[HN Gopher] You're muted - or are you? Videoconferencing apps ma... ___________________________________________________________________ You're muted - or are you? Videoconferencing apps may listen when mic is off Author : sizzle Score : 280 points Date : 2022-04-13 16:59 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (news.wisc.edu) (TXT) w3m dump (news.wisc.edu) | NoImmatureAdHom wrote: | Purism's laptops (and cell phone) all include hardware kill- | switches for mic and webcam (and also the radios, bluetooth and | wifi) | | https://puri.sm/ | oauea wrote: | I am, because I ask my operating system to mute the microphone. | winternett wrote: | Nothing beats black electrical tape that you can easily put over | microphones and cameras when you don't want them to be live... | It's going to really be the easiest and most reliable way to | ensure a decent level of privacy moving forward. I've been using | it for ages now. | fsflover wrote: | For microphones it may not work well. I prefer hardware kill | switches on my Librem 15. | smugma wrote: | One valid use case for this is for the software to detect when | you're speaking while on mute and notify you that "you're on | mute". Maybe I dreamed it up, but I thought I've seen this before | (WebEx?). | | I could imagine a soft-mute feature where you're on mute when | you're not talking (perhaps to keep down on background noise) but | if your app detects that you're actively talking, it will unmute | you. It might lose the first word or two that you say but could | be effective. I could also see this going horribly awry when | someone thinks they are on mute rather than soft mute and say | something Biden-esque, like "what a stupid son of a bitch". | mathematicaster wrote: | Anybody knows what Discord behaviour is with respect to muting? | dundarious wrote: | The actual study appears to be here: | https://wiscprivacy.com/publication/vca_mute/ | | The findings are largely reassuring, to be honest: | | > 1. Continuously sampling audio from the microphone: apps stream | data from the microphone in the same way as they would if they | were not muted. Webex is the only VCA that continuously samples | the microphone while the user is muted. In this mode, the | microphone status indicator from an operating system remains | continuously illuminated. | | > 2. Audio data stream is accessible but not accessed: apps have | permissions to sample the microphone and read data; but instead | of reading raw bytes they only check the microphone's status | flags: silent, data discontinuity, and timestamp error. We assume | that the VCAs, like Zoom, are primarily interested in the silent | flag to tell if a user is talking while the software mute is | active. In this mode, apps do not read a continuous real-time | stream of data in the same way as they would while unmuted. Most | Windows and macOS native apps can check if a users is talking | even while muted but do not continuously sample audio in the same | way as they would while unmuted. In this mode, the microphone | status indicator in Windows and macOS remains continuously | illuminated, reporting that the app has access to the microphone. | We found that applications in this state do not show any evidence | of raw audio data being accessed through the API. | | > 3. Software mute: apps instruct the microphone driver to | completely cut off microphone data. All of the web-based apps we | studied used the browser's software mute feature. In this mode, | the microphone status indicator in the browser goes away when the | app is muted, indicating that the app is not accessing the | microphone. | | > The notable exceptions to these trends are the Microsoft VCAs | (Teams and Skype) and Cisco Webex. Microsoft VCAs are much more | difficult to trace because they do not use the standard Windows | userland API. Instead, they directly make calls to the operating | system. Since the Windows syscall interface is undocumented, we | could not determine how Teams and Skype use microphone data when | muted. More interestingly, we observe that Cisco Webex -- unlike | the rest of the Windows native VCAs -- continuously accesses the | microphone while muted. | | I still unplug my desktop's external camera and microphone when | not in use (9" outty-inny cables plugged into my monitor so those | ports are accessible), and use hardware buttons (that may really | be implemented in software, unfortunately) to mute during calls, | and can just flick the camera to point at the ceiling. Will be | more of a concern when I'm back to laptop living. | jug wrote: | Attention: | | The title of this submission has been editorialized by removing | the "may" from "may listen", which changes the claim completely. | Findecanor wrote: | Years ago, an engineer working in videoconferencing told me that | the algorithm they used for avoiding feedback loops involved | listening at how it comes out at the other end. | | I suppose that perhaps there could be audible artefacts when | muting/unmuting if these algorithms didn't continuously do this. | someweirdperson wrote: | With some poor power saving implementations keeping the mike on | can make sense. Switching the power back on when reactivating the | mike may cause noticable stutter. An application with limited | permissions might not be able to turn the mike off without | dropping the device to some low power state. | | Being in a conference, muted, hearing something that requires | action, hitting "unmute", freeze for a second... bad thing. | | A hardware switch would be the better option. But then people | wanting to hear you cannot inform you about still being muted. | anon946 wrote: | It's obvious that Zoom is listening, because if I try to speak | when I'm muted, it tells me that I'm muted. | joeman1000 wrote: | This is why I go to sound preferences in my OS and turn my mic | input level to 0. | kelahcim wrote: | This is the exact reason that made me develop MuteMyMic. I was | really fed up with all these apps that alter input volume behind | your back. Now, I can at least know that somebody is playing | nasty as MMM beeps whenever mic's volume was changed. | | This is not an advertisement ;) I no longer actively develop this | app, however, I am still a happy user ;) | blunte wrote: | What's not clear to me is whether other participants of the | meeting are aware of my sound while my mic is "muted". | | I'm far less concerned about the videoconference system hearing | me than my other meeting participants. This morning during a | boring company-wide meeting I accidentally fell asleep (it was an | early morning meeting and I was still in bed!) | | All that said, it should really be a right of consumers that | audio and video capture devices have a physical on/off switch. | 29athrowaway wrote: | Use a microphone with an hardware switch. Problem solved. | mbostleman wrote: | If they don't listen when your mic is off how are they going to | remind you that you're talking but you forgot to unmute? | ivanhoe wrote: | I actually like how Zoom can warn you that you're muted if you | start talking, happens to me all the time. And that obviously | wouldn't be possible without keeping the access to the mic. So | the light being on is OK for me. However continuing to stream the | sound to the server is a huge problem, if it's really what's | happening - but we can't confirm that without knowing which app | is in question... | KindAndFriendly wrote: | I'm fine that the app locally still processes the audio stream - | even if I'm muted - to show me a warning if I start talking while | muted etc. The alarming part in the article is that at least one | app would still send the audio stream _to the server_ while being | muted. Any mentioning which "popular app" that is? | alistairSH wrote: | This reads like the app is open and active and muted within the | app? So the answer is to close the app if you want privacy? Seems | kind of obvious to me. | qq66 wrote: | The reason they do this is to give you that little warning | "You're muted" when you speak while on mute (if they weren't | listening to the mic, they wouldn't know that). This is such | common behavior (even with the warning!) that I think a | videoconferencing app without such warnings would be virtually | impossible to use. | asp_hornet wrote: | The article specifically states in a number of these apps the | data is hitting the network. You don't need to do that for what | you describe. | | Reduced latency after unmute is probably the better | explanation. | | > They used runtime binary analysis tools to trace raw audio in | popular videoconferencing applications as the audio traveled | from the app to the computer audio driver and then to the | network while the app was muted. | | > They found that all of the apps they tested occasionally | gather raw audio data while mute is activated, with one popular | app gathering information and delivering data to its server at | the same rate regardless of whether the microphone is muted or | not. | IshKebab wrote: | Yeah how can you write an article about it without mentioning | this obvious and innocent reason? Disingenuous clickbait. | Damogran6 wrote: | I just want to make sure the people in the meeting don't hear the | toilet flush. | jrochkind1 wrote: | If you make a noise while muted, Zoom pop up a dialog saying | something like "warning, you're muted!" | | So that was kind of a giveaway that zoom is accessing the mic | when muted, not really a secret. | selykg wrote: | I use Shush on my Mac to have a push to talk button that's | independent of the app. That way I can leave the app unmuted if I | plan to talk at all, and can always use the same button. | lxgr wrote: | At least as far as not giving up microphone access is concerned, | when using Bluetooth headphones, this is very much desirable: | | Deactivating the microphone usually is seen as a signal by the OS | to switch Bluetooth headphones from two-way conferencing mode | (low latency, mediocre quality) back to "music" mode (high | latency, good quality). This usually takes 2-3 seconds and | disrupts all sound being played (most notably other people | talking in the meeting). | | I wouldn't want that to happen every time I mute myself. | | Continuing to send data to the conferencing bridge is indeed | quite shady. Hopefully this would just be (encrypted) silence or | comfort noise parameters, which can be useful to e.g. keep NAT | mappings alive. | axegon_ wrote: | I use a hardware switch, albeit for a different reason: I hate | the beeping sounds all videoconferencing apps make when you | mute/unmute yourself. I guess a good call overall. | WalterBright wrote: | That's why I have a powered mike with a physical switch. | | The web cam has a hinged lense cover. | | The background picture is of the office, taken from the exact POV | of the