Apps for secretly recording computer sessions.
 

Okay, so, I have a friend of mine that wants to be able to record the computer sessions of his roommate, whom he shares his computer with and believes is up to no good when using the computer in my friend's absence.

Now that the background story has been filled in. My research led me to vnc2flv. Now, I know that the recording CAN run in the background and will not be discontinued until a SIGINT or Ctrl + C combination is sent. My only question is, will the VNC server that needs to be running concurrent with vnc2flv be apparent to his roommate (i.e., on screen) or will it be running in the background itself?

Also, what about restarts? Will a new vnc2flv session need to be propagated if his Mac is restarted?

Honestly, I'm thinking that some kind of remote desktop app for maybe the Ipad that would not only allow my friend to view his computer desktop (without alerting his roommate but also record the session would be great, but, maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here.

Any suggestions?

Thanks beforehand.

How much "no good" is he suspected of? Things the roomie disagrees with? Things society finds to be ..... unusual? Things that Interpol gets interested in?

Simple solution would be to set up a separate account for each of them so roomie #1 can just log out when he leaves.

Not sure where you live but in the US this is against the law. It doesn't matter if it's his computer or not. If the roommate finds out your friend could get arrested.

Simplest solution would be to require a password at log in and wake from sleep, and not tell the roomie what the password is.

Can you give a citation for that? Recording of conversations without people's knowledge is not the same as recording the actions that take place on a computer. And by extensive case law, the owner of a computer has quite a bit of leeway in regards to what they do with it. Businesses have been upheld time after time for things like reading emails, texts, and other things from employees, when the employee is working on a computer owned by the business.

Trevor

In case the computer is owned by your friend he can definitely record the computer sessions as he wants. Perhaps a keylogger maybe helpful.

First of all and what seems the most obvious to me is that your "friend" could just password protect his computer. Secondly if your "friend" doesn't trust his roommate then maybe he should get a new one.

Thank you for more clarification on the legal stance on this matter. You appear to always be the voice of reason in most discussions lead astray.

That's what I was thinking. If it's "his" computer, I don't see how he could get indicted or something of that sort for keeping track of what "his" computer is being used for.

That's the thing, yeah, he can set up another account, but, if any problems should arise from his roommate's activities, no one's gonna care about which account was logged in or not. It's HIS computer.

And, my friend isn't entirely sure about what he's up to, but he has noticed suspicious type behavior whenever he comes home to meet him "finishing" up or "closing" sessions on his computer, usually with no history trace to show for it.

This could be considered wire tapping in the state you live in, or country if outside USA. If he is doing something illegal stop him from using it, plain and simple. If he is doing something that is not illegal, but say amoral, then you should just have a chat with him.

I love these kinds of discussions - basically they boil down to "How much can I invade my friend's/roommate's/girlfriend's/boyfriend's privacy without being discovered or getting in trouble?"

Dude; Grow up already! :rolleyes:

If you have suspicions about how whomever is using your computer, take away their access. You don't need to justify the act, just do it. You don't need to prove that they're doing something wrong, and you sure AS HELL don't need to be spying on them like a perv just make ourself feel better about taking away their access. You're an adult, act like one: just tell them you changed your mind and they have to get their own computer. Right now you have the moral high ground, but if you go spying on them you lose any trace of being in the right, and if you get whupped over it by a righteously pissed-off roommate… Damned sure serves you right.

…no moral compass whatsoever - how do you get through life? yeeEEeeeee.

I'm with tw; I'm for the blunt approach: "What the hell are you doing with my computer? -- I don't like the air of secrecy in whatever you're doing, so get your own box to do it on."

Try the social engineering approach - mention that you just got this great data recovery tool that records every keystroke so if the browser crashes you don't lose that 3000 word blog entry you've been working on, and it saves screenshots once a minute so you know what got typed where.

software like mentioned below can be helpful:

http://www.macspysoftware.com/
http://www.topsecretsoftware.com/mac-spy.html

Though I never used any one of those but seems can meet your requirements.

