- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 21:21:07 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26332 --- Comment #36 from David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> --- It has been argued that user agents will do what is right (for the CDMs they support) and that there is therefore no need to require HTTPS. I do not believe this would be true in practice. I think it is unlikely that most user agent implementors will have access to or seek out the information necessary to make the correct decision. (Think beyond the major browser vendors.) I think the spec can and should try to avoid such judgement calls on important issues. Furthermore, suppose that a user agent implementor does not feel comfortable with the capabilities of the CDM (i.e. one built into the platform). They _could_ choose to require HTTPS, but if all other implementations have not made that requirement, the user agent will likely be limited to a small set of content providers that support HTTPS. Instead, that implementor will probably expose the CDM to HTTP anyway, resulting in exactly the problems we are trying to avoid. As I said above, "it is likely that the only way to actually address the issue is to normatively require secure origins..." Much of the discussion has focused on identities, but there are other concerns as well. For example, DRM implementations, especially those provided by the platform, are often unsandboxed. This means that such CDMs could access anything on the system and it are particularly dangerous because they run outside the sandbox. Given these risks and the unique nature of EME/CDMs compared to other web APIS, it makes sense that such risks should be restricted to authenticated domains. Other potential mitigations to these risks (i.e. prompt the user) are also non-normative, so we cannot rely on those. Even if we made user prompts normative, the benefit is minimized if non-secure origins are supported (see [1] in comment #0). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 19 August 2014 21:21:09 UTC