web cam, when it was clean. That way it is not necessary | to straighten out the office before video conferencing. | | It also causes the weird behavior of looking like I am "beaming | in" to the office from my orbiting starship :-) Or maybe it's | just a glitch in the simulation of myself that has long since | replaced me. | mdoms wrote: | Google Meet will pop up a little "you're muted - are you trying | to speak" bubble if it hears noise through your mic while you're | muted. So obviously it's still accessing the mic. I don't see | this as a big deal. | conradev wrote: | This is something that should be solved at the operating system | level. | | macOS has an orange indicator light when the microphone is | active, and Control Center shows which app is using it. | | Platforms are responsible for controlling access to the | microphone, so they should let users know when it is active, too. | dr_dshiv wrote: | _flush_ | QuikAccount wrote: | I always use the mute switch on my microphone and not the mute | switch in software. | throwawayHN378 wrote: | I'm less concerned about privacy and more concerned about a bug | in their code causing my microphone to say mute but not mute | somehnacct3757 wrote: | Google Meet at least it's very obvious to tell they do this | because if you talk while muted, they will show a pop-up saying | that you're talking but you're muted. | | Whether this functionality is justification for more nefarious | data usage remains to be seen. | frutiger wrote: | Couldn't this be done by using some ML on the video stream? | knorker wrote: | Probably the user experience would not be as good, though, | since it'd be an audio-only feature that only works if you've | enabled video. | brimble wrote: | The solution is obvious: have the camera watch you even | when it's "off". | | :-) | rzzzt wrote: | That is for the "You are talking, but others can't see | your face" notification. | kyleplum wrote: | "We can see that you are talking. Would you like others | in the meeting to see you as well?" | David wrote: | That's way more computationally expensive and only available | if the camera is on (and the user's mouth is visible). | frutiger wrote: | That's true. I've never tried it with the camera off. | gwbas1c wrote: | Zoom also has a similar popup. It's quite useful, too. | | > "It turns out, in the vast majority of cases, when you mute | yourself, these apps do not give up access to the microphone," | says Fawaz. "And that's a problem. When you're muted, people | don't expect these apps to collect data." | | I wouldn't assume that's nefarious | systemvoltage wrote: | Once I was on Teams meeting and someone exclaimed "We can see | your screen, systemvoltage!". Sure as hell, I wasn't sharing | anything. Thankfully I wasn't browsing HN, but writing code. | | These things implemented somewhere in the middle of the stack | seems dangerous. I much more prefer a slider switch. Preferably | made from real atoms and molecules. | subpixel wrote: | Not long ago I dialed into a 100+ person, 3+ hour long | quarterly planning type call. It was a video call, but I had | to be in the car for part of the time so I dialed in. | | After sitting through over an hour, including the part I | thought was essential to my team, I jumped off the call and | proceeded to explain the shit show to my fellow passengers | for 15m or so. | | When I got to my destination and pulled out my phone I | discovered _I had never hung up_ - I was on the line the | whole time. I had said some things that you should never say | about your employer within their earshot and expect to remain | in their employ. | | After some nauseating minutes I realized I had been saved by | the auto-mute feature. When a call has over x participants, | everyone is muted until they take their mic off of mute. | | I am much more careful now about these things, bc I don't | expect to get that lucky again. | systemvoltage wrote: | Yes, be careful. You were lucky. Also, bloated apps lie to | you and UIs are buggy, what you see in the UI may not be | the case. | | I now disabled screensharing in MacOS privacy settings for | all apps unless I am explicitly sharing. | alana314 wrote: | But then when you need to use it you have to restart the | app, right? | [deleted] | ketzo wrote: | Holy shit, I cannot _imagine_ the stomach drop when you | pulled that phone out. This is one of my biggest anxieties. | Sheesh. | hu3 wrote: | I love Discord for some usecases but a while ago I pressed | the mute button to talk to my brother sitting next to me | and my discord friend made a joke about what I said while | muted. | | I double-checked Discord and the mic icon was displaying as | muted but I could still talk to my friend regardless. | thaumasiotes wrote: | I have to cough a lot, so I have a headset with a flip-to-mute | mic. | | As a result, I don't generally use in-software mute effects. :/ | tialaramex wrote: | In Google Meet, the UI will change to show that it thinks you | have hardware muted the microphone and so "unmuting" the Meet | software won't help. I think it's a red ! mark or similar. | All my USB headsets have hardware mute. | parentheses wrote: | Easily explained by Zoom's "You seem to be talking, you're muted" | message. | wlesieutre wrote: | I can't speak to all videoconferencing software, but Zoom does | this to throw up a "Hey nobody can hear you, did you mean to | unmute?" banner | metadat wrote: | What about those cases where you wish you'd been muted? | | "Hey everyone can hear you, did you want me to erase the last 5 | seconds from their memory?" would be a nice feature. | | Facepalm. | AdmiralAsshat wrote: | There's a Zoom setting to Mute Attendees Upon Entry. I make | that my default for every meeting. | | Some people complain, but I've had _way too many_ people join | and not realize their mic is live, so the meeting is | interrupted by random dude shouting at his children to stop | making noise, etc. | | Or even better, when the meeting tool has a "Call me at this | number" tool, but _does not_ require validation before | bridging the audio. So instead the CEO 's All-Hands | PowerPoint presentation is interrupted by that one guy who | tried to have Zoom/WebEx/GoToMeeting call his cellphone, but | the call goes to his voicemail instead and the voicemail | audio plays over the (recorded) conference. Fun times. I've | seen it happen multiple times. | shultays wrote: | Huh, isn't this the default behavior? I never set that and | all meetings I attended mutes me by default | NathanielK wrote: | Business users might get different defaults from their | admin. | dekhn wrote: | This is entirely in line with my understanding of how these | products should work. | matheusmoreira wrote: | I always use my browser instead of these native apps precisely so | I can deny microphone permission whenever I want it muted. | nerdponx wrote: | It would be nice if you could also have this level of control | over native apps. | akira2501 wrote: | Once you use something like the Jack Audio Connection Kit | it's hard to understand why a user-controllable system-wide | audio graph isn't just the default thing baked into the | kernel API. | | I have full control over all apps. It involved some extra | effort creating a fake ALSA device that sends/receives from | JACK, but once it's in place, all audio connections become | points you can easily make and break in the graph. | theshrike79 wrote: | Am I the only one who actually likes this feature? | | Zoom prints out a huge full screen notification of "you are muted | press X+Y to unmute". Very rarely people speak on Zoom while they | are muted. | | Now if someone would add the reverse of "your mic seems to be | sending nonsense crap and everyone can hear it, maybe you should | mute yourself?" | mattacular wrote: | The most unsurprising thing ever. Hardware switch would be the | only way to be sure. (Apparently modern macbooks do hardware | disable the mic and camera when the lid is shut) | jmull wrote: | I like the feature of my video conferencing software that popups | up a helpful overlay when I start speaking while on mute. It lets | me know I'm muted in case I don't intend to be and reminds me I | can press and hold space to temporarily unmute. | | Obviously it's listening white muted to do this, but it seems | legit. | knbrlo wrote: | Assuming the app that's using the microphone would still need to | have hardware access to be able to switch back on when someone | unmutes themselves, couldn't there be a higher level API within | the OS that still allowed hardware access but wouldn't allow | input through so that the audio couldn't be captured in third | party apps? Seems like this is an OS issue that Microsoft, Apple | and Linux team need to work on if that isn't already the case. | kurthr wrote: | Have a mute button on your microphone and cover for your camera. | Something you can see is engaged (e.g. a light goes on/off). | | Some laptops now have switches that disconnect them from USB... | which can be a different kind of pain, if there are other devices | that may be connected to. | brimble wrote: | Lots of the mutes for external mics still do it in software. | The software may run on the microphone itself and not the host | computer, but still. I don't trust it. Give me something that | interrupts a circuit. | | Many laptops (notably including MacBooks) can be damaged by | even fairly thin camera covers. Which sucks, because they | _should very obviously be standard_. | chipotle_coyote wrote: | Most MacBooks are also designed so the camera "on" light is | impossible to disable in software. | brimble wrote: | _Some_ hardware up there must be active and sending data | even when the light 's not on. It's how they make the | (excellent, can hardly live without it now that I'm used to | it) automatic monitor color temp adjustment work, AFAIK. | Though maybe that's a separate sensor from the camera | proper. | kayodelycaon wrote: | The camera and microphones are run through the T2 | security chip. Also, there's a separate ambient light | sensor. | AnonC wrote: | That's certainly a different sensor, called the ambient | light sensor. | randStr_ wrote: | I use the hardware button to mute. My headphone has a mute button | right on the cord. It's fast and easy and always within reach. If | that's not available, I use the operating system to mute. My | Linux systems have a mic icon on the top bar. I believe it's easy | to do in Windows also. I don't know about mac. | spullara wrote: | Tell me you don't understand how things work without telling me | don't understand how things work. /s | | All the apps tell you that you are muted when you are trying to | talk while muted. How do they think they do that? | brimble wrote: | If I could pick one hardware feature that I'd love on all my | i-devices and laptops, it'd