Nope. The person using the computer can expect a certain level of privacy. Violate that and you're basically screwed.

I do admit I don't know enough of US law but in Holland even a company can't spy on it's employees. Doesn't matter if it's their equipment, internet pipe and whatnot. An employee is legally allowed to use his company's computer equipment for personal reasons, as long as it is within reason. Only when there's a severe enough indication something might be wrong is the company allowed to snoop on the employee's email or web usage.

On short notice I could only find a case involving a man snooping on his wife's email. But I do also remember a few other cases.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/408208...-e-mail-crime/

I fully agree.

Yes, it's your computer BUT your roommate has a right to his privacy and you do NOT have the right to invade that. The only right you have is to deny access to your stuff. Use that right if you suspect something is up, don't violate someone else's rights.

I disagree, you give up some of your rights on someone else's personal private property. If someone is using your property to break the law you have every right to investigate. Though if it were me, I would just tell my roommates straight up don't use my computers in this manner or I will take away access.

No, you don't.

Not if this means you have to break the law too.

Absolutely! The roommate using the computer is a privilege, not a right. Privileges can be revoked, rights cannot.

You don't really have a right to privacy though. You only have a right against illegal searches and seizures. It has been ruled in many state SCOTUS that people have a right to defend and protect their property, even to the point in some states of killing someone over it.

When things involve private property a lot of times you forfeit certain rights. If you own a business and ban T-Shirts which are anti-religious that is your right, even though I am guaranteed freedom of religion and speech/express via the 1st amendment. If I own a private company people frequent and want to ban firearms, prayer, assembly, and refuse service to people who are rude I can do so.

Your rights are limited and dealing with other people's private property you do not own, you are forfeiting that right. It would be like a company or a school computer, it is not your property, you cannot do whatever you want with it.

Here's where we have a complete disconnect on proper moral reasoning. You seem to be arguing that people are morally entitled to do anything that is not expressly prohibited by law. That's bullshit. People are legally entitled to do anything not expressly prohibited by law, but ethics carries a higher standard. I mean, the fact that men were once legally entitled to force their wives to have sex (which still holds true in limited forms in some US states) does not make it a morally correct act. Plus, you are advocating a rather notable double-standard: The roommate is implicitly required to respect the owner's moral standards when he uses the owner's computer, while the owner is left free to violate all moral standards by spying shamelessly on the roommate.

I do understand the logic here: It's in the nature of "This belongs to me, and I can do whatever I want with what belongs to me, no matter what effect it has on others." It's the same logic that authoritarian political leaders use ("This country belongs to us and the people in it belong to us and we can do whatever we like with them for the security of what belongs to us"). Somehow I doubt that you'd be entirely comfortable with your government reading all of your personal letters and emails, tapping your phone, hiding cameras in your house, and etc, all because they suspect you might be doing something they don't like in their country, but you seem to think this is appropriate for someone to do to someone else, so long as it's not you.

I mean, I get it, liberal capitalism has its ideological roots in the idea that everyone is king of their own demesne, but being king carries a certain noblesse oblige - one needs to have some courtesy and grace towards one's subjects. The idea that everyone is the despotic totalitarian ruler of their own demesne is just a horror.

And yeah, I know I'm beating a dead horse: Neither you nor the OP will get this point if you don't already see it. Moral reasoning has to grow on you, it doesn't come through sudden inspiration. But I'm sorry, I simply refuse to allow you to equate moral behavior with "anything allowable under law". That's just unspeakably wrong.

Elegantly put, tw. The crash of '08 was caused by folks who didn't understand your point. Their actions were apparently legal, but I think most of us would think they were immoral. Further, suppose a homeowner with a roomer had strict religious views that prohibited masturbation, say. Would he then have the right to spy on the roomer because he suspected illicit behavior? Could he legally install a hidden web cam in his room perhaps? Legally, perhaps, but morally no.

First of all, before you jump to any more conclusions, I was never expressing my opinions, morals, ethics, and so forth. Simply stating facts. The facts are that is has been proven in court you have no right to privacy, you have a right to protect your personal property, and that when you are on or operating someone else's private property, they can regulate what you do with it.

