Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Adam Barth
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:24 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Adam Barth wrote: >>> But you get this with a per-connection (not per-packet) nonce and CTR's >>> sequence number.  You don't need a unique 16-byte nonce for each packet. >> >> The attacker observes each pac

Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Adam Barth wrote: >> But you get this with a per-connection (not per-packet) nonce and CTR's >> sequence number. You don't need a unique 16-byte nonce for each packet. > > The attacker observes each packet once delivered, so you need a new > nonce for each packet

Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Adam Barth
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Adam Barth wrote: >> So, the salt and the nonce play different roles.  The salt is to make >> sure the message appears random if you haven't read the spec (and so >> don't know the salt).  The nonce is to pre

Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Adam Barth wrote: > So, the salt and the nonce play different roles. The salt is to make > sure the message appears random if you haven't read the spec (and so > don't know the salt). The nonce is to prevent the attacker from > crafting plaintexts that encrypt t

Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Adam Barth
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Adam Barth wrote: >> The encryption serves two purposes.  First, it provides >> confidentiality from eavesdroppers, as you appear to be aware. >> Second, it provides a defense against cross-protocol attacks,

Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Adam Barth wrote: > The encryption serves two purposes. First, it provides > confidentiality from eavesdroppers, as you appear to be aware. > Second, it provides a defense against cross-protocol attacks, which is > why the salt and the per-message nonce are impor

Re: [whatwg] Ongoing work on an editing commands (execCommand()) specification

2011-03-17 Thread Aryeh Gregor
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Tim Down wrote: > Is a column full of > > "Exception: [Exception... "Not enough arguments" nsresult: "0x80570001 > (NS_ERROR_XPC_NOT_ENOUGH_ARGS)" location: "JS frame :: > http://aryeh.name/spec/editcommands/implementation.js :: getState :: > line 1046" data: no]"

Re: [whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Adam Barth
Hi Glenn, The encryption serves two purposes. First, it provides confidentiality from eavesdroppers, as you appear to be aware. Second, it provides a defense against cross-protocol attacks, which is why the salt and the per-message nonce are important. Theoretically, we could just use an initial

Re: [whatwg] Ongoing work on an editing commands (execCommand()) specification

2011-03-17 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > * In one case, the spec adds around a single space, while WebKit > doesn't; I'm inclined to say this is a WebKit bug (which also occurs > in my spec implementation as viewed in WebKit, but not Firefox, since > WebKit mangles ranges when you a

Re: [whatwg] Ongoing work on an editing commands (execCommand()) specification

2011-03-17 Thread Tim Down
Is a column full of "Exception: [Exception... "Not enough arguments" nsresult: "0x80570001 (NS_ERROR_XPC_NOT_ENOUGH_ARGS)" location: "JS frame :: http://aryeh.name/spec/editcommands/implementation.js :: getState :: line 1046" data: no]" the expected result in Firefox 3.6.15? I'm interested in th

Re: [whatwg] Ongoing work on an editing commands (execCommand()) specification

2011-03-17 Thread Aryeh Gregor
I just rewrote the spec, and it's now both shorter and produces better results. For a quick view of the results, as compared to the browser you're currently using, you can look here: http://aryeh.name/spec/editcommands/autoimplementation.html That link isn't stable, and will change and possibly

[whatwg] PeerConnection: encryption feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Glenn Maynard
PeerConnection defines packet encryption, but it uses AES-128-CTR without actually defining the counter. It also generates a new AES key for each packet. A major point of using CTR is to not have to do that; you have a single key and vary the counter. The inputs to AES-128-CTR are a key, a count

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:51:08 +0100, Olli Pettay wrote: On 03/17/2011 06:31 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:48:40 +0100, Olli Pettay wrote: On 03/17/2011 03:11 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: On 2011-03-16 19:29, Olli Pettay wrote: Perhaps navigator.getUserMedia("audio,video"

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Olli Pettay
On 03/17/2011 07:41 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: On 2011-03-17 16:48, Olli Pettay wrote: ... src property definition needs to be changed from DOMString to any. That would be strange and make API inconsistent with and for example. This is getting a bit off topic, but it would be better if they w

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Lachlan Hunt
On 2011-03-17 16:48, Olli Pettay wrote: ... src property definition needs to be changed from DOMString to any. That would be strange and make API inconsistent with and for example. This is getting a bit off topic, but it would be better if they were also modified so that authors could, ins

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Olli Pettay
On 03/17/2011 06:31 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:48:40 +0100, Olli Pettay wrote: On 03/17/2011 03:11 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: On 2011-03-16 19:29, Olli Pettay wrote: Perhaps navigator.getUserMedia("audio,video", success, error); could return an url to the device in the

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:48:40 +0100, Olli Pettay wrote: On 03/17/2011 03:11 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: On 2011-03-16 19:29, Olli Pettay wrote: Perhaps navigator.getUserMedia("audio,video", success, error); could return an url to the device in the success callback, and that url could be then set

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Olli Pettay
On 03/17/2011 03:11 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: On 2011-03-16 19:29, Olli Pettay wrote: Perhaps navigator.getUserMedia("audio,video", success, error); could return an url to the device in the success callback, and that url could be then set to video.src. The creation of a URL is unnecessary indire

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Lachlan Hunt
On 2011-03-16 19:29, Olli Pettay wrote: Perhaps navigator.getUserMedia("audio,video", success, error); could return an url to the device in the success callback, and that url could be then set to video.src. The creation of a URL is unnecessary indirection. It's easier to avoid creating specia

[whatwg] Feedback on "Video conferencing and peer-to-peer communication"

2011-03-17 Thread Stefan Håkansson LK
All, we've done a quick read through of the updated APIs and tools for "Video conferencing and peer-to-peer communication" from the latest whatwg html draft. Generally we think it is much improved over the last version, and especially a lot of details are clarified. There are detailed comments

Re: [whatwg] Stream API Feedback

2011-03-17 Thread Lachlan Hunt
On 2011-03-17 04:22, Robert O'Callahan wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Lachlan Huntwrote: I'm not entirely sure I understand your proposal, but are you suggesting that the input streams from the camera/microphone would first go to and elements, allowing the existing HTMLMediaElement AP