The creator of Nearby Glasses made the app after reading 404 Media’s coverage of how people are using Meta’s Ray-Bans smartglasses to film people without their knowledge or consent. “I consider it to be a tiny part of resistance against surveillance tech.”
more at: @feed@404media.co
are you filming this? 👊
Admittedly, this is cyberpunk as fuck.
Should not be needed… but it’s a fucking cool solution.
Install this on kali nethunter and make glassholes pay for their crimes.
Next step is for someone makes a version that hijacks the Bluetooth headphones and makes them play a loud shrill noise that makes the glasses too uncomfortable to wear in your pressence.
Should be expanded for IP cams
Paywalled article. Here’s the link to the app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ch.pocketpc.nearbyglasses
Edit: it’s licensed under a license I never heard of. I’m curious, I don’t understand why it was needed.
“Why draft new licenses? Until now, there has been no standardization of this kind of source code license, even though it has become increasingly common. This has resulted in confusing and overlapping licenses, which need to be analyzed one at a time. Lack of standardization has used up the time and resources of many in the software industry, as well as their lawyers. The objective of the PolyForm Project is standardization and reduction of costs for developers and users.”
Seems like that exact XKCD about standards.
That license looks like Creative Commons Non-Comercial, which is not an open source license.
This is an unpopular opinion, but using licenses to actively prevent commercial exploitation of voluntary communal labor is not a bad thing. I would even argue that allowing commercial exploitation of free, communally-maintained software is downright unethical. I don’t tolerate this pejorative “it’s not open source unless the rich and powerful can exploit it” bullshit.
This is not a remotely unpopular opinion, sharing is awesome and corpos can suck it
Thank you, I see this so often and it always irks me.
"oh but you’re limiting your reach with this license because companies won’t want to us— boo fucking hoo, maybe not everything is about market-share and having a morbillion downloads.If you dont want corpos to exploit it, you go with GPL. Then they are forced to share back.
I like AGPL in theory, but in practice it never works like that. They are protected by a smoke screen — you don’t know if they are using something, how they are using it, or what they’ve built on it — and even if something did leak about their usage they are protected by money — the vast majority of FOSS projects won’t have the resources to pursue any kind of legal enforcement or reasonable remedy. In practice, they will use and build on A/GPL software while contributing nothing back in blatant violation of the spirit and intent of the license, because who is going to find out or enforce it?
I know, and yet the code is open source. Confusing.
No, the code is available, which is not the same as open source.
They do call it “open source” in the docs though.
That’s called “source available”. FUTO basically did the same thing with their stuff after the community rightfully got angry over their use of “open source” in their docs.
Proudly powered by WordPress.
Say no more
Yeah I noticed it in the favicon too. Bad aftertaste.
You know what sucks?
In that AR glasses, in theory, are such an interesting technology with lots of potential, and certainly a piece of tech I would love to have and work with and on. Not to secretly record people, but to, well… augment my field of view with whatever digital tools or displays I would like. It would be so useful
It’s honestly kinda saddening to me that it most likely will get completely ruined by our current toxic relationship to technology. A step towards our ever increasing cyberdystopia, and not towards enchanting our limited lives
Obviously either way I don’t trust Meta, but an open-hardware device running a FOSS AR system? It would be nice…
I still hold out hope that this somehow could be resolved, and I would love to contribute to open software for these devices. Maybe one day soon-ish I will. My expertise should be well applicable, after all
Drop the cameras and microphones and replace them with a couple accelerometers and gyros. Paired with your phone’s GPS tracking, the glasses can tell where you’re looking without actually seeing anything. You can get handy features like a floating ‘turn here’ sign over your exit while driving with GPS navigation without recording anyone or anything at any time. Better battery life, too.
I don’t think that would work particularly well with AR: People get sick if movement isn’t synced up properly, not having any sort of cameras or sensors at all would exacerbate that problem.
If you are talking about a simple HUD, then that might be a lot more viable, but for AR and the tech we currently have, some sort of camera or sensor array is kind of a requirement practically speaking.