In the case of the OP, as having a situation with roommates using my computers in the past for things I disproved of, I told them not to, told them I was going to search for their files and delete them. I did, with out their permission and it was on technology I purchased with my own money.

Not merely a right, but in some cases a duty. You can be found culpable for allowing illegal activity on/with your property and not using due diligence to prevent it.

For example, your home can be confiscated if it is used to grow, manufacture, or warehouse illegal drugs, even it wasn't you doing the growing, manufacturing, or warehousing, and even if you were unaware of it. It is your duty to police your own property, to be aware of what's happening on it.

Duty. Not right. Not privilege. Duty.

Similar examples can be found with allowing an unlicensed driver to drive your car, or even allowing inebriated guests to drive home from a party. You can be found liable for allowing illegal activity that you could have prevented.

I'm not objecting to the facts, I'm objecting to what you do with the facts. You are rendering a moral opinion whether you know it or not - the opinion that all one needs to pay attention to is the restrictions placed by the legal code in a given region, so that any moral considerations beyond that are of no value - and that is an opinion I find highly disturbing. I mean (if you'll pardon the hyperbole) one has the legal right in the US to kill anyone who enters one's property without permission or official warrant, but this does not make killing such people a moral act. it's simply an immoral act that's excusable under the law. I do not know what people would make of someone who habitually shot and killed everyone who trespassed on their property, but I think it's safe to say that such a person would not be treated as a moral and upright citizen.

As I said, if you suspect someone is using your computer for unsavory purposes, remove their access. If you suspect someone is using your computer for illegal purposes, take the computer to the police and allow them to investigate (that's what the police are for). Both of these are moral acts. Setting up surreptitious surveillance on your own is not a moral act, and might even get in the way. A prosecutor is not likely to want to use any evidence you find because he'd have to put you on the stand to explain just exactly why you had installed hidden software to watch someone else; juries do not respond well to witnesses who engage in creepy immoral acts.

Duty doesn't help here. If in fact you suspect your roommate is engaged in an illegal activity, your duty is to report it to the cops. You have a right to put a stop to the activity by denying the roommate access (though the cops may not want you to do so), but you have neither the duty nor the moral right to spy on your roommate.

Or wait, sorry: are you Batman? Because, you know, we bend moral norms for superheroes in the US; if you've dedicated your nightlife to costumed crime-fighting I might make some allowances.

Thank $DEITY I live in Holland where privacy is a right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europea...le_8_-_privacy

And more specifically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_of_correspondence

What ever happened to just talking about things? If the roommate is concerned, he should discuss the matter with his roommate. As the owner of the computer, he can attach requirements to the deal of loaning out his computer, such as all log files and browser histories must be left intact. If the borrower does not like that, he can decline the offer. It's that simple.

It doesn't matter what the second roommate is doing or not doing to make the computer owner nervous. He is nervous and that's that. He has a right to stipulate the conditions in which he will loan out his computer. If the person wanting to borrow it agrees, then great! If not, that's fine too! No one is forcing him to borrow the computer. He can borrow someone else's computer, use a public computer, buy his own computer, or do without.

In an adult world, people discuss these things. There is no need to go behind anyone's back. The guy has a right to his feelings, and if he feels nervous about loaning out his computer for any reason — justified or not — that's how he feels. Since he owns the computer, he should take his own feelings into consideration.

This is no different than loaning out a car. Wouldn't the owner have the right to stipulate things, such as the borrower must replace the gas used, or can only borrow it to go to a predetermined location or for an agreed upon amount of time (i.e. just one day locally, not a week out of town)? Why would a computer be any different? If you don't trust the person, the solution would not be to put GPS tracking on the car. You simply say no. A computer is no different.

I think the guy should simply tell the first guy that he's not comfortable loaning out his computer. That's all there is to it. Otherwise, the two roommates need to come up with a mutual agreement on the stipulations under which the computer can be borrowed. If they are able to agree, then they have a deal. If they can't agree, then no deal.

