Re: Individualization

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 3:27 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:59 PM, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> wrote:
> > I don't know what initData
> > changes you are referring to. Can you be more specific?
>
> I'm referring to accommodating non-CENC MP4 encryption. See
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17673#c6 onwards. I'm
> not trying to pick on Apple specifically. I'm just pointing out that a
> change that catered to one vendor doing things differently was treated
> with the general attitude of "How do we accommodate this?" instead of
> the attitude "Should they really be needing this accommodation and
> what are the consequences?", so in that light, the treatment my
> request to add an enum item is getting is rather different.
>

On that specific issue, I believe the concern was that createSession()
accepted a MIME type and there was concern about equating a MIME type to
one possible variation of it. We discussed and iterated and eventually
ended up with initDataType, which avoids the issue.

In general, though, we have increased the focus on interoperability as well
as privacy and security over time.

>
> That said, I'm happy with the privacy aspects of EME getting
> attention. (Though whether the attention translates to privacy safe
> guards in implementations matters more then whether the issues are
> noted somewhere.)
>

Agreed. Where possible, we should try to be normative. Other than doing the
right thing in the implementations we control, that's probably the
strongest thing we can do.

>
> --
> Henri Sivonen
> hsivonen@hsivonen.fi
> https://hsivonen.fi/
>