Re: [rtcweb] SDP_PRANSWER followed by SDP_OFFER scenario in JSEP

[Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Christer Holmberg <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> >>You could also choose not to alert the remote user until the ICE
> procedures have finished - more or less using ICE with preconditions.
> >>
> >> Of course, that is going to trigger actions in STUN/TURN servers, even
> if the called party won't accept the call, but at least from a user
> >> experience perspective that is still better than lifting the hook, and
> having to wait for whatever-time-it-takes-for-ICE-to-finish seconds before
> one can start to talk.
> >
> > This also has a downside of disclosing user's IP to the caller without
> the user confirmation. For a lot of applications this can be serious
> security flaw.
>
> The client can still log when ICE procedures occur.
>
> Because, even if I wait until your phone starts to ring, most likely I
> would still get your IP address without user confirmation (speaking in SIP
> terms, phones normally don't ask for user permission before they send 18x
> with SDP), eventhough you would easier be made aware of that it happens.
>
> Another alternative is of course to do ICE with an SBC, and/or having an
> SBC doing ICE on behalf of you :)
>

This is true for SIP but was as far as I know was specifically designed
around in WebRTC. WebRTC signaling server acts as B2BUA so any type of
ringing notification goes through the web server and does not need to carry
any type of client address information. The client address information is
only provided when SDP answer is sent or ICE negotiation is started.
_____________
Roman Shpount