If two adults can't work out the conditions in which a computer is loaned/borrowed, then there are much bigger problems than what computer spyware will ever resolve.

Oh. I finally found the cases I was looking for.

As I read some of the comments they would have you believe that since it's their equipment they can do whatever they want with it. Including spying on the users of that equipment. This is simply not the case.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-19/j...ls?_s=PM:CRIME
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/webcamscanda/

The case of the school recording pictures is very different.

That was a public institution that recorded remote images of a student outside of a school context within their home. There was no notice given that such recording was possible or would occur. In several circumstances, the school lied to students about capabilities and evidence that the camera was being used to monitor the students. Further, they attempted to used the images to punish a student for suspected activity that, again, occurred outside of their jurisdiction; an abuse of their power. Following the investigation, it was determined that the tracking software was being used outside the guidelines that had been set on how and when it would be used to locate lost or stolen property.

In this case, it's a personal computer being used in a non-public setting. The owner of that machine is free to use that computer in any way that they see fit. At least in the US, they can legally monitor every communication or interaction that occurs on it. I could see this getting fuzzy if there isn't a notice of monitoring, specifically if a user communicates with another at a remote location who doesn't fall under the same monitoring notice.

Legally there may be a requirement to inform potential users of the possibility of monitoring. In casual usage I don't think such a case has ever been tested in court. It also doesn't seem obvious that you would need to post such a notice on a computer that is shared in such a setting. Would a parent need to inform their child that their usage is monitored (legally, not morally)?

Morally? It seems far better to inform the roommate that you're going to start auditing the machine. It's just good security practice for one (both the auditing and informing).

Further, if you don't trust them, just don't let them use the machine. If you still want to let them use the machine, at least give them their own account, or make them use the guest account. Making comments in person about their usage is going to be far better than springing something like, "I've been monitoring your Internet usage for the past month."

Legally speaking, no. The parent is not legally required to inform their child.

Morally speaking, there are too many variables and circumstances to even begin to give a single, global answer. However, in general, it is usually best to be upfront and discuss concerns and actions being taken to address those concerns with the child whenever possible.

Just to be clear, the main moral issue is a power/empowerment issue. Privacy is a form of empowerment, and the ability to strip privacy from people is a form of power over them. This is a standard sociology riff: you can read Foucault where he talks about using public exposure and ridicule to enforce social norms (as is happening now to rep Wiener), or some of the Feminist authors who decried pornography as disempowering (because it 'normalizes' exposing women fully to the observation of unseen, anonymous men). Parents are expected to exercise a certain amount of power over children for the child's safety, so it's neither illegal nor particularly immoral for parents to 'check up on' their kids activities (within reason - do it excessively and you end up with a neurotic kid, or start veering in to pathological parent-child relationships). This gets progressively more questionable as the child gets older (teen rebellion is all about establishing oneself as an independent - i.e. private - individual), and it's outright dysfunctional for one adult to try to exercise this kind of power over other adults. Not that adults don't love to do it - there are a lot of privacy-pirates in the world, from government to the yellow press to (often) your own beloved mother - but it's still dysfunctional.

Man you should help me get a job in Holland, that would be great!!!! :D;)


As for morals and some other person using my personal property, I am sorry but I disagree when you have to say to respect their right to privacy. If someone is abusing my property I no longer care about their privacy. I am not saying I will wire tap them, but I will definitely investigate and with out their permission. After all, it is my private property.

It is just like a school or work computer. You agree to a policy when using it, and are subjected for it be searched at any time you break rules in the policy.

Well, all that really shows is that you cannot exactly be trusted. I feel sorry for the people who enter into interactions with you on the assumption that you will respect conventional standards of decency, because you obviously reserve the right not to. Depressing, that, but not much to be done about it.

What the? I am talking about my property. Maybe I was raised different but I was taught if you are using something that isn't yours you respect it, don't abuse it.

Also, more specifically I am talking about people (roommates as it was) using my computer.

