- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 09:14:37 -0700
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 31 May 2013 01:15, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote: > When addressing deliberate tampering, I'm not sure the case for audio is all > that different from the case for video; video is also subject to copying > through the "analog hole" much bemoaned by Hollywood DRM advocates - or by > pointing a camera at the screen. Yes, DRM doesn't work. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about the user agent protecting their users. This might just be a restriction on getUserMedia when tainted output is present. That is, if I'm having a secured (peerIdentity constrained) conversation with Stefan, then google.com cannot - at the same time - sample my microphone and send that audio for "further processing". This might be behavior that the site can opt into with a constraint, or it might be a consequence of choosing to use peerIdentity/noaccess constraints. On the converse, it would be nice to know that the audio that I'm receiving is both a secured stream from Stefan mixed with some audio that the site has selected or generated.
Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 16:15:09 UTC