be _physical_ shut-off switches for | the mic and camera(s). Or, in the camera 's case, maybe a cover, | since that way you're less likely to have the camera "turned on" | without realizing it. | | [EDIT] and by "physical" I mean "actually breaks a circuit when | off" | derbOac wrote: | https://puri.sm/products/librem-14/ | | I haven't used it and have no connection to them but think | they're onto something in their product design. | sam1r wrote: | This article fails to recognize the value (in a Ui perspective) | for detecting surrounding audio when you are in mute. | | I do find it useful to know I tried to speak, and the audio bars | visually indicate that I just spoke. | | Hence the need for audio listening even if you are on mute. | SkyPuncher wrote: | I feel like they're trying to make an insidious suggestion about | the usage of these. IMO, there's likely a good reason - user | experience. | | At a hardware level, grabbing the microphone can take time. Even | worse that timing is inconsistent across devices, workloads, etc. | That leads to a bad experience when unmuting and needing to delay | your commentary. The solution to this is to keep the microphone | on, but mute at a software level. This way the mic is always hot | and ready to relay audio as fast as the software can switch. | | I'd be somewhat willing to bet continue to stream audio is also a | quality assurance mechanism. Some networks will shape traffic | according to load. A quick jump in bandwidth can introduce | unexpected jitter and latency. By continuing to stream audio (but | not necessarily process or re-transmit), video conferencing can | better ensure an un-interupted experience. | | ---- | | With that being said, if you really care about privacy, consider | getting a hardware mute microphone. | admax88qqq wrote: | Not to mention the feature of notifying a user they are muted | if it sounds like they're trying to talk. | nanoservices wrote: | Exactly the reason I use a headset with a boom mic. Flip it up | to mute, and back down to activate. Love it. | sizzle wrote: | wait till the wear and tear on that hinge breaks from doing | this 50 times a day lol | oriolid wrote: | The worst part is that on iOS you can't just start and stop | input stream separately from output, but you have to stop the | entire audio session and restart it in output only category. | You can configure the session to ignore all input channels, but | that won't get rid of the mic indicator (or at least didn't | back when the mic indicator was introduced in the first place). | | Yes, I work on an app that keeps the mic running all the time | because of the above, and because ASIO doesn't allow disabling | input at all. | SllX wrote: | It's something to be aware of. | | The first time I had ever heard of Zoom, it was long before the | pandemic and it was about how Zoom was a videoconferencing app | that was installing an http server (read, a security hole on | the user's computer) which remained even if you deleted the | app. This was to "improve the user experience" so that it could | quickly reinstall itself if you clicked one of their web | widgets to start a call. | | It's worth checking in on _exactly_ what software is doing in | the background, auditing its activity and coming to a more | precise understanding of 1. The reputation of the company | behind it and 2. How they came to have this reputation and | whether it is still relevant. | trelane wrote: | My first introduction to Zoom was their malware-like pre- | install install. | https://twitter.com/c1truz_/status/1244737672930824193 | SllX wrote: | That was March 2020? | | This is from July 2019: | https://daringfireball.net/linked/2019/07/10/zoom | | After they were called out, supposedly they fixed it, but | that tweet you just linked looks like more of the same | nonsense which goes right back to my original point: | reputation matters. If the first could be taken as honestly | naive, the second proves it was not. Zoom doesn't go on | anything I own or control. | trelane wrote: | Yep. I don't trust them at all. | vladvasiliu wrote: | On Linux at least, Teams continue to grab the microphone even | after the meeting has ended. You can see this by looking at | apps registered for "recording". | | I'm not sure how that can be justified. Besides privacy, the | issue is that this prevents the sound card from going to sleep, | which may be an issue on laptops. But I guess this is | insignificant compared to the rest of Teams' power consumption. | _notathrowaway wrote: | Teams is a real clustefuck, I do not believe it is a design | decision but rather just poorly written code. | Gigachad wrote: | It also doesn't happen on MacOS where you can see the | indicator dot go away after a call. Teams just has a lot of | bugs. | zelphirkalt wrote: | From the outside perspective, this must be true. Recently I | have noticed, that Teams, unlike any other app I tried, is | unable to properly distinguish between stereo and mic, when | that arrives both at the headset jack (made for both, | stereo and mic) of my laptop. When I switch in Teams to use | that as mic, it means, that others hear themselves and do | not hear me. I tried everything, but Teams is simply unable | to take the proper mic input from the headset jack, while | an app like audacity has no issue at all. Teams is utter | garbage. Found topics on MS websites, where people are | describing similar problems. The answers usually are: | "Well, it is MS, what do you expect?" and no solution in | sight. In the year. 2000 and 22. And this is what I am | forced to deal with. So I had to go back to only have the | output on headset jack and use the laptop internal mic, | which very likely has much worse quality than my external | on the desk standing microphone, which I am effectively | unable to use, because I have to use Teams... | | This stuff can drive you crazy. Each month there is some | new annoyance or broken part, that I discover. | vladvasiliu wrote: | I've never had your particular issue, but my favorite has | got to be that it somehow "loses" the mic between | conferences, although the sound server shows it as still | recording... | | I can understand not detecting something, or badly, but | if it works now, and then on the next conference it | figures "nah, there's no mic", I just can't understand | what it does. | zelphirkalt wrote: | Oh losing the mic has happened to me mid-call many many | times. Suddenly I would notice, that someone does not | respond to anything I am saying, then check in Teams and, | what do you know ... "Your microphone is not working.". I | leave call, call again, without changing anything, mic | works again ... | vladvasiliu wrote: | I find that usually (but not always...) restarting Teams | works. I chalk it up to "made by Microsoft". People make | fun of me at work when I ask them if they tried rebooting | it whenever they have a problem (the company I work for | runs Windows on the desktop, I'm the odd one out running | Linux). | | I used to think that this was an issue with me running | Linux, and an "unsupported" distro at that (Arch). But | I'm always reassured (in a way) when I see people having | the exact same issues I do on Windows, with basic, run- | of-the-mill configs (I have multiple sound cards, some of | which come and go). | formerly_proven wrote: | Teams and audio problems is pervasive. Since a few months | I cannot use Teams on the iPhone any more [1] because | they changed/broke volume control so that even the lowest | possible volume is way too loud (and interestingly, Teams | somehow manages to circumvent the hearing protection | settings in iOS). The audio quality on iOS is also very | jarring, regardless of connection speed, basically to the | point of it hurting in the ears even if you reduce the | volume to a safe level (e.g. by dangling the headphones | in front of your ears instead of putting them in, which | is absolutely ridiculous). Similarly I had issues with | Teams mute control on a dedicated, certified headset, | where both the mute button on the headset and in the | Teams UI did nothing, only the special Fn key on the | laptop worked. "It magically fixed itself at some point". | | [1] I really liked to walk'n'talk for a few recurring | meetings. Unfortunately, Microsoft does not like people | touching grass. | connicpu wrote: | Completely agree, there's a lot of user friendly reasons to | want the software to behave this way. I use a headset with a | hardware mute that engages when I put the mic arm up, that's | what I use when I want to make sure I'm muted. | David wrote: | Very much this, it takes time to recapture the microphone and | it's really annoying to lose the first part of what you say | every time you unmute. I lead the video team at a | videoconferencing app (gather.town) and we keep the microphone | active when you mute for this reason. | | As seems to be pretty common, for the sake of privacy we do | stop sending audio to the media server. That's a tradeoff, | since we're still susceptible to losing a little bit while the | audio connection resumes. | | Edit: as others have mentioned, also useful to keep bluetooth | headsets in two-way audio mode rather than reverting to audio | output mode, since that's really disruptive. | jimmygrapes wrote: | Just throwing it out there but maybe to avoid bandwidth | spikes that might lead to latency depending on the setup, | could you inject some kind of easily identifiable "is muted" | signal along with white noise in place of silences? or would | that sort of pre-mixing be too slow to do in real time on the | client side? | sillysaurusx wrote: | Shoutout to gathertown. Love what you're doing. | pigtailgirl wrote: | got a modmic - popular mic - has a button on it to mute the | mic- light turns red - pushed the button and went for a pee - | came back to the meeting - left again to get a drink - came | back - was asked to mute my mic - light was red - clicked | hardware button - red light turned off - clicked again - right | light turned on - mic was still active - no longer trust | hardware buttons | novok wrote: | That is a button that works via software, not a physical | disconnect like on some other mics. When its a physical | disconnect the os can't tell if you've sent a mute command, | just that all audio input stopped. | Karrot_Kream wrote: | Not all mics are like this. I have a Corsair gaming headset | which has a hardware mute button. I frequently set it on mute | when I'm munching on something, forget to unmute, and despite | videoconferencing software and the OS thinking the Mic is | unmuted, no signal is detected. | Dig1t wrote: | You are right that the problems you listed are easily solved by | keeping the mic open/streaming. | | If you actually value privacy as a company though, these are | all very solvable