See, I don’t really want full AR. I want a HUD, a very small number of rudimentary AR features, like floating windows for text documents or videos, physical buttons on the arms of the glasses, small drivers by the ears for audio, and battery life that will last most of the day. I already have to wear glasses and if I’m paying more for extra features I want ones that will last the whole time I might want them, not just the six or so hours a day that the current offerings have.
If that’s all you want, making something that just clips onto your existing glasses might be pretty viable.
GNSS isn’t really accurate enough for this, especially in urban environments where there is poor line of sight to most of the satellites.
Except that one cool thing with AR is being able to have it tell what you’re looking at is. Not just positioning things in space. A lot of cool shit that could be done with AR, like real time text translation, object identification, etc needs some kind of camera, even if it just sees IR light. Lotta cool shit needs a microphone, too.
Using an AR display on those glasses with frames that thick is such a horrible idea. Google was on the right track with the HUD displayed on a frame-less prism that doesn’t block half your vision.
Last thing I’d want is to be in the middle of something with my hands full and the display bugs out, blocking the one eye, making me screw something up.
Last thing I’d want is to be in the middle of something with my hands full and the display bugs out, blocking the one eye, making me screw something up.
Maybe don’t cause your own problems.
I mean, that was sorta the point of the comment…
I don’t like them and therefore, I won’t be using them, ever. I’d get a less obstructing headset instead. And, I wouldn’t get a headset just to play around with it, I’d actually want to use it and try to get to it help me doing things.
It’s only a matter of time before someone is arrested on suspicion of voyerism and there is evidence of him staring at some girl’s boobs.
Every guy does this, but “Looking at cleavage is like looking at the sun. You don’t stare at it. It’s too risky. Ya get a sense of it and then you look away!”
-Jerry Seinfeld.
but an open-hardware device running a FOSS AR system? Until these display my health, ammo and the direction to my next objective, I’ll pass.
The truth is that we already are living in the surveillance state and people are just going to have to “get over” being recorded in public by anyone that walks by.
I don’t like it either. But that’s the reality we’re entering into, where privacy isn’t a right but a privilege and that privilege does not exist save for some very select (if any at this point) places like your home … Maybe.
No, people do not have to get over that. People need to stand up for their rights. Being in a public space isn’t justification to have your movements recorded and logged 24/7. Stop being the fucking knee you coward.
I’m just being realistic about the future. You already are carrying around a machine that’s listening and watching. You’re walking into and out of stores where you’re on camera. Hell you’re driving past however many cameras in your car or walking past them on the street, every business, every office, every space has cameras now.
Thus, I think eventually more and more augmented reality devices will be seen because people will come to appreciate their uses outside of just being recording devices once that concern is overcome. In other words, wearing AR glasses won’t get you default labeled as some perverted weirdo.
You don’t need to bend the knee but we’re past the point where there should be any expectation of privacy in public spaces. I’m not saying I like it, I’m saying I expect our society to continue to move towards a surveillance model where privacy simply cannot be expected in any public space.
Do I think it’s dystopian and bad, yes, yes I do. I also think we need strong privacy protections for our private domiciles. That doesn’t mean my opinion is aligned with what actually is going to happen in our world.
I don’t want it but it’s what is going to happen and has been happening.
While I agree that AR glasses will become widespread, there’s still time to advocate for and implement privacy focused regulations. Especially early on as people are upset about the technology
While not perfect solutions, enforcing stuff such as recording LEDs and such are steps in the right direction
AR glasses will become widespread
I was picking up my new prescription glasses this week at a large mall. They had Ray Ban and Oakley Meta glasses and the clerk said they have not sold a single pair.
“Here’s a list of reasons why all hope is lost and you too should bend the knee.”
That’s all I read. C.O.W.A.R.D.
You’re a silly person, aren’t ya.
Yeah fuck me for acknowledging AR glasses or other AR tech could be very useful but it’s being limited by our privacy concerns that are basically theater at this point.
