside. Probably over a network, at which point the GPS becomes irrelevant, as being connected to a network in itself has the potential to be tracked.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,299
10,408
And the person who wants it removed rather than just "turning it off" has plausible reason, by the way: Any switch in software is suspect. You may think the device with the microphone, gps transmitter (i.e., whatever it is that is transmitting your GPS coordinates, which I agree isn't the GPS receiver itself), or camera is "off" but is it really?

There is a reason a lot of people put tape over the cameras on their monitors. And there are plenty of stories out there about people who started getting targeted for ads based on face-to-face conversations in the presence of electronics.
Masking the camera on your computer isn't fair to those scammers who claim to have a record of you doing naughty things that they will send to your mailing list unless you pay over bitcoins within 24 hours.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,341
2,188
As I made clear previously, I am not questioning anybodies decision to take advantage of the service that's being offered here.

No, you weren't, but I was trying to give insight into why someone might have such a preference. It's not as arbitrary as wanting polkadots on the camera body. Many might not consider the issue to be a big deal, and that is their privilege (by symmetry) but at least I've spelled it out.

Although if one really is concerned with how honest or secure Canon software is when reporting a feature as off, one should also be skeptical of the service at hand. It is after all performed by Canon and by their own admission is just a firmware change, not a removal of hardware. They even point out that there's no guarantees of security with this in the footnotes.

And that, for some reason, I hadn't caught earlier. That being said, putting on the paranoid mindset I just described it only guards against accidental turning on of the features. Depending on what happens when the camera resets, it may guard against them turning on then, too, if that isn't already something that survives various resets (e.g., popping the battery to "unfreeze" your R5).

As such, it seems to be quite an expense for little benefit, since it's *still* a soft switch. But that's a cost benefit analysis and that's as individual as can be.

My point was and still is that this is technology and not magic. You can't observe a user's position from the outside just because they use a GPS device. There needs to be some compromised component inside the device that transmits this information to the outside. Probably over a network, at which point the GPS becomes irrelevant, as being connected to a network in itself has the potential to be tracked.
And I agreed with that. A GPS receiver by itself is "passive" and transmits nothing. And any real-time transmission would likely have to be over a network. But one thing you're missing is the potential that a compromised camera could record where you've been (while off network) and transmit it later. For that matter, it can and will record where you've been when you take the pictures, in the EXIF data. This can be stripped out provided your software knows about those fields, but are you sure that's the only place it's being encoded in the picture? The only way to be *completely* Tom-Clancy-level safe from this is to not have the GPS in the first place.
 

Bdbtoys

R5
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2020
373
275
Hang on a second... the R5 doesn’t even have GPS built in
Shhh.... they're on a roll.

All joking aside, I think their point was if you use the camera app on a smartphone... the camera can read the GPS data from it, and you can then get the GPS data from the pictures. However one would have to be carrying a smart phone around which makes the tin hat concern on a camera a moot point.
 

Dj 7th

EOS R5
CR Pro
Apr 22, 2019
43
55
Well, this was interesting. I believe I came out more confused than when I posted the initial question. I however found out that privacy is a big concern for some people and they will not mind paying to remove anything that MAY compromise that privacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC