This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computer Security: Computing High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer Security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer SecurityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer SecurityTemplate:WikiProject Computer SecurityComputer Security High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Mid-importance). Things you can help WikiProject Computer Security with: Article alerts will be generated shortly by AAlertBot. Please allow some days for processing. More information... Review importance and quality of existing articles Identify categories related to Computer Security Tag related articles Identify articles for creation (see also: Article requests) Identify articles for improvement Create the Project Navigation Box including lists of adopted articles, requested articles, reviewed articles, etc. Find editors who have shown interest in this subject and ask them to take a look here.

This article currently reads like journalism: it needs to be reworked into Wikipedia's NPOV house style. -- The Anome (talk) 11:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@The Anome: I don't perceive any bias in this article. What changes would be necessary in order to make this article more "neutral?" Jarble (talk) 20:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the introduction I read this: "Typically, a webcam hacker or a camfecter sends his victim an innocent-looking application which has a hidden Trojan software through which the camfecter can control the victim's webcam." Thus suggesting there are many cases of this kind reported and you can say something about "typical" procedures. But than we see only two "notable cases" at all: the FBI agent Marcus Thomas and the sentenced teenager. It seems that we have the claim of Thomas only, without any technical details about the procedures. In the article about Abrahams we find only details about his talks with the victims. In these talks he urged the victims to run their webcam and to undress. There are no details how Abrahams managed to run the webcams of his victims. So I do not see a proof that the procedure explained in the introduction really happened. --Jjkorff (talk) 22:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Camfecting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110121055845/http://dataprivacyday2011.org:80/media/ to http://dataprivacyday2011.org/media/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]