problems. | pmoriarty wrote: | _" if you really care about privacy, consider getting a | hardware mute microphone"_ | | Even if you get an external microphone which can be muted, if | you're on a laptop you'll still have an internal microphone | which can't be muted except through software. | | What we really need are laptops sold without microphones and | cameras. Then you can just use external ones only, and be sure | that no one's listening/looking when you unplug them. | charcircuit wrote: | Usually software only captures one mic at a time. | rob_c wrote: | have to agree, it's not well explained, but hardly seems like a | smoking gun that google/zoom/skype are listening out for anti- | government hysteria... | neura wrote: | It's simple. Most video conferencing apps that I've used will | let you know that your mic is muted when you try to speak and | your mic is muted. | | If you think they're doing something else, then don't use it. | If you think you don't have a choice because your employer | requires you to use it, your choice is not in whether or not to | use the software. If it's something you care about, there's | always a choice. | asxd wrote: | I don't think an application has to actually do anything with | the audio data in order to retain its access to the microphone. | I'm not an expert here, but I'd imagine it's something like | this: mic = grab_access_to_mic() | while app_is_running: if (is_muted): | pass else: send_that_audio(mic) | | It also mentions some of the apps sending the muted audio "to | the cloud", which seems completely unrelated to retaining | access to the mic. | | Also, seems like an honest mistake, but I think they got this | backwards, right? | | > They used runtime binary analysis tools to trace raw audio in | popular videoconferencing applications as the audio traveled | from the app to the computer audio driver and then to the | network while the app was muted. | | Wouldn't it be driver -> app -> cloud? I think I'm splitting | hairs at this point though. | | Lastly, it would be nice if this article at least listed the | apps that were investigated. | Veserv wrote: | Okay, given that they are not listening for any insidious | purpose, they should all just add a legally binding, | unrevokable clause to their all of their terms of service | indicating that they will never sell any audio data or data | derived from the audio data while the microphone is muted. | Absent that, it is entirely legal for them to do so at any time | for any reason with no consequences, so I see no reason why we | should take the word of a amoral entity that pinky swears they | will not do so when a legally binding statement is so much | cleaner and more straightforward. | lrem wrote: | Would you use a service that sells your audio data when | unmuted? :/ | Sakos wrote: | Honestly, it feels like most people here aren't reading the | article. | | > The researchers then decided to see if they could use data | collected on mute from that app to infer the types of | activities taking place in the background. Using machine | learning algorithms, they trained an activity classifier using | audio from YouTube videos representing six common background | activities, including cooking and eating, playing music, typing | and cleaning. Applying the classifier to the type of telemetry | packets the app was sending, the team could identify the | background activity with an average of 82% accuracy. | | How is this not extremely concerning for anybody who cares | about privacy? | | How about we not make the default that companies can do | whatever they want and users have to take steps like a | hardware-muted mic (which isn't always an option) to ensure a | basic expectation of privacy? | Manuel_D wrote: | There's no cost to privacy if it's all being written to | /dev/null. I'm not worried because the cost benefit analysis | is not even remotely in the video conferencing app's favor to | listen to that traffic. Are they really going to use the | compute time to analyze all this audio, then do what? Try and | monetize data on what people are doing in the background of | their video calls? | | The technical cost of deploying this is probably large, and | the cost to reputation immense if they were caught doing | this. By comparison, giving people the additional sense of | privacy by actually turning off and on the mic is likely more | than outweighed by the annoyance of lag between turning on | and off your mic and being heard by the other chat members. | | Although they could do something like write random bits of | audio to the stream when the mic is muted in software. That'd | at least let users know that the actual audio isn't leaving | their device. But the hardware peripheral activation is | probably not going to go away. | nemothekid wrote: | Because a video conferencing app with a bad UX is going to be | quickly supplanted with one with a better UX; the privacy | concerns of being spied on by a video conferencing app while | you are muted is very minute for most people. | | There should be a line between "companies doing whatever they | want" because of some implied "nefarious" reasons, and | "companies doing whatever they want" because their customers | want a better experience even if it has security/privacy | implications. | ortusdux wrote: | _Because a video conferencing app with a bad UX is going to | be quickly supplanted with one with a better UX_ | | For the vast majority of users, price beats UX. If a | company can keep their app free by selling user data, they | will out-compete paid alternatives, regardless of the UX. | chefandy wrote: | Mostly agree. Price has a higher _weight_ than UX but a | bad enough UX will succumb to reasonably priced | competitors. | | Anecdotally, privacy/security seem to be on the bottom of | the stack. Platform support and necessity for work are | above them all. | julienb_sea wrote: | This is not how enterprise software works. Audited data | privacy is a core selling point of enterprise | communication systems like Slack and Zoom, which are able | to charge a lot of money for enterprise licenses and have | very viable business models. You're right that this may | not work in the consumer space, but that battle is | already lost -- there are myriad free communication | options available to consumers such as messenger calls, | facetime, etc. | johannes1234321 wrote: | Considering the trouble I have with WebEx again and again | UX indeed comes late. | | I often call it "golf-course-ware" the sales person goes | golfing with the executive, they discuss features and | prices and discounts ober the match and the executive | typically doesn't have to use the software but only their | employees or the assistant. | | Interestingly Zoom for me was a game changer in usability | and it spread during pandemic, when executives where at | home partially without their physical conference room | with video conf setup and without assistant. | joshuaissac wrote: | > Audited data privacy is a core selling point of | enterprise communication systems like Slack and Zoom | | Is Zoom audited? Zoom had been lying for about having | end-to-end encryption, for example, until they were | caught by the US Federal Trade Commission. Surely, | something like that would have been discovered earlier in | an audit, if they were audited and the audits were worth | something. | | They were also sending data to third parties like | Facebook and Google through their SDKs. | | https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/11/zoom-lied-to- | use... | | https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/08/zoom-to- | pay-85m-... | brodock wrote: | They also kept microfone on after closing calls, and | reverted after getting caught | https://thinksproutinfotech.com/news/zoom-update-fixes- | macos... | LegitShady wrote: | this was definitely a thing in windows too although no | idea if changed now - I remember zoom running in the tray | would cause the microphone to activate even outside of | calls. I was weirded out by it enough to stop running | zoom on startup and eventually replace zoom with other | applications that didn't exhibit that behaviour. | autoexec wrote: | Seriously, who in their right mind is using Zoom at this | point? They've been "accidentally" collecting people's | data, disclosing people's data to others, and have been | caught lying so many times there's nearly zero chance | that it's just total incompetence and even if it were, | why use something made by people who are _that_ bad at | their job? | | There are so many alternatives, how is it Zoom has any | business at all? | lolinder wrote: | This morning my boss tried to host a meeting on his | favorite Zoom substitute. The first 20 minutes were spent | trying to fix a ten second delay in his audio. Finally we | just switched to a Zoom call, and it worked flawlessly. | | There are only two videoconferencing platforms I've never | had any problems with: Zoom and Google Meet. I don't | trust either company, but sometimes you just have to get | your work done. | throwawayboise wrote: | > how is it Zoom has any business at all? | | Zoom was the first videoconferencing software I | experienced where the first 15 minutes of the meeting was | not spent with "can you see me," "can you hear me," some | people falling back to dialing in to a speakerphone, and | one or more out-of-band calls to various participants to | troubleshoot problems. | | Zoom was click a link. And it worked. Nobody cared much | about anything else beyond that. | mitchdoogle wrote: | Perhaps I am misremembering but I remember using Skype | 9-10 years ago without any issues. Zoom does not seem to | be that much of an improvement in terms of ease of use | rootusrootus wrote: | But is Skype that way _now_? Zoom was in good position | when the pandemic made everyone pick a video conferencing | app. Some of the competition (Webex comes to mind) got | slapped so hard they basically copied the Zoom interface | in order to stay somewhat competitive. | victimblamer wrote: | > How is this not extremely concerning for anybody who cares | about privacy? | | I manage some properties for a family member on the side, one | of which is in a very bad neighborhood. When I travel to this | neighborhood I have a certain state of alertness that I would | not normally have in my boring suburbistani neighborhood. | This is better known as "situational awareness" - the man | approaching me in my own neighborhood is likely a just having | a friendly conversation, the man approaching me in bad | neighborhood is guaranteed going to at least try to bum a | smoke off me, which I don't have as I don't smoke, and will | likely act belligerent if I refuse to give him money as a | follow-on to the request for a smoke. | | Contextually, I expect a video conferencing