- From: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:29:16 -0400
- To: <public-privacy@w3.org>, "'Christine Runnegar'" <runnegar@isoc.org>
- Cc: <ryladog@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <6ce201cfde55$a1d1c760$e5755620$@gmail.com>
All, In preparation for my contribution to the PING Review: MediaStream Recording Draft, I first reviewed: * WebRTC Security Architecture - Protocols for real-time communications between Web browsers http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch/?include_tex t=1 * Security Considerations for WebRTC http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-security/?include_text=1%2 0[2 <http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-security/?include_text=1% 20%5b2> ] * Media Capture and Streams - W3C Working Draft 03 September 2013 - which defines a set of JavaScript APIs that allow local media, including audio and video, to be requested from a platform. http://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/ My recommendations for this draft (can be found below): * MediaStream Recording - W3C Editor's Draft 20 August 2014 - a recording API for use with MediaStreams http://w3c.github.io/mediacapture-record/MediaRecorder.html NOTE: I am unaware if there was a PING review of Media Capture and Streams draft itself. If so, I would love to get a chance to review that before providing my final recommendations for PING to consider. The Media Capture Task Force is asking for a Privacy review but it is unclear whether that request is specifically related to the spec itself - or - around the broader idea of privacy consideration as it relates to capturing media via webcam recordings in general (does the device have permission to capture an individual, etc), and for surveillance purposes. I have chosen only to address the privacy/security related to the draft technical spec. Introduction: Media Streams. Access to multimedia streams (video, audio, or both) from local devices (video cameras, microphones, Web cams) can have a number of uses, such as real-time communication, recording, and surveillance. The Media Capture and Streams draft defines the APIs used to get access to local devices that can generate multimedia stream data. It also defines the stream API by which JavaScript is able to manipulate the stream data or otherwise process it. The draft defines conformance criteria that apply to a single product: the user agent (browser) that implements the interfaces that it contains. The RTCPeerConnection object acts simultaneously as both a sink (image, audio, video) and a source for over-the-network streams. As a sink, it has source transformational capabilities (e.g., lowering bit-rates, scaling-up or down resolutions, adjusting frame-rates), and as a source it could have its own states changed by a track source (though in this specification sources with the remote <http://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/#dom-mediastreamtrack-remote> attribute set to true do not consider the current constraints applied to a track). This review of MediaStream Recording is related to the recording API for that draft spec, that uses JavaScript or ECMAScript. The Event Handlers are specific to HTML5. The terms event handlers <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/webappapis.html#event-handlers> and event handler event types <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/webappapis.html#event-handler-event-type> are defined in [ <http://www.w3.org/TR/mediacapture-streams/#bib-HTML5> HTML5]. Recommendations: We would want to see a standard W3C Privacy/Security Considerations section included, which has additional language specific to the vulnerabilities presented by the use of scripting. IF, a media stream recording from a local device is distributed, shared or accessed over the web: * We would want to see that Implementations can ensure that only Authenticated Entities can have access to the data and preferences of the user - and - only have/maintain it for a single session. * We would want to see that services and media are delivered only from trusted entities via HTTPS (or other similarly secure method - such as peers whose origin can be verify cryptographically -optimally via DTLS-SRTP.). And perhaps somehow check that the servers are also authenticated by an external identity service, using the SSL/TLS certificate infrastructure. * We would want the spec to allow for support of Identity Provider (IdP) use that supports protocols (such as OpenID, OAuth, or BrowserID) that can be used to demonstrate identity to other parties. Ideally, we would want to see that a persistent separation of identity provision and signaling service [maybe: in the communication stream]. * We would want the PeerConnection (RTCPeerConnection) assertion to allow binding other information to the identity besides a fingerprint but at minimum it needs to bind a fingerprint (which uses the fingerprinting surface of the UA). Or allow for anonymous communication. Allows users to share a set of secure data and/or media channels with keys which are not known to any third-party, and exchange data protected by those keys negotiated by DTLS. Must allow for sending/receiving keepalive signals. * We would want to see that any associated clients MUST treat HTTP and HTTPS origins as different permissions domains. * We would want to see that implementations MUST obtain explicit user consent prior to providing access to media, media streams and services. implementations MUST NOT allow the setting of permanent access permissions for HTTP origins. * We would want to see that implementations allow for IP Location Privacy functions. Users should be able to participate in communications without revealing their location. * We would want to see that personal identifier are not persist when a session ends. * Implementations should allow for Individual Consent or Cryptographic Consent. o Individual Consent: Ask the user for permission for media recording. o Cryptographic Consent: Only allow media recording to a given set of peer keying material or to a cryptographically established identity. IF, a media stream recording is distributed or accessed only locally through the users private peer devices - and - without using the web outside a secure firewall: I am not sure that there are any privacy considerations. * katie * Katie Haritos-Shea Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA) Cell: 703-371-5545 | <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA | <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 15:29:52 UTC