Re: [Perc] PERC LIte

Hi Bernard,

Yes, the example API is just the lazy approach I have taken on my 
modified chromium, hardcoding the key to AES-GCM 256 so I didn't have to 
add an object to the IDL and worry about how to retrieve later on the 
c++ code.

The API should allow to set the key and look more like:

*

const pc = new RTCPeerConnection({

mediaCrypto : {

key **: 'VEhJUyBJUyBUSEUgMzIgS0VZIFdJVEggMTIgU0FMVCBET1VCTEUgUEVSQyE=',

suite  : 'AEAD_AES_256_GCM'

}

});*

Anticipating the security comments, I don't expect that to be the final 
API for WebRTC, which IMHO should be a similar mechanism as the one in 
place for IdP (or even integrated with it), but I feel that that 
discussion should take place on the RTCWeb group and not here.

Best regards
Sergio

On 24/05/2017 19:56, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Thanks for posting this.
>
> Question:  In terms of API support, how is the crypto-algorithm 
> specified?  So far, the proposed API just has the key.
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Sergio Garcia Murillo 
> <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com 
> <mailto:sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi all again,
>
>     Also to start the discussion about 5), I would like to introduce
>     again my proposal for a "PERC Lite" approach.
>
>     The main objectives and key points of this proposal are:
>
>       * Minimum viable PERC implementation
>       * Minimize impact on both endpoints and MD
>       * OHB is carried in the RTP payload (Encrypted Payload Header).
>       * No changes to the DTLS/SRTP code/api/standards
>       * No RTP E2E Header extensions
>       * RTX/FEC/RED is supported HBH without any change to current
>         standards/implementations.
>
>     Best regards
>
>     Sergio
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Perc mailing list
>     Perc@ietf.org <mailto:Perc@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perc
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perc>
>
>