NOTICE: This content was originally posted to Google+, then imported here. Some formatting may be lost, links may be dead, and images may be missing.

... uot; Canon EOS Wi-Fi protocol. Give me a break. This stuff has been known for quite some time now, it's been documented around the net if you search well. It has also been known to the people who make tools like I do for quite some time.

Yeah, the development version of DSLR Controller ( http://dslrcontroller.com/ ) indeed does support connecting to WFT's as well (6D is in testing, unfortunately I do not have one myself). Yeah, if you manage to make that connection, you can control the camera. Guess what? That's what it's meant to do.

Not to mention that this "exploit" requires you to sniff the connection of somebody who is actually using EOS Utility (or DSLR Controller, or whatever) wirelessly with the camera. This while the camera only accepts one connection at a time, and if you're not using it, with default settings, it'll time out and turn itself off, because this stuff eats batteries like no tomorrow. Well, to be honest you don't even need to sniff an EOS Utility connection, because you can deduce the GUIDs needed without anybody using EOS Utility, as long as both devices are doing something on the network; but that GUID still has to be pre-authenticated with the camera. The one connection thing is also beatable - you can boot the main user - but as somebody is actually using the camera at that time, you can't do this without anybody noticing.

So your window of exploiting is rather tiny. Not to mention that engaging liveview or taking pictures makes a lot of noise on these devices. So stealing pictures - yes. Surveillance? Mwah.

Did I mention that you actually need to have a connection to the Wi-Fi network they're using? Which is probably secure? And a smart camera user will use their own hotspot for this (setup by the camera, the WFT, or the computer/laptop/tablet, all of which can do this) instead, because the transfer speed is many times higher than using a router near you. This is not just something that is more secure - people who have this equipment might not care that much about secure - but what they do care about is that it works fast and smooth, and it's very hard to do that without creating your own private hotspot shared only between the two devices communicating. This can make a 2-3x performance difference, even if the non-private Wi-Fi network has no other users and a good signal. Imagine the difference with a crappy free public Wi-Fi network!

And for surveillance there's also the factor that most people with these cameras think they are sort-of precious, and while not using them, will have lens caps on the lens, the camera turned off, and stowed away somewhere.

Much ado about very little, IMHO. Yes, it can be abused. But it's not nearly as spectacular (or likely) as some news sites make it out to be. 

There's more risk in using the other means of sharing the images over Wi-Fi (FTP, DLNA, etc) on a "public" network, but those methods won't create a surveillance device. And with the massive sizes of the images these camera produce, you're much more likely to use your card or USB to transfer those than Wi-Fi in the first place.

If you're a high profile journalist doing a story in China, by all means, take extra measures to secure yourself and think about what you're doing and how. Or if you're at a photographer's conference. But if you're just a random professional doing your job, the chances this is going to touch you are rather low.

Just to clarify: I'm not saying this isn't bad, shouldn't be fixed, or that you shouldn't watch out. it's just not as spectacular as some tech news sites make it out to be.

DSLR Controller :: Home