- From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:37:00 -0400
- To: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
- CC: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On 7/11/2013 5:54 PM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote: > Jeff Jaffe: >> On 7/11/2013 3:27 PM, piranna@gmail.com wrote: >>>> I don't understand why a closed implementation of an API for >>>> encrypted media >>>> helps the NSA get metadata about users emails and phone calls. > The NSA also is responsible for malware such as Stuxnet and Flame. > >>> Are you kidding us? A closed implementation of WHATEVER can host >>> anything inside it, >> Sure I understand that part, but that appears to be related to the >> fact that certain companies ship closed code and has nothing to do >> with the specifics of EME. > EME is an attempt to get proprietary software (CDMs) included in systems > which with the exception of that proprietary software contains > reasonably secure Open Source and to attack Open Source in general. I don't think that this is at all what EME is attempting to do. There are systems in the world that as you say are built on reasonably secure Open Source. If these systems are also interested in viewing premium content, they also already have proprietary software to view that content. If they are not interested in viewing the premium content, they won't have EME either. > > The interests of the NSA (and other similar organisations around the > world) and proprietary software vendors here are completely aligned. > Even the terminology sometimes is the same as demonstrated by Google > Widevine promoting "Silent monitoring". > > Cheers, > Andreas >
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2013 22:37:06 UTC