- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:20:01 +0200
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Christian Kaiser <kaiserc@google.com>, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> After having watched this discussion, I actually believe that this proposal
> would be a lot more acceptable if generalised for any external resource
Depends on what level of content hiding from the user and browser code
is expected.
If arbitrary resources had to be renderable by a CDM of the sort that
doesn't trust browser code with decrypted data, it most certainly
wouldn't make the proposal more acceptable. You'd quickly end up
putting the whole browser engine inside the CDM.
Also, browser vendors (other than Microsoft) successfully fought
against font DRM on the Web. Furthermore, the Web is doing just fine
without DRM for <img>. So adding "end user is an adversary" DRM to
those is unlikely to make the proposal more acceptable. ("CDN is an
adversary" crypto like Hixie's http+aes are a different matter of
course.)
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 12:20:30 UTC