W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Open Source implementations Re: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals)

From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:34:25 +0000
To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
CC: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B24E7562-95A9-416B-9984-C672BD2AC852@netflix.com>

On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Charles Pritchard wrote:

On 2/28/2012 9:07 AM, Glenn Adams wrote:

2012/2/28 Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com<mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com>>
In your other case (server is untrusted), DRM is unnecessary baggage;
you only need JS encryption/decryption that can be inserted between
the server and a <video> element of the user.  This can be specified
and implemented without many of the concerns that people have been
raising about this proposal.

A solution that requires decryption of the actual media content in JS would be unacceptable from a performance perspective, particularly on resource constrained devices. The solution must be readily implemented with reasonable performance on devices at different ends of the spectrum, including TV/STBs (resource constrained).

Citation needed.

Do you mean some evidence is needed for the requirement that the solution work on constrained devices, or for the claim that JS decryption would not be sufficiently performant on such devices ?

...Mark



-Charles
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 18:34:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:46 GMT