software to be | listening to and watching me even if it doesn't necessarily | reflect in the UI, it has the capability and is actively | meant to do so. As such, I explicitly don't have any form of | sensitive conversation in the vicinity regardless of status. | On the other hand, I do not expect it to do so when not | running nor my laptop to do anything similar. | | Perhaps there is a legitimate criticism to be made here of | poor UX around "not listening" - but to paint this as an | "extremely concerning" issue is sky-is-falling critique. This | over-the-top concern seems further alarmist in that both my | laptop and phone display clear and obvious warnings to the | user when the microphone is hot. | UncleMeat wrote: | If your VC software decides to perform signal processing on | the microphone input while it is running but you are muted | then yes, it can determine things about your behavior. | | But that's true for literally all applications running on | your computer. Evil software running on your machine can do | all sorts of bad things. | Tepix wrote: | You can tell that an application accesses the microphone | these days. | necovek wrote: | It's not that simple. An application could have access to | the microphone, but an OS could be providing the mute | functionality, thereby not passing any data to the app | even if it keeps access to it (there are | hardware/software issues with releasing and reaccessing | it with extremely low latency like one expects of a | mute/unmute button). | | The problem, as reported in the article, is that apps are | not making use of the OS mute, but are instead still | reading from the microphone, and some are even passing | the readout to their servers. | Gigachad wrote: | On Macos, there is an indicator dot in the status bar, on | all chat apps, the mic dot is always active while the | camera dot does turn off when the camera is disabled. The | most likely situation is that turning the mic and camera | on at the OS level has delay which is acceptable for | turning on video but not for audio where you want to be | able to respond to something quickly. | trelane wrote: | > But that's true for literally all applications running on | your computer. Evil software running on your machine can do | all sorts of bad things. | | This is why I personally insist on using the web version of | streaming software over an installed binary. | quantified wrote: | It is, just most people don't care. And you can't buy a | little shutter for your laptop mic like you can for the | camera. | izacus wrote: | You can easily buy a microphone with a physical mute switch | though. | quantified wrote: | Yes, more addons for the employer-supplied Mac. I miss my | Thinkpads | necovek wrote: | You can control your microphone in your OS settings. While | we are still on PulseAudio, check out pavucontrol for Linux | systems. I am sure there are equivalent tools for Windows | or MacOS. | | There are also laptops with hardware microphone switches | (eg. https://puri.sm/products/librem-14/ or | https://frame.work/). | phendrenad2 wrote: | Why did you move the goalpost? The comment you're responding | to claims that there isn't a malicious purpose here. You | instead claim to rebut it by saying that it's "concerning for | those concerned with privacy". Can you see how those are | different things? | PragmaticPulp wrote: | > How is this not extremely concerning for anybody who cares | about privacy? | | Because they're not actually doing that? | | These researchers did everything they could think of to come | up with the most concerning headline. | | I imagine someone, somewhere is going to make a video | conferencing app that closes the audio interface every time | you press mute. I also expect few people will use that option | because it adds additional latency every time you unmute. | | I want my mute button to work ASAP and I don't believe Zoom | (or anyone else) is interested in whether or not I'm eating | while muted. | worik wrote: | > ....and I don't believe Zoom (or anyone else) is | interested in whether or not I'm eating while muted. | | But the detectives with a search warrant are pleased to be | able to listen to your private conversations. | | The secret police who do not need a warrant (or legality) | are glad to be able to listen too. | | The staff at Zoom are happy to spy on you, probably, for a | small reward. | | A proper mute removes those concerns. A mute that does not | mute is inviting a lawsuit | throwawayboise wrote: | If these are your threat models, your microphone should | have a hardware mute switch, and you should at least have | something opaque to cover your camera. | thaumasiotes wrote: | > and I don't believe Zoom (or anyone else) is interested | in whether or not I'm eating while muted. | | If they are, the continuing video feed is pretty likely to | answer their question. | marricks wrote: | > Because they're not actually doing that? | | >> Applying the classifier to the type of telemetry packets | the app was sending | | Are you sure they're not? The used these algorithms on | telemetry packets sent from browsers. I see no reason to | give companies whose revenue is built on ads the benefit of | the doubt here. | asojfdowgh wrote: | I don't think one should go to the level of making random | bs claims about things, and then blaming the groups one | is making the claims about. | Aunche wrote: | Most of the time, audio that a videoconference app receives | while the mic is unmuted is going to be a lot more useful for | surveillance purposes than the audio the app receives while | it's muted. If you're so concerned about the app knowing when | you're eating 82% of the time, why would you trust the app at | all? | rob_c wrote: | please go away and read about the architectural permissions | for things like this, performance, latency and re-read | this... if it bugs you throw away your smartphone or custom- | compile lineageOS | georgyo wrote: | I think there are two different problem here. | | 1. When the mic is soft muted, information is getting sent to | the conference provider which could leak information about | private matters. | | 2. When the mic is not muted all information is definitely | going to the conference provider in a way they can decrypt so | they can mix it. | | That is to say that when using most conference software, you | have already granted then access to contents of the meeting. | | If you can't trust them to not miss use information they get | when the mic is off, then you also can't trust them when the | mic is on. | markstos wrote: | End-to-End encryption for group video and audio is now | supported. I'm not sure it works or who is supporting | besides Signal, but it is apparently not not required that | the conference provider decrypt the streams to mix them. | | https://mashable.com/article/signal-end-to-end-encrypted- | gro... | KennyBlanken wrote: | Element/Matrix also support e2ee. | | Jitsi has supposed e2ee videoconferencing (on Chrome - | they used some chrome-specific API for processing) for (I | believe) at least a year or two. | feanaro wrote: | The API is called Insertable Streams. It's not actually | supposed to be Chrome-specific, others are just lagging | in implementing it. | | Element has native E2EE for 1-to-1 calls, but uses Jitsi | for group calls. Native E2EE group calls actually also | exist, called Element Call | (https://element.io/blog/introducing-native-matrix-voip- | with-...) but they're yet to be integrated into Element | and specced into Matrix, I believe. | BlueTemplar wrote: | Jitsi's own solution I assume (also on Jitsi Meet), and | not the usual XMPP/Jabber that (non-Meet) Jitsi uses ? | hunter2_ wrote: | > it is apparently not not required that the conference | provider decrypt the streams to mix them | | I don't believe this could be true, and the linked | article doesn't have the word "mix" anywhere. I imagine | that there is no mixing happening until after decryption | on the client device. Of course this means that every | audio source goes to each recipient discretely, which | means more bandwidth, but audio (especially near-silent | moments therein) is lightweight enough for reasonably | sized groups. Obviously this same n^2 scaling issue | happens with the video anyway which is never mixed. | pthatcherg wrote: | That's correct. You can't mix without decrypting. Signal | does not mix at the server because it can't. | | More info is available at my blog post about it: | https://signal.org/blog/how-to-build-encrypted-group- | calls/ | ghostpepper wrote: | "They found that all of the apps they tested occasionally | gather raw audio data while mute is activated, with one | popular app gathering information and delivering data to its | server at the same rate regardless of whether the microphone | is muted or not." | | The way I read that is, only one of the apps actually sends | audio data to the server when the mic is muted. I'm not sure | why they don't say which one, and I'm not sure what is meant | by "occasionally gather raw audio data" but it could be as | innocuous as the mute button not updating and a half second | of audio being sent before muting starts. Nobody is building | a machine learning profile out of that. | | The real story here should be that one app where the mute | button doesn't actually work. The others are all operating | normally as far as I can tell. | 2fast4you wrote: | "occasionally gather raw audio data" could be used to | remind you that you're muted when you're trying to talk. | I've seen that in either GoToMeeting or Zoom | notreallyserio wrote: | There's a weird culture around reporting problems without | reporting names. You see it a lot here on HN and | occasionally in media. I'll never understand. Why bother | talking about corporate misbehavior (or etc) and not back | it up with the basic, minimal data you could provide? | sharken wrote: | They state that their findings will be presented at | Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium in July. So it | seems they want to keep some info for that event. | | Should i hazard a guess, it would be either Zoom or | Teams. | saghm wrote: | I imagine it's to avoid getting sued by the company | behaving poorly. Companies bring lawsuits against good- | faith security researchers all the time to try to silence | them, so if you were a researcher, why would you expect | the one company among the several you researched who's | potentially misbehaving to not misbehave by trying to sue | you into silence? | willcipriano wrote: | Makes claims impossible to falsify, without naming names | nobody can poke holes in your analysis. | MaxBarraclough wrote: | > You see it a lot here on HN and occasionally in media | | It makes some sense here on HN where people often post | under their real names and want to think