W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > November 2013

Re: Why does screen sharing require a browser extension?

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:16:27 -0500
Message-ID: <529385EB.508@bbs.darktech.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org

I believe it was part of "Google WebRTC Overview & Application 
Demonstrations" at 13:40 the first day of the conference.

PS: Does this discussion belong here or on public-media-capture?

Gili

On 25/11/2013 12:06 PM, Rob Manson wrote:
> What session was that in?  And is there an official announcement 
> somewhere?!
>
> 8(
>
> roBman
>
>
> On 26/11/13 3:56 AM, cowwoc wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the WebRTC World conference Justin Uberti mentioned that Chrome 
>> (and Firefox too?) will be moving screen sharing out of Javascript, 
>> requiring developers to publish a browser extension per application 
>> that wishes to screen-share. The logic behind it was that malicious 
>> app could be banned from the app store.
>>
>> One thing I didn't understand (and was not explained) is why screen 
>> sharing is substantially more security-sensitive than webcam sharing? 
>> I get the fact that someone could use screen sharing to snoop on my 
>> banking activity, but how is this any more security sensitive than 
>> knowing what I look like and where I live? If the security dialog is 
>> good enough for webcam sharing, why is it not good enough for screen 
>> sharing?
>>
>> And finally, couldn't you simply require the use of SSL for this 
>> feature and then ban malicious applications based on their 
>> certificate? Requiring the download of an extension is almost like 
>> requiring a browser plugin for WebRTC. I'd like to avoid it if at all 
>> possible.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gili
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Monday, 25 November 2013 17:17:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:36 UTC