←back to thread

Show HN: Glasses to detect smart-glasses that have cameras

(github.com)
509 points nullpxl | 1 comments | 28 Nov 25 05:52 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

Hi! Recently smart-glasses with cameras like the Meta Ray-bans seem to be getting more popular. As does some people's desire to remove/cover up the recording indicator LED. I wanted to see if there's a way to detect when people are recording with these types of glasses, so a little bit ago I started working this project. I've hit a little bit of a wall though so I'm very much open to ideas!

I've written a bunch more on the link (+photos are there), but essentially this uses 2 fingerprinting approaches: - retro-reflectivity of the camera sensor by looking at IR reflections. mixed results here. - wireless traffic (primarily BLE, also looking into BTC and wifi)

For the latter, I'm currently just using an ESP32, and I can consistently detect when the Meta Raybans are 1) pairing, 2) first powered on, 3) (less consistently) when they're taken out of the charging case. When they do detect something, it plays a little jingle next to your ear.

Ideally I want to be able to detect them when they're in use, and not just at boot. I've come across the nRF52840, which seems like it can follow directed BLE traffic beyond the initial broadcast, but from my understanding it would still need to catch the first CONNECT_REQ event regardless. On the bluetooth classic side of things, all the hardware looks really expensive! Any ideas are appreciated. Thanks!

Show context
dotancohen ◴[28 Nov 25 07:32 UTC] No.46076398[source]▶
Interesting idea. It seems to me that most things which would need to be protected from hidden cameras would be stationary and not require the operator to mount the detectors on his body, but starting with mobile constraints is often helpful.

I would like to draw attention to this gem of wit, easily the best I've seen in a long time:

> I think the idea behind this approach is sound (actually it's light)

replies(6): >>46076448 #>>46076474 #>>46076686 #>>46076848 #>>46077052 #>>46077275 #
october8140 ◴[28 Nov 25 09:24 UTC] No.46077052[source]▶
It's me. I want to be protected from hidden cameras from other peoples glasses.
replies(3): >>46077348 #>>46078810 #>>46080085 #
LocalH ◴[28 Nov 25 16:30 UTC] No.46080085[source]▶
I want to be able to use glasses with a camera, in situations which warrant it, to prevent people from gaslighting me or others about our conversations. Something like you see in dashcams, where it's always recording to a circular buffer of a few seconds to a minute, and then one can then enable "full" recording which dumps the buffer to storage and then starts saving everything until disabled.

I also live in a US state that only requires one-party consent to record a conversation, meaning it is fully legal in my state to record any conversation I am a participant in, regardless of the consent of the other participants.

How should this be reconciled?

replies(5): >>46080174 #>>46080386 #>>46081056 #>>46082207 #>>46082403 #
moritzwarhier ◴[28 Nov 25 16:38 UTC] No.46080174[source]▶
Sounds dystopian to me, I'd want to reconcile it by not allowing "one-party consent" for people to record me.

Not sure if the state laws you're referencing are in reality limited to phone calls, but I strongly dislike unregulated public camera use.

Your vision (no pun intended) is the story of the Black Mirror episode "The entire history of you", IMO from the show's golden age.

edit; I know that surveillance cameras pass this line already, but here they have to be announced with signs. And even when they aren't, to me state or police surveillance is different from potentially everyone stealthily recording me in private or public spaces.

replies(2): >>46083453 #>>46097422 #
godelski ◴[28 Nov 25 22:41 UTC] No.46083453[source]▶

  > Sounds dystopian to me
1984? It's not the only surveillance state story. Everyone loves when you can dig up something from decades ago that is no longer representative.

Cameras everywhere just keeps everyone honest, right? Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, right? What's acceptable now will always be acceptable in the future, right? My mind never changes, whose does?

replies(2): >>46084565 #>>46097466 #
1. ◴[29 Nov 25 01:43 UTC] No.46084565{3}[source]▶