Re: [rtcweb] Let's define the purpose of WebRTC

[Ravindran Parthasarathi <[e-mail]>]

Agree with Roman. I'm considering your statement as "mandate to implement" SRTP.

From: Roman Shpount [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 9:31 PM
To: Olle E. Johansson
Cc: Ravindran Parthasarathi; <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Let's define the purpose of WebRTC


On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Olle E. Johansson <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

That is an interesting objection. I don't think SRTP by default is the problem here. In the case where you need lawful interception in the application,
the server needs to route the calls through an RTCweb b2b media server.

SRTP is exactly what is the problem here. Do not confuse this with lawful intercept in the application. This is about encrypted communications being illegal in some places. If your web site is using encryption or cannot be accessed without encryption it would be blocked. As an example we are all familiar with, think about the key length restrictions TLS used to have due to US export regulations. This has been lifted, but there are numerous regulations in other countries that prohibit encryption at all, across the borders, or from certain institutions (like prisons).

I am not arguing that we should not include SRTP. In fact I think we must, but it should be possible to turn it off.
______________
Roman Shpount