carefully before | badmouthing a former employer, or otherwise picking a | fight. | | I agree that journalists have little excuse. | ElemenoPicuares wrote: | > I agree that journalists have little excuse. | | Except wanting anyone, ever to talk to them again about | something controversial. | mitchdoogle wrote: | Maybe their research is ongoing, maybe they are afraid of | being sued, maybe they'd rather not harm a company so | reputation without fully understanding why they do this | ivanhoe wrote: | So why did they publish the text now then (other than | obviously for self-promotion)? | | Why not finishing their research first, discussing with | lawyers how not get sued, and contacting the company | about it so that they can fix it or comment on it, and | only then publishing the proper, responsible research | that is actually useful to someone? | e40 wrote: | _> I 'm not sure why they don't say which one_ | | Yeah, that's very annoying. | | Zoom, for example, will tell you, when you are muted and | you begin to speak. It's a very nice thing. | | I have a microphone (that wasn't expensive) that has a | hardware mute. I use it when I really want to make sure I'm | not heard, even for "speaking" detection. | toyg wrote: | _> Zoom, for example, will tell you, when you are muted | and you begin to speak_ | | MS Teams has that feature too. | | TBH I'm not surprised: when you mute the mic in an app, | you're still letting the app in control. If you _really_ | want to be safe, you need to mute at OS level or in | hardware. That 's why cameras have a hardware cover in | modern laptops. | the_pwner224 wrote: | The apps can control the sound devices at the OS level | too. But fortunately most(/all) don't, so muting in the | sound server / OS is generally safe. | sushisource wrote: | Precisely, this is why I think the earlier comment's | suggestion: | | > How about we not make the default that companies can do | whatever they want and users have to take steps like a | hardware-muted mic (which isn't always an option) to | ensure a basic expectation of privacy? | | Sounds nice on the surface, but is ultimately silly. | Sure, it'd be _nice_ if everyone did the right thing, but | you can never guarantee that, and hence if you really | care you need to perform the mute at a lower level than | what the app has access to. | andrei_says_ wrote: | MacBook pros already have a mute-speaker button. | | It would be so nice to have a mute-mic button which | lights up when muted. | Edd314159 wrote: | Ironically this is a good use case for a Touch Bar: a | button on your keyboard that is only there _sometimes_ | because it's only needed in certain contexts (when you're | on a call) | Gigachad wrote: | The touch bar is like an idea that works really well in | your head. It has so many theoretical cool uses. But in | reality I end up never using it for anything.. I would | have been happy if the new one had the touch bar and the | function keys, but that would have been extra cost for a | feature people just aren't using. | Godel_unicode wrote: | Teams has a notice that it pops up if you're talking and on | mute, and there's another for if you're not on mute but your | mic is producing no signal (mic has it's own mute). I find | those super helpful, personally. | Freak_NL wrote: | I hate the latter, because I use a keyboard shortcut to | mute/unmute the microphone on the OS-level. This works fine | with Google Meet, but in Microsoft Teams I have to use the | button in its UI because that pop-up gets in the way (also: | Teams not working at all in Firefox, what's up with that?). | prettyStandard wrote: | It's BS. I changed my user agent to Chrome and it worked | just fine. | zelphirkalt wrote: | It is BS, but when I tried that, I had other things not | working, like sharing my screen. So it is BS, but not | merely for looking at the user agent of the browser, but | for the software development incapability or | unwillingness on the side of MS. (Edit: While basically | every other voice chat / video chat web app works fine on | FF, so basically everyone but MS and Slack has solved | this problem years ago. Go figure.) | nyuszika7h wrote: | GoToMeeting also refuses to work in Firefox. | Arnavion wrote: | Yes, I have the exact same situation, and had to resort to | uBlock Origin's element zapper because of how annoying that | popup is. Of course it's an alphabet soup of minified CSS | classes, so I assume it'll break the next time they update | the UI. | ineptech wrote: | I know! Eight zillion designer-hours in to one of the | most-used applications of all time, and yet the "you can | join now" popup blocks the "join" button. | GraphenePants wrote: | Firefox is an unsupported browser - Teams works fine on | Edge. | ls15 wrote: | > Teams works fine for me on Edge. | | "If you don't want to install our app, you can just | install our browser." | wbobeirne wrote: | I also considered this, but the article is talking about | audio _telemetry_, not that they're keeping your hardware mic | "hot" locally. Audio detection like that could be done | entirely locally. | [deleted] | cortesoft wrote: | Yeah, Meet does the same thing. I find it annoying, because I | am muted because the kids are making a bunch of noise, not | because I am trying to talk. | | I am muting because I don't want the sound in my room | broadcasted... if it was silent, I wouldn't have to mute! | UncleMeat wrote: | In like 25% of my meetings, somebody is accidentally muted | while they are trying to speak. The popup speeds up the | process of them unmuting. | BlargMcLarg wrote: | I still don't know how professionals keep making this | mistake. Having used Discord for so many years, this has | never been a problem aside from a select few people who | had very clear reason to mute themselves. Meanwhile in | professional settings, people seem to be falling for this | over and over while lacking the common curtesy of not | letting random environmental noise bleed through (read: | their mics are barely ever turned off). | | Not to mention push-to-talk has solved this issue for | almost a few decades now. | conductr wrote: | It takes a long time for the masses to adopt software in | the way you mention. I'd bet that discord users are not | representative of the masses. The main reason I notice | people talking while muted is 1) forgot they were muted | 2) multitasking / distracted 3) unfamiliar with the | software / how to unmute. #3 was probably #1 in summer of | 2020 when everyone was just starting. The #1 and #2 I | listed just happen. It's common to never speak in a | meeting. It's common to never speak in a meeting and then | randomly get called on leading to forgetting to unmute. | It's also common that your mic isn't working and you | don't realize it until you do try to speak and everyone | is say "you're on mute". This happens all the time with | some Bluetooth Bose headphones and my work PC, some | configuration has this device matchup to be a constant | problem and my IT couldn't care less about a permanent | solution since they found a temporary one (reverts on | reboot). | | I know people that literally retired early when they were | forced to use PCs in the office. Over 30 years later, | many people can barely use the most basic features of | their computer. All to say, I'm not surprised this is an | issue and I don't see people as a whole digging their way | out any time soon. | mynameisvlad wrote: | Main reason why I invested in a mic that has its own mute | button with a very obvious red light when it's muted. | | It also can keep the Teams mute status in sync as long as | I don't touch it in the app myself (I believe through | Teams detecting whether the mic interface is marked as | muted or not, so it isn't exclusive to my mic). | Karrot_Kream wrote: | Because in Discord you hop into an audio call and you're | there for however long you want to hang out in the room. | People can come and go from this room, but the room is | persistent. In a job, you're going from meeting to | meeting each with different attendees and stakeholders. | You might have been on top of it in the morning for | standup then 3 hours and a head full of | code/spreadsheets/whatever later when you're discussing | tech debt with other people you forget to unmute until | your portion of the meeting comes 5 minutes into the | start. Push-to-talk certainly helps, but if you're | frequently talking in small meetings (say 3-5 people) | then PTT becomes more of a hindrance than a help. | | Personally I just have a headset with hardware mute | functionality and a big red circle showing me it's muted. | It remembers its muted status, so I just mute it by | default and default my OS to use the headset's mic. That | way I know quickly and easily when I'm muted and when I'm | not, though even then I have small mistakes in the | mornings when I'm tired. Over time I've optimized my | meeting workflow because my company has gone all remote | and I'm in a lot of meetings. | someweirdperson wrote: | People are not communication professionals. They are not | ATC nor even pilots. | | Still, PTT is the solution, preferrably in hardware. Not | supported in sw anyway by e.g. Teams. In hw it keeps the | mike-on symbol lit, and the device powered. Always having | to push prevents ever forgetting to do so. | | Discord's input handler sucks, uses semantic keys, not | keycodes. Can't be mapped to an otherwise disabled | capslock. TS and mumble can do that. Compared with those | Teams audio looks like a toy. | chefandy wrote: | We all have our shortcomings. | | Some people don't intuitively track the state of the | video conferencing microphone, especially if they have | cognitively involved jobs or lots of distractions. Mine | are 1) the inability to resist that little self esteem | boost from disdainfully highlighting inanity of other | people's shortcomings, and 2) making snide comments. | | They're both super obnoxious but I'm working on them. | ChuckNorris89 wrote: | _> I still don't know how professionals keep making this | mistake._ | | Because | | 1) most group calls that need people to be on mute most | of the time are useless, boring, snooze fests, most | attendees don't care about, so those 'professionals', who | are caffeinated zombies half asleep, will space out and | forget the status of their mic within 10 seconds of | toggling it | | and | | 2) most chat apps suck at drawing attention to the status | of the mic and, if you have multiple monitors, you can be | staring at one monitor (Jira, reddit, Redmine, HN, VS | Code, etc.) while the chat app and the status of the mic | is being displayed on another monitor where you're not | looking | | It's a mistake super easy to make. Still, better be safe | and make the mistake of being muted all the time, than | forgetting to mute yourself