- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 23:30:50 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, 2 Mar 2012, Mark Watson wrote: > On Mar 2, 2012, at 10:59 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > > > No. Again, a working CDM is *required* for this API to be of any use. > > If implementing a working CDM is troublesome or impossible for various > > reasons, that makes the API itself useless. > > The clearkey keysystem was intended to provide a simple baseline. A > working clearkey CDM would be easy to implement, requiring no trade > secrets or closed source obscurity (Usual IANAL disclaimer about IPR). I've specced Kornel's http+aes:// idea. This seems like a much better solution to the untrusted CDN solution than the CDM clear key idea, as it applies to all content, with or without JavaScript, in any user agent. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 2 March 2012 23:31:14 UTC