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

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

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 23:30:50 +0000 (UTC)
To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1203022329300.6189@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Fri, 2 Mar 2012, Mark Watson wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2012, at 10:59 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> > 
> > No.  Again, a working CDM is *required* for this API to be of any use. 
> > If implementing a working CDM is troublesome or impossible for various 
> > reasons, that makes the API itself useless.
> 
> The clearkey keysystem was intended to provide a simple baseline. A 
> working clearkey CDM would be easy to implement, requiring no trade 
> secrets or closed source obscurity (Usual IANAL disclaimer about IPR).

I've specced Kornel's http+aes:// idea. This seems like a much better 
solution to the untrusted CDN solution than the CDM clear key idea, as it 
applies to all content, with or without JavaScript, in any user agent.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 2 March 2012 23:31:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:30 UTC