4 ms·
Riiight. Unlike other browser vendors with more than >5% marketshare, which all voted NO on DRM. Anyway the message is frivolous and OFF TOPIC.
by Ygg2 13y ago
Riiight. Unlike other browser vendors with more than >5% marketshare, which all voted NO on DRM.
Anyway the message is frivolous and OFF TOPIC.
- pjc50 13y agoNot entirely: the DRM code modules are necessarily closed-source and cannot easily be audited for security vulnerabilities. Given that Adobe is apparently supplying one, and given the number of remote exploits provided by the PDF reader plugin, I think it's reasonable to assume that the DRM modules can present a security risk.
- pcwalton 13y agoThe CDM is strictly sandboxed.
- sp332 13y agoThat's a good start, but it's not reason to implicitly trust that it can't break anything.
- pjc50 13y agoSo it's not native code? Interesting.
- pcwalton 13y agoIt's native code, but it's strictly contained within an open source sandbox that implements all the interfaces it can use to communicate with the outside world.
- justinschuh 13y agoCould you provide a link to the source for the sandbox implementation?
- pcwalton 13y agoI'm not on that team so I'll have to get back to you—it's quite possible that the code hasn't been written yet. Currently, we use the Chromium sandbox [1] for sandboxing where it's supported. [1]: http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/security/sandbox/ http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/security/sandb...
- nitrogen 13y agoThis post could be an attempt to shift the narrative away from Mozilla's decision to include DRM, so the DRM issue at least deserves a mention, even if it sits at -4 at the bottom of the page. Somewhat relevant: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html