Bureaucrats, checkuser, Administrators
3,313
edits
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Background== | |||
Currently webcams are easy to access on any device, simply by knowing the URL. | Currently webcams are easy to access on any device, simply by knowing the URL. | ||
This is a cause of concern for some members, for some/all of the following reasons: | |||
* People just don't like webcams | |||
* It's difficult to justify the loss of privacy to visitors | |||
* Temptation to use the webcams to work out why something happened | |||
* Imbalance of power - those in the space don't necessarily know who can see them | |||
Note that the last two are seen by some as advantages, due to their deterrent effect. | |||
=====The following people requested for it to be members only===== | =====The following people requested for it to be members only===== | ||
Names given are common username and email name. | |||
{| | {| | ||
| Montyphy || | | Montyphy || Monty | ||
|- | |- | ||
| TheHypnotist || Morris | | TheHypnotist || Morris | ||
| Line 63: | Line 75: | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Implementation of limiting to members== | |||
I hope rearranging the cameras will be enough, but if not, here's how the members-only limit might work without causing too much disruption: | |||
I hope | |||
* Logged in user visits webcam page | * Logged in user visits webcam page | ||
| Line 79: | Line 89: | ||
This of course does nothing to protect against a member who forwards the streams, or writes an API to make the URL available to the wider world. But | This of course does nothing to protect against a member who shares their password, forwards the streams, or writes an API to make the URL available to the wider world. But it does mean we can graph how often the links are shared with outside members. | ||