- From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 12:48:44 +0100
- To: Cory Doctorow <cory@eff.org>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
28.01.2017, 12:43, "Cory Doctorow" <cory@eff.org>: > Thank you, Philippe. > > A couple of questions: > > 1. Would publication of EME as a W3C rec be affected by this best > practices work, or does the Director envision that EME would go out with > no protections for security disclosures while this work trailed behind it? I would also like to know the answer. It *seems* to envision a path along those lines, but I trust that at minimum there would not be a W3C Recommendation before such work has been published. > 2. Members have expressed other concerns regarding anti-circumvention > and EME -- for example, Vision Australia, SSB Bart, the Royal National > Institute for Blind People, Media Access Australia, Braillenet and > Benetech have all expressed concerns about the need to immunize those > who circumvent to add accessibility features (note that all of these > members have granted me permission to disclose their concerns and votes > in polls on charter renewal and publication). > > These members represent, I believe, all of the W3C members that > represent visually disabled people and people with other > sensory/physical disabilities. No, they do not. Nomensa, Deque and TPG spring to mind. I think it is also fair to say that companies like IBM, HP, Microsoft, Apple and Google have done a lot of important work to ensure the rights of people with disabilities can be exercised in practice - even while it is fair to acknowledge that they have a patchy record. > A list of accessibility use-cases that require this protection, and a > further discussion, can be found in this document: > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/interoperability-and-w3c-defending-future-present Against which technical experts who are passionate advocates for accessibility who have carefully assessed the technology over years have declared that there isn't a problem. I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle, but I cetainly don't recognise your claims as unarguably factual. > Is the Director going to take any action on the concerns of the entire > visual impairment caucus of the W3C? That seems to misrepresent the situation. cheers Chaals > Cory > > On 01/27/2017 03:41 PM, Philippe Le Hégaret wrote: >> All, >> >> This is an update on the status of the HTML Media Extensions charter >> extension and the Proposed Recommendation transition request for the >> Encrypted Media Extensions specification. >> >> Further to the recent review regarding the HTML Media Extensions Working >> Group, the Director has been reviewing the expressions of support to >> continue the work as well as the objections to continuing the work in >> its present form. >> >> While the Director recognized the technical progress and stability of >> the work, the lack of consensus to protect security researchers remained >> an issue. The Director had asked the Team to find a resolution that was >> agreed to by both supporters of the charter extension and objectors. The >> team was unable to find such a resolution. The Director has concluded >> that the best practical method to improve protections at this stage is >> to overrule the objections of the charter extension, but establish >> momentum for protection by establishing best practices for responsible >> vulnerability disclosure. >> >> In the interest of promoting vulnerability disclosure programs, W3C will >> establish a set of guidelines intended to protect security and privacy >> researchers when proper and reasonable disclosure procedures are followed. >> >> Specifically, the W3C Team will publish on 2 March 2017 a set of >> guidelines for vulnerability disclosure programs that protect security >> and privacy researchers as a W3C Team submission. This will represent >> our initial sense of best practice and will serve as input for further >> work in this space. Prior to the publication of the team submission, >> input will be welcome on public-security-disclosure@w3.org. The >> Responsible Vulnerability Disclosure program [1] established by Netflix >> will be used as a starting point. >> >> Following the 2 March date, the W3C Director will send a Call for Review >> for the Encrypted Media Extensions Proposed Recommendation, soliciting >> feedback and expression of interest for the specification and the >> initial draft of W3C guidelines for security and privacy researchers >> disclosure programs. >> >> The Working Group Charter [2] is hereby extended until 30 April 2017. >> >> More information could be found at >> https://www.w3.org/2017/01/GVDP-factsheet.html >> >> Philippe >> >> [1] https://help.netflix.com/en/node/6657#gsc.tab=0 >> [2] http://www.w3.org/2013/09/html-charter.html > -- > > FOR PUBLIC SAFETY REASONS, THIS EMAIL HAS BEEN INTERCEPTED BY YOUR > GOVERNMENT AND WILL BE RETAINED FOR FUTURE ANALYSIS > > -- > > Cory Doctorow > doctorow@craphound.com > Wickr: doctorow > > For avoidance of doubt: This email does not constitute permission to add > me to your mailing list. > > blog: boingboing.net > upcoming appearances: craphound.com/?page_id=4667 > books (novels, collections graphic novels, essay collections): craphound.com > latest nonfiction: Information Doesn't Want to Be Free > latest graphic novel: In Real Life > podcast: feeds.feedburner.com/doctorow_podcast > latest novel: Homeland craphound.com/homeland > latest short story collection: With a Little Help craphound.com/walh > > Join my mailing list and find out about upcoming books, stories, > articles and appearances: > > http://www.ctyme.com/mailman/listinfo/doctorow > > READ CAREFULLY. By reading this email, you agree, on behalf of your > employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from > any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, > shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, > non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have > entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and > assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and > privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release > me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer. > > As is the case with every email you've ever received, this email has not > been scanned for all known viruses. > > Duh. -- Charles McCathie Nevile - standards - Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Sunday, 29 January 2017 11:49:22 UTC