On 16/05/14 05:41, Eelis wrote: > On 2014-05-15 21:36, Scott Ferguson wrote: >> On 16/05/14 05:20, Eelis wrote: >>>>>> Because there are no restrictions. >>>>> >>>>> No restrictions? >>>> >>>> That's correct. It's a sandbox. The sandbox restricts the close >>>> plugin. *You* are only restricted in how you can *playback* media >>>> encrypted by the plugin. *If* you choose to install it (and why >>>> would you?). >>> >>> The article talks about "preventing users from saving the content". >>> That's content that the closed-source CDM plugin decrypted and passed >>> on to Firefox, isn't it? >> >> Yes. >> (sigh, it's 5:30am here, I'm tired) >> Perhaps the article and I haven't been clear - the sandbox is the big >> change. In itself all it does is restrict the plugin (protect *your* >> privacy from the closed source plugin). > > If the restrictions in the sandbox are for restricting the plugin, then > why would Adobe need to audit the sandbox source code to make sure > restrictions imposed on users are respected? > Huh? You know you answered your own question (well done!) "to make sure restrictions imposed on users are respected"
To make sure we haven't modified the sandbox and t-ed the stream off to PirateBay where the companies lawyers make mountains out of molehills counting views as missed purchases. Regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53751b75.3010...@gmail.com
