But that was not your concern in your post that I answered. What you said was..."Nobody has offered any proof that the school even has the capability to activate the cameras remortely and get images from them, let alone that they have been doing that." I supplied the proof that they had the capability.It answered your concern. Whether they did is a different issue. Them coming forward with a photo is proof that they did.
Most Windows-savvy people here have stated that any comptent hacker can activate the camera embedded in a laptop.
Apparently any camera-equipped laptop can be remotely hacked without knowlege of the user.
I’ll remain sceptical in this case- it could be that the principal (or whoever was the secondhand source) was asked if it ws possible to hack a laptop in such a manner, and he said, yes it is, if the hacker understands how to do it, which was then reported to the hysterical parent as, yes the school can activate the camera.
When I said, did the school have the capability, I’d assume that the capability would include whatever software and net gear is needed, a place to do it from, some room or office with the appropriately prepared computer and net gear, and a protocol to execut e the plans from. An actual capability, not one inherent in the laptop design. Is there evidence of an actualized capability, or only a conceptualized capability?
having a picture is not evidence. If it were then al the cases of kids sexting in which the school ends up with a cell phone picture would be evidence that the school is remotely accessing kids cell phones.
Apparently everyone “has the capability to do it” to a laptop if what other posters here have hinted at.
I’ll follow this news story and court case as it develops before I decide that the school is guilty as alleged