[Bug 20961] EME depends on privileged access to the users computer which is not technically available.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20961

--- Comment #7 from Fred Andrews <fredandw@live.com> ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > As noted before, the specification does not define the scope of privileges
> > required by a CDM, so it is not possible to assess the validity of your
> > claim that 'EME does not depend on any such privileged access.'.  Please
> > include the scope of privileges that the CDM requires has so we can all
> > assess the technical merits of this claim.
> 
> How is this different from video codecs ? The specification does ont define
> the 'scope of privileges' required by video codecs either. We expect UA
> implementations to pay attention to the access they give to components such
> as this.

A video codec fits within the standard web platform security model, effectively
the same as for an image decoder which has been part of the platform from the
beginning.  For this reason it was probably not deemed necessary to articulate
the scope of privileges that it needs.  It would be expected that a video codec
could execute within a very restricted sandbox, with a one-way flow of
information.  I suggest that a CDM useful for DRM requires privileges beyond
this, but the onus should be on the proponents to articular the scope?

The EME interface alone does not require privileged access.

However it is designed to solve the problem of DRM, and the success of EME in
solving the DRM problem does depend on the CDM having privileged access.  If we
assume that a CDM has no security or protection then it will not be able to
implement DRM and EME is of not use and is not worthy of consideration. The bug
description will be amended to clarify this.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 15:54:04 UTC