and have participants hear | something you didn't want them to hear. | | Ideally I'd want a feature that gives the image on all my | monitors a nuclear red vignette, or something like that, | whenever my mic is hot, so I don't have to keep | paranoidly glancing at the mute toggle every couple of | minutes, to make sure my mic is still muted, so they | can't hear me mumbling on how incompetent management is | and on how useless this meeting is. | macintux wrote: | > With that being said, if you really care about privacy, | consider getting a hardware mute microphone. | | But still consider using both software and hardware mutes. I | was on a sales call years ago and activated the hardware mute. | While one of our salespeople was talking I groaned out loud, | and the call suddenly went silent. Somehow the hardware mute | had failed, despite the light being lit. | zarzavat wrote: | > I'd be somewhat willing to bet continue to stream audio is | also a quality assurance mechanism. Some networks will shape | traffic according to load. A quick jump in bandwidth can | introduce unexpected jitter and latency. By continuing to | stream audio (but not necessarily process or re-transmit), | video conferencing can better ensure an un-interupted | experience. | | They don't have to actually send the data though in this case | they should just send 0 padding. It's all encrypted presumably, | so the only externally observable factor is the packet size. | zelphirkalt wrote: | > At a hardware level, grabbing the microphone can take time. | Even worse that timing is inconsistent across devices, | workloads, etc. That leads to a bad experience when unmuting | and needing to delay your commentary. The solution to this is | to keep the microphone on, but mute at a software level. This | way the mic is always hot and ready to relay audio as fast as | the software can switch. | | Another solution is to mute at the microphone, if your hardware | has a button for that. This way the application can do whatever | it wants, it will still get nothing. Using the hardware button | is often less effort, than switching windows, finding that | unmute button visually and moving the mouse to that button to | click it. Or one could use push to talk. Since there are ways | to mute yourself without having to do it in the app, it would | be acceptable, if unmuting took a part of a second to be | effective, indicating that by some "unmuting ..." label | somewhere. | LeifCarrotson wrote: | > "With a camera, you can turn it off or even put your hand over | it, and no matter what you do, no one can see you," says Fawaz. | "I don't think that exists for microphones." | | Maybe it doesn't exist on whatever sleek glassy slabs they're | working with, but the old Thinkpad, Elitebook, and Precision | workstation laptops I have around me at the moment all have | dedicated microphone mute buttons (the Precision has a Fn key | combo, the others have physical buttons that do nothing but mute | the microphone) that I reach for before trying to mouse over to a | different mute button for a particular videoconferencing app. | vladvasiliu wrote: | I generally hate my HP laptops' hardware, but this is one of | the features that I really love and wish more computers had. | | On the one I'm typing this on, the key actually sends a | standard Media Mute signal, that can be used under Linux | (complete with the LED coming on when it's muted). Ironically, | this needs special drivers under Windows. | lxgr wrote: | On my Thinkpad, this was still just interpreted as an OS-level | keyboard shortcut, as far as I remember. | | A solution that actually (logically if not physically) | deactivates any built-in microphone would arguably be at least | as important as a "webcam shield". | | Apple does this for the built-in microphone for their newer | laptops, but that benefit is immediately negated when e.g. | connecting a USB webcam that also contains a microphone. | remram wrote: | Yes those mute lights have been stuck on "lit" (= "mute") on | my Windows forever, both the mic and speaker lights. However | recording and playback work fine, the lights just stay on. | Very annoying, a little unsettling. | | My daily driver is Ubuntu where both lights work fine, on the | same machine (dual boot). But now I know not to trust them. | | Lenovo ThinkPad P51 | SllX wrote: | Check out if you can disable the mic in Audio MIDI Setup on | Mac OS X. I tend to use the built in webcam so I've never | looked on an external one, but in theory you should be able | to selectively disable the input/output of any device via its | interface. I do this to disable the mic on Work equipment and | use my own AirPods as the mic input. | Nextgrid wrote: | On my T480s the mic mute button is handled in hardware/low- | level firmware however all it does is set the mic input level | to 0%, where the OS can trivially set it back to 100% if it | wants. | | At least the LED on the button is driven by firmware based on | that level, so it lights up only when the mic level is | actually at 0%. While it won't prevent the OS from raising | the volume, at least you'll know about it as the mute light | will go off. | bqmjjx0kac wrote: | Do these mute buttons actually hardware-mute the mic or do they | send a keycode to the OS? | remram wrote: | Usually the second. If you have multiple buttons to do it | (for example dedicated button + Fn+F4 combination) then it's | almost certainly software. | tedunangst wrote: | They seem to do both, at least on some models? On my thinkpad | running openbsd, the speaker mute can become desynced. Audio | won't play unless both are unmuted. Pushing the button will | flip flop the software state, but not the reverse (although I | believe that code could be written, it doesn't exist). So if | you soft mute, then push button, hardware mutes and software | unmutes, but sound still doesn't play. | rom1v wrote: | I always use the key mute button on the Thinkpad, but anyway it | can be muted in the system menu easily (at least in XFCE). | | (In fact, I just checked in Gnome, the menu does not expose | microphone volume, it's only available from the settings | window.) | uslic001 wrote: | Use a Mute Me device. https://muteme.com/ | lxgr wrote: | This seems to just toggle the video conferencing software's | native "mute" function, which is exactly the scope of this | article. | | How would that help here? | giantg2 wrote: | "With a camera, you can turn it off or even put your hand over | it, and no matter what you do, no one can see you," says Fawaz. | "I don't think that exists for microphones." | | Some microphones have physical switches. Turn off your internal | laptop microphone and only use a mic with a switch. | qiskit wrote: | Isn't it common knowledge by now that cameras and microphones are | still "on" even if you disable it at the software level? | | Zuckerburg has been taping webcam/microphones/etc for a while | now. Though being the CEO of a major corporation requires you | take privacy more seriously. | | https://www.macworld.com/article/228326/mic-drop-how-to-keep... | KennyBlanken wrote: | Zuckerberg is an attractive enough target that someone would go | to the trouble of trying to compromise his MBP's iSight | firmware (and such compromises have been proven to be possible, | and pretty easy in pre-T2 macs.) | | The tape, however, is probably about really making completely | sure he doesn't accidentally show video on a call or | videoconference when he didn't mean to. | | Video could easily reveal even his approximate location (via | shadows and such), and that could potentially lead to deriving, | say, that he's working on an acquisition or talks with another | company, leading to stock manipulation/speculation and so on. | wolverine876 wrote: | > being the CEO of a major corporation requires you take | privacy more seriously | | My privacy is as valuable to me. | schroeding wrote: | Probably not in the general population, I would guess from my | friends and family. Or they just don't care, also possible. ^^ | | Even those that used to tape over webcams (some started doing | so after the Snowden revelations in '13) gave up on that during | the pandemic, due to video call after video call and "webcam | taping fatigue". Webcam shutters in non-business laptops would | be great. :D | | Audio is another beast and way harder to solve, as there is no | tape or (cheap) shutter that can really block a microphone, and | physical disconnects are probably not a feature in most | customers eyes, as they have no optical feedback, like webcam | shutters. So they could, to most people, maybe only be a source | of "why does my audio not work - ah, the stupid button" | frustration. :/ | hammock wrote: | I always noticed that the Mac version of Zoom stays open in the | background rather than closing after you finish a meeting. Very | sus. I have to manually close out the app. | kazinator wrote: | Use a headset with a hardware mute button. | gruturo wrote: | I've been trying to buy one (bluetooth). I'm on headset #3, | advertised as having a mute button, like the previous 2, which | does absolutely nothing, like the previous 2. | | I'd gladly shell out 100 bucks for a bluetooth headset with a | real mute button, which just cuts off the mic, instead of | telling the PC to do something (which the PC apparently won't | do without custom drivers, which I can't install on my company- | issued laptop, and which I wouldn't trust either). | | Bonus if it's 1 ear only, I find those (esp. the ones with the | arc overhead) more comfortable in long sessions, and my job has | a lot of those. | | Can anyone point me at one known to actually work? Thanks! | teen wrote: | There are other reasons to capture the mic (for example, to | display a message to you that you are speaking while muted). Or | to test the audio settings prior to unmuting yourself in the | meeting. | markstos wrote: | Quit hoping that software providers change in this regard and | demand hardware with physical microphone kill switches. | | The Framework laptop provides an example of a high quality, | repairable laptop with physical kill switches for the mic and | camera. | | I love the UX of "Oops, it looks like you are talking but you are | muted" and I also value privacy. The physical kill switch | provides a true "mute button" when it's needed. | cphoover wrote: | I love my framework... But be careful If taking out the | battery. The battery connector socket on the mother board is | extremely fragile. I learned that when I bent the pins in the | socket when reattaching the battery... | Isthatablackgsd wrote: | As a Deaf person, the notification annoyed the heck out of me and | there are not even an option to disable the notification. I muted | my mic because I am Deaf and I don't use my voice to communicate | with my fellow