Truly I am so cowardly Mr big internet man.
What does this even mean? You gonna punch every other person you see?
Fuck off with your disingenuous comment
deleted by creator
I agree, it would be nice.
I agree but the biggest defense for this is to always assume you’re being recorded when in public even if you’re not. You never know.
The issue becomes relevant in private spaces, to me. Nobody with smart glasses is coming into my home.
Doesn’t this boil down to self-censorship in public? Better not critizise the government in public becaus you never know whos waring smart glasses…
I agree with the core of your point. I’d like to assert, though, that all people exert some level of self-censorship in public on the basis of the opinions of their neighbors and peers. Having to worry about powerful organizations like governments and megacorps also always being there (instead of just sometimes, or usually) adds a new degree of reason to self-censor, for sure.
Yes. You should have to censor yourself for neighbors and peers to have a functioning society. You should not have to do it for corporations. The line is pretty cut and dry and we should fight to keep it.
deleted by creator
Those who would give up any measures of Liberty to purchase any amount of temporary Security deserve neither Liberty or Security.
I agree 100%, but a thought occurred to me…would these help lead to more arrest if assaults were captured on the cameras. It sucks that such an existential threat to privacy could do real good. Forces some moral and ethical issues that techno feudalism is forcing on us, and we aren’t making the choice.
you should be reading more cyberpunk / scifi literature. There is literally the case for human action and freedom within the machine. And assuming that AI cameras are also the freuquent next step in police states. Do you really want this? Are you allowed to have ambitions outside the machine?
I would love for an AI machine to be all knowing and all pervasive. It honestly sounds like it could be great.
Except definitelt not because we know 100% that nobody could be trusted to be in charge of it.
Ofc I don’t want this. But I look at my wife and daughter and their safety comes first hence the dilemma. And philosophy should be considered as well.
Fucking assholes would sell out the world for a false sense of security.
There is no reason for anyone to be walking around and public with hidden cameras.
would these help lead to more arrest if assaults were captured on the cameras
It might also help find lost puppies, but that’s not a good enough reason to give up any additional amounts of privacy to the megacorporations or to a police state.
Everyone around you has a phone with a camera. Businesses and the government have additional cameras looking all over. The phone camera being less obvious and handsfree seems like an arbitrary choice of where to draw the line
Spy glasses are much less obvious than using a phone camera.
Back to the 1960s…these were marketed to look at kids and girls.
I don’t know about you, but when I’m walking around all my phone camera sees is the inside of my pocket. Hands free stealth cameras seems like a perfectly reasonable place to draw the line.
Is unsolved assault cases currently a problem? That sounds like an answer looking for a problem to me.
And I think it just means anyone deciding to commit assault just also steals/ destroys the victims phone and glasses as a default
the biggest defense for this is to always assume you’re being recorded when in public even if you’re not
So women in July should wear tarps?
What posible application is there for this CreepTech?
I just re-watched Ghost in the Shell SAC Laughing Man last night, and wouldn’t mind seeing these things get hacked with the Laughing Man logo replacing any face it was looking at, re-writing signs, etc.
Open season on meta wearers when?
Green light!
Github (APK) link, if you’re on a privacy phone: https://github.com/yjeanrenaud/yj_nearbyglasses
meta is all about surveillance cant expect anything less
Doesn’t work 😮💨 push “start scanning” and nothing happens.
It’s supposed to ask for Bluetooth access at that point, did it?
Also from the GitHub page:
if you don’t see the scan starting, you might need to enable Foreground Service on your particular phone in the Settings menu [in the app’s settings, not the phone’s]
Yes I did. I don’t know what a foreground service is or how to enable it…
Sorry - edited my comment as you were replying. It’s in the app’s settings menu.
Oh I couldn’t access the settings menu previously…
Working now, thanks
It worked for me after I looked at the settings screen. I’m not sure why. If it is working, though, the debug box will fill up with a ton of text.
Turn off “debug” in the app settings to stop that & have it only report suspect devices instead of everything it sees.
