Re: noaccess / peerIdentity as constraints

On 9 July 2013 00:48, Stefan Håkansson LK
<stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> * Are noaccess streams intended for hair checks only?

No, the intent is that they can be sent to others.  The 'no access'
part applies to the web application only.

> * Should there be some kind of indication (in the browser chrome) that
> all access to cameras/microphones is of type "noaccess"?

The indicators would be roughly the same as normal: yes the camera is
on, and (if sending) the identity of the receiver of that stream.

> * Would "noaccess" mean that the user would not have to give consent
> (since the app can do no harm with the media) to accessing input devices?

Consent would still be required.