You don't even know me, yet you think you can figure out how indecent I am over a few posts over an opinion of privacy and roommates versus someone's personal computer? What happens when your roommate totally hoses your system and all of your work/school work is gone? Or they download illegal apps? Don't be absurd.

Regardless though, I am done with this conversation.

Again, no one is denying one's right to protect one's property. The issue at hand is whether one can radically invade the privacy of others in the pursuit of protecting one's property. The fact that you do not see that this is the issue is exactly why there is an issue to argue over. But that's your limitation, not mine.

I would not feel comfortable trusting you because I recognize - by your own implicit admission - that you do not stop to consider the impact of your *rights* on others. You certainly have the right to prevent someone from abusing (or even using) your computer; no one questions that. However, you seem to believe you also have the right to use the full power of your computer to ruthlessly invade the privacy of anyone who uses it (monitoring the websites they visit and their downloads, reading their emails, or whatever else might raise your suspicions). Yes, someone who borrows your computer has an obligation to be respectful, but you also have an obligation to be respectful towards them, and you don't seem to realize that. At the very least, if you are not going to have any regard whatsoever for the rights and feelings of others, you should at least start interactions off with some formal contract so that people know that they have no rights except those you explicitly spell out for them. right?

I suspect that in actual practice you wouldn't do anything like this - you would do the sensible thing, and kick whomever-it-is off your computer the first time your suspicions got raised (which is what I advocated originally - no need for spying, just axe them from the get-go and move on with life). But the way you're presenting yourself here has an invasive edge to it that I find offensive. But you're right, there's no sense going on about it, so let's drop it.

Here's an interesting analogy that occurred to me.

A houseguest acted a bit evasive the last time they left the bathroom as you walked by. Do you have the right to install a hidden camera? It is after all your house and you want to be sure they aren't doing anything illegal in there.

It's an analogy of course, so it's a poor example and isn't directly applicable, but it is an at least somewhat similar situation.

I might check under the sink, look rather closely at the countertop and inside/under the tank and in the vent. Depending on what I find...

Well, I find your judgmental attitude on what very little you know of me personally to be sad. Do you judge people like this so quickly? I never said to what extent I would go to either. You are making a lot of assumptions here. I simply said if they are abusing my computer I will find out what they are doing. I never said I would read their emails you are putting words in my mouth, and twisting what I say to fit your agenda, not mine.

Obviously everything is due to circumstance, there will always be what is legal, and what is moral and they aren't mutually exclusive. Sometimes they go together sometimes they don't.

However, go ahead and make your unilateral judgments. It doesn't bother me one bit. Now, I feel sorry for people who interact with you and have to deal with your high horsed morality you project onto everyone and if they disagree in the slightest you judge them.

the end.

No that doesn't even compare. You are talking about filming someone going to the bathroom versus a roommate abusing your computer while you are not home or around. The situation doesn't really apply to anything else, since everything is circumstantial.

This forum is designed to discuss computer help requests, not debate ethics. Ethical debate should be confined to the Coat Room. Please stop this discussion as it relates to ethics, and keep on the subject of computer help, or this thread will be moved to the Coat Room.

And, yes, I am as much to blame as anyone for this thread veering off into ethical debate. My bad.

Trevor

Do what you feel you must, but note that ethics are often an issue here. for example, had the OP asked how to monitor the activities of his wife or girlfriend (because he suspected infidelity), he would have been generally condemned - the fact that he framed it as invading the privacy of some *suspected bad person* (casting himself as a victim rather than as a perpetrator) doesn't change the moral ramifications of the request, it just masks it behind a veneer of self-righteousness.

spying on people is bad, period. there is rarely a need for it, and never an excuse for it.

I'm sorry that you feel judged because I find your willingness to invade the privacy of others offensive. However, I am fairly certain that I have the moral high-ground here, and I am not at all concerned about calling people on questionable moral behavior. If you don't like being judged, I suggest you do one of the following:

• Explain to me in a morally consistent way why you accept the kind of invasion of privacy for others that you would not tolerate if it happened to you.
• Explain to me in a morally consistent way that you believe no one (not even you) has any inherent right or privilege to privacy, and that it's all a matter of power (whomever can exercise this power over others is entitled to, no questions asked).
• Ignore me and ignore the question, and go on thoughtlessly and happily about your life.

