- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:37:31 +0200
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Cc: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > If so, then would you place the same restriction on implementations of TLS, > which already supports extensible key and bulk encryption systems [1]? > > [1] http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5246.txt Drawing comparisons with TLS is a distraction and everyone here should already know that it is. Implying that the situation is equivalent is completely counterproductive. TLS terminates in the networking stack in such a way that the browser is trusted with the decrypted content. EME is designed to account for cases where the browser is treated as untrusted to handle decrypted content. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 11:38:00 UTC