[Matroska-devel] Re: Re: Compromise Encryption Proposal
paul at msn.com
Sat Jan 28 00:27:35 CET 2006
"Joseph Ashwood" wrote...
> Actually, most of this is to push from auth^2 required for DRM, to auth^3
> required for auditing. This move is useful in only limited context, and is
> why I implied, but did not state openly as I am now, that only very high
> end splitters/decoders would need to be able to handle the
> reinterpretation portion. Such splitters would only be necesary for audit
> viewing purposes, and the ability to use a standard format with public
> analysis of the security makes this far more usable. As a major side
> benefit, the auth^3 model can actually prevent attacks on the splitter, as
> the splitter can be written to only process authenticated files.
If the primary purpose it to authenticate the file, why not just sign the
product file and verify the signing before playback?
More information about the Matroska-devel