This is not a matter on which we can agree to disagree, because it involves how we treat each other. so...

Ah, a perfectly defined issue with all the markings of an entirely unsolvable resolution.

The right to privacy, property rights and law v. morality in a diverse, multi-cultural society set against the backdrop of loaning a laptop to a roommate ... perfect for a heated coat room discussion. Add exceptions for super heroes and what could be better?

Personal opinion is there should be no exceptions for Batman. Only lawyers, politicians and the clergy are intellectually prepared to know the differences between legal, moral, profitable, self serving and politically correct. Okay, throw in philosophers for the fun of it, though mostly their abstract thoughts are irrelevant to the real world. (Threw that last sentence in for TW :) )

Please move to the coat room.

No one who refuses to contemplate the conditions of their own existence can ever truly be free.

or in other words: :p:p:p

First off, not "my" computer. Secondly, to accuse me of having no moral compass whatsoever is quite the grandiose claim, especially since you don't know me. I think I've been quite successful at maneuvering my way through life thus far, and plan to continue to do so.

Your opinion of the situation is a valid one, but definitely not definitive. There are way more than one way to skin a cat. To come in here and proclaim your stance as the end all be all is the surefire way of receiving a backlash from whomever you are attempting to berate and claim moral superiority to.

Once again, you opinion is a valid one but you could lose the holier than thou tone.

And, no one's whupping my ass, my friend, even if it was my computer.

Yes, I would be very uncomfortable with this, but doesn't the Patriot Act allow this kind of surreptitious behavior?

Great points. Far as I know, when the cops or whatever investigative force shows up, the could give a damn about your moralistic stance on not invading your roommates privacy when using your computer. You'll be interrogated too. And, worst case scenario, implicated and prosecuted along with.

Well, as I can obviously see that I have been post-jacked and had my inquiry transformed into one of moral superiority, ultra-piety and other banter I care not to involve myself in post-philosophy 101 in undergrad, please do not move the post to the Coat Room as I truly don't want it to spiral any further.

I realize that I did make quite a few replies that help to further the downward spiral, but this was before I read trevor's alluding to the possibility of the thread being moved. My apologies.

Now, if anyone has anything to contribute in the way of "applications", I am open.

TW, you are more than welcome to begin your own separate post on the moral issues underlying my request, but please don't exile my post as a springboard.

Thank you.

Exactly my point.

You misunderstand. My explicit intention was to derail this post so that you did not get an effective answer. MacOSXHints is not in the business (I don't think) of supplying people with the information they need to engage in cyber-surveiilance. My advice to you - which is the advice others have given you as well, and the advice you should follow - is to advise your 'friend' they do one of the following:

• Deny the roommate access to the computer (e.g. make a new login password and lock him out).
• Have a direct talk with the roommate about respectful use of other people's property and make sure s/he is not doing anything untoward (e.g. go the above-board route rather than sinking to tawdry surveillance).
• Take the risk, and give the roommate his own personal non-admin account on the machine which s/he can use as s/he likes (trusting that the account can be deleted in its entirety by you at a moment's notice, and that if the roommate does something illegal and gets caught at it, you can demonstrate - albeit marginally - in court the you had no control over, access to, or knowledge of what the account was used for.

If none of these satisfies 'your friend', who insists on some tool for surreptitious surveillance of his/her roommate, well… That is a bit telling about the ulterior motives here, isn't it?

I agree that this thread (being in the Help section of the forums) is not the place to debate ethics etc.

However, as with all help requests, one of the most important parts of the request is the explanation of why you are making the request and why any solutions suggested so far are not suitable.

And if we (the moderators of these forums and general forum members) don't like the reasons for the request, we will refuse to help. (And if as moderators we feel that the request/reason is something undesirable for these forums, we will close the thread.)

Remedial:
At the moment, in this particular thread, I think it is up to you to explain why the solutions suggested in post #47 by tw are not suitable.