None of those buttons at the top work either. Possibly because they’re behind my notifications bar.
For me it worked to rotate the screen, then the buttons worked.
Same here.
Go to Android Developer Settings > Display Cutout, set it to one of the other options and it should shift the app down a bit so you can access the buttons. (change it back after ofc)
I used “waterfall cutout” but others might work depending on your phone model. Afaik no other fix is possible without the app’s code itself being modified.
Ditto
I think you need to give it a sec or hold. The button down. The same thing happened to me. But it was scanning within a min of downloading
No such luck
It apparently works with the bluetooth signals which I found really smart.
Couldn’t people who specifically want to stealthily record people just turn off the bluetooth?
I believe Bluetooth is always on with the Meta glasses, at least the last gen. They offload everything to the phone. I got a pair as a work gift and only use them as sunglasses with headphones built-in so I can listen to podcasts on walks.
My partner got a pair for work when they first came out (her job involves creating social media content). I was impressed by the speakers and it’s the same style of sunglasses that I normally wear daily, so I got a pair for myself. It was so nice to be able to listen to stuff and take calls without carry around headphones or putting them in when the phone rang. I was already uncomfortable with the association with meta, but was able to isolate that aspect at first. As they continued to add features, I’ve started being less comfortable with them. I accidentally left them somewhere a couple months ago and decided not to replace them. It’s such a bummer that all the cool tech is now not just spying on you, but on everyone around you. Fuckin capitalism ruins everything.
I know next to nothing about the glasses, but would they be vulnerable to anything the Flipper Zero is capable of doing?
How hard can you throw it?
Pretty hard. Unfortunately my aim is shit.
Just throw hard enough to trigger fusion reaction then.
XKCD-it. Got it.
What do you mean “vulnerable”? Are you trying to blow them up?
Hmm, wonder if Bluetooth (D)DoS attacks are a thing.
https://github.com/crypt0b0y/BLUETOOTH-DOS-ATTACK-SCRIPT
Requires Linux. But a raspberry pi should do the trick.
Now we just need to combine them both so it only targets Meta devices.
how does this work? I thought bluetooth is practically invulnerable to DDOS because of its endless frequency hopping
Haven’t tested it against meta glasses. Essentially it requires the MAC address of the device and pings the shit out of it. May or may not work against the glasses.
That’d be a great TV show plot…but I’m not really a fan of violence. I’d be more interested in rendering them unusable, or spoofing them into making loud fart noises or letting out a loud wolf whistle everytime someone else walks by. Like I said, I don’t know, nor do I much care, what kinds of things the glasses do…but I imagine theres some kind of screen the user can watch, so maybe forcing them to view something annoying could be another viable spoof.
Ok, but how hilarious would it be if a series of vulnerabilities (software & hardware) would be discovered that wound allow just that (set fire to the battery), lol.
I mean, the Flipper Zero is just a computer with a few radios built-in.
I think the only one they share with most smart glasses is Bluetooth which might potentially have some vulnerabilities which could be exploited, but there are also expansion cards for the Flipper Zero that add everything from wifi and ethernet ports to high-powered IR blasters, so the real question is how vulnerable smart glasses are.
And the truth is, they’re vulnerable by default because they rely on corpo servers to operate like any other “smart” device. Any flaw in the security of the glasses themselves barely holds a candle to the fact that they forward everything to Facebook or some other big tech brand name with a financial interest in monetizing your data.
I mean, eventually there are going to be people with camera’s stealthily integrated directly into their eyeballs recording non-stop.
Like that black mirror episode letting people relive any moment from their past.
The wireless communication protocol will still be able to be intercepted. A physical port for data transfer will probably be too dangerous to the subject and prone to contamination (and infection).
But not necessarily interpreted.
Now you need a powerful laser pointer to ruin the glasses camera. Careful not to blind the wearer.
https://xkcd.com/1251/ (there is always an xkcd about it)
That was way more on point than I expected.
Apparently the lidar in some cars can damage cameras and are safe for eyes.
Removed by mod
