- From: Matt Ivie <matt.ivie@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 20:49:07 -0600
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On Fri, 2013-08-16 at 10:16 -0700, Mark Watson wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de> > wrote: > Mark Watson: > >> You probably meant to write this: > >> > >> Enclosed shops which are operated in the homes of the > customers and > >> might be watching and listening to them on behalf of > companies and/or > >> secret agencies (again: Google Widevine is promoting > "silent monitoring"). > > > > You've mentioned this and other similar things a few times > and I've > > explained how the EME approach is an improvement for users > in this > > respect. > > > > If a browser integrates a specific CDM, what makes you think > that they > > will pay less attention to user security and privacy with > respect to > > that part of the browser compared to the attention they pay > to the > > rest of the browser ? > > > That is a question which I consider to be irrelevant in this > context. > Especially while the U.S. government claims the right to issue > "National > Security Letters" with gag orders and is using that alleged > right for > criminal purposes against the world population. > > The W3C should not in any way participate in this, stop the > work on EME > and publicly denounce DRM. > > > I'm confused why you think this has anything to do with EME. > > > Would Netflix inform the public or shut down its operations > when it > receives a secret order to participate in surveillance by > using a > backdoor contained in a CDM which is already installed on a > users > computer? (After the shutdown of lavabit.com this > unfortunately is not a > rhetorical question.) > > > That question is somewhat above my pay grade, but my point is that it > is no more likely that a browser-integrated CDM contains such a back > door than that the browser itself contains the same thing. And > equally, it is no more likely that an OS-integrated CDM contains such > a back door than the OS itself contains it. So, EME and DRM are > completely irrelevant to your concerns. > > > ...Mark > This is all pretty likely and there's no way to truly verify it. You're inferring that we're all supposed to be okay with this likely-hood. > > > > Cheers, > Andreas > > -- /* Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. Visit GNU.org * FSF.org * Trisquel.info */
Received on Saturday, 17 August 2013 02:49:36 UTC