Deaf friends over Zoom/Teams. | | And there is no option to disable Zoom joining-room audio (the | one that when you join the room, Zoom present the option to ask | which microphone you want to enable). Why would I need to enable | the microphone if I am signing to my Deaf boss? Deaf communities | have major grief with those notifications. | | At least, I can disable the microphone access in my macOS and | Zoom won't complain. However disabling mic permission in iPadOS | will make Zoom to whine about it. Every time I join a meeting, it | will let me know that the microphone access is disabled and | "kindly" asked me to enable it. In Windows, I can deny the | microphone access to Zoom in the Windows setting, however for | some reason that made Zoom to crash. | gwbas1c wrote: | Then why mute yourself? | | Even more interesting: Why do you prefer to sign over video | instead of typing? Are there forms of expression that are more | natural that way? | lucasmullens wrote: | Signing has tons of advantages over typing, since you can | convey emotion/tone with your hands and facial expressions. | I'd also imagine it has a higher WPM, although WPM might be a | bad measure since some small words like "a" can get skipped | when signing. | phillipseamore wrote: | Sign language is an actual independent language. | | Most sign at the same pace as speech. Both of which are | faster than typing. | | Sign language has the same, or more, expressive properties as | when we use inflection etc. in voice. | Isthatablackgsd wrote: | > Then why mute yourself? | | Why not? The only sound they will find is my dogs barking, | doors slamming (I lives in apartment), my partner talking in | his phone, all of that background noise. Why participants | should be subjected to those noise and why Zoom need to know | the noises? | | > Why do you prefer to sign over video instead of typing? Are | there forms of expression that are more natural that way? | | We signs because Signed Languages is our modality and the | only form of expression in Deaf communities. There are no | written sign language or spoken sign language. Using sign | language is natural for us to use. We avoid using typing | because it is not a true representation of the community, we | don't have same proficiency of written/spoken languages as | you and others. So to them, it looks like we are from a call | center in India with broken English. | 10u152 wrote: | I'm fascinated by your last point. Are you saying that | being deaf impedes your written communication ? As a layman | I would have thought that written communication would be a | godsend. | svxml wrote: | Is it a serious question? Why do you prefer to speak over | video instead of typing? | Aerroon wrote: | I am curious about that too (although others have already | answered). I prefer typing over speaking. | | But I have realized that a lot of people I interact with | find it more difficult to understand information in written | form. Ie it's easier to teach someone with spoken language | than over written text. | | I dislike video calls. | lighthazard wrote: | The lack of a physical button to control camera and microphone | access is really annoying. At least with a camera, I can cover up | with a patch but I can't do anything about my microphone. | NathanielK wrote: | Zoom is really bad for this. On my old thinkpad there is a "mute" | button on the keyboard. When you press it, it mutes the mic in | windows sound settings and turns an indicator light. I've had | Zoom un-mute the mic itself with not notification to the user and | the "mute" led even stayed on. In old version of Zoom, the host | could unmute you without your consent and this would unmute the | mic at the system level too. I resorted to disabling the | microphone in the Device Manager so it would show up as unplugged | instead. This also disables the popup other commentors mentioned. | | It looks like newer versions have unmute-consen which hopefully | fix it, but the original behaviour made me feel uneasy and not | trust Zoom. | someotherperson wrote: | I use this[0] on Mac OS and it works extremely well. It turns the | mic off at the system level. Holding down a key acts as push to | talk and triple-pressing the key locks it on. | | [0] https://github.com/yulrizka/osx-push-to-talk | bartread wrote: | Yes, I think we know this: how else do they think it's possible | for Teams (or other videoconferencing app) to warn you that | you're muted when you start talking whilst muted without the mic | being switched on? | | I'm not saying there's definitely not anything sinister happening | here in the case of every videoconferencing app, but there are | legitimate reasons for leaving the mic on that are about | improving user experience, not spying on you. | racl101 wrote: | Of coooourse they are. | | Cause why should we trust these companies to be honest? | EGreg wrote: | My team and I built some of the world's most decentralized | videoconferencing software, using WebRTC. You can try it on | https://yang2020.app/meeting for example ... but it's available | in all of our apps, including for teachers, etc. | | Since a major point of our platform (qbix.com/platform) is to | avoid relying on external third parties, that meant we built a | version of livestreaming that is completely peer-to-peer. Imagine | a giant tree at whose root are the WebRTC participants "on | stage", the ones getting their feed directly get the least lag, | and then people just join different parts of the tree (and ask to | rejoin if the parent node dropped out or is too slow). | | Here is what we learned: | | 1. On some platforms, it's hard to turn off the audio listening, | because you can't turn it back on later. So you have to just | disconnect the audio stream going out, but it's still being | captured. | | 2. When someone is "muted" in a chat, what this really means in | P2P setups is that the peers have to "respect this setting" and | simply ignore the audio/video stream that the one muted is | sending. | | 3. Sometimes, it's very valuable from a business standpoint to | grab the incoming video, and do eye recognition and face tracking | (yes we support all that too, in our platform, it's available in | Javascript). So a teacher can, for example, take attendance and | know which students are no longer present or engaged, without | actually seeing their feed. All of it is done on the client side | of the student, and with their consent. | | Each of 1, 2, 3 can lead to a determined "hacker" kid making it | seem like they're listening when they're not, etc. But there are | some cool tricks to make it really hard and expensive to pull off | perfectly. | | We use this, for example, to award credits to people for | completing educational materials or listening to a show, as with | https://ftl.fm | datadata wrote: | 2) Seems like a waste of bandwidth, did you consider the use | case that turning off the video stream might be done to try to | reduce bandwidth usage either due to cost of bandwidth or | bandwidth being limited enough to break other simultaneous | needs? And since 3) while creepy, is at least done on the | client so does not seem to require the stream to always be sent | to the other clients. | EGreg wrote: | Well, yes, it can be turned off and yes it can be not sent, | but that's at the discretion of the client. They can "hack | their client" to send it anyway which is why everyone has to | "refuse" to receive it from a "muted" client, as well. It's a | second line of defense. Never trust the client. | m463 wrote: | > Sometimes, it's very valuable from a business standpoint to | grab the incoming video, and do eye recognition and face | tracking ... | | this should 100% be opt-in. Think what kind of future is being | created. | EGreg wrote: | it's a core feature of the app, in this case it's opt-in by | the TEACHER, the student can simply choose not to participate | in the course | sizzle wrote: | Might want to hire some marketing and product branding agency | folks to make sure you are branding this in a way that seems | safe and trustworthy, so people will try it out and you can | increase engagement and adoption. | EGreg wrote: | That sounds like a great idea, but how much would it cost? We | are kind of strapped for cash. | jacobsenscott wrote: | It's always been risky to trust the mute button, even before zoom | etc. The rules have been the same for at least 30 years. Never | send an email or other type of text message you don't want the | whole world to see. Never say anything on a conference call, even | when muted, you wouldn't say when not muted. | | Ethically any audio chat software shouldn't transmit any audio it | receives when muted. The "hey, you are muted" notifications can | all be done client side and don't need any server side support. | But ethics is not a factor in the design of any enterprise office | software. | fooblat wrote: | Is this is really important to you there is at least one | solution: Wearable Microphone Jamming[0] | | 0. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28885739 | ortusdux wrote: | I am generally against new government regulations, but I would | most likely support a law that requires all microphone and camera | elements have an LED hard-wired into the power wire/trace. If the | sensor is powered, the user should be able to tell. | m463 wrote: | The case where the school administrator was spying on kids - | the macbook light would quickly turn on and then off and you | had to look carefully to see it. | mvkel wrote: | People will always choose convenience over security | zaphod12 wrote: | Google Meet certainly stays on, but does not try to pretend it | doesn't. Feature, not a bug. And this is google, who you know has | no compunctions about data collection. The microphone volume icon | continues to show movement based on noise from your microphone | and it will even prompt you if it thinks you're speaking to | unmute yourself. | CalRobert wrote: | One nice thing about the frame.work laptop is a hardware mic | privacy switch built right in to the screen. | paxys wrote: | They are confusing the concepts of an app level vs OS level mute. | If the app itself paints a mute button, of course there's no | guarantee that it will do what it says. You have to trust the | developers at their word, that they are actually ditching the | audio feed coming into their application. Some apps even use the | audio to provide useful functionality (like a "you are speaking | while muted" notification). If you are really concerned about it, | mute the app from system controls instead. | soheil wrote: | Why wouldn't said app also be able to programmatically unmute | at the os-level? | oauea wrote: | It could, but you'll notice and then uninstall that app. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-04-13 23:00 UTC)