On 4/22/2014 10:24 PM, Paul Theriault wrote:
On 19 Apr 2014, at 11:42 am, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Paul Theriault <[email protected]> wrote:
Both APIs have a similar prompt, and would likely have a similar name in the
settings app, possibly leading to confusion for the user. So I think we should
aim to have a single camera prompt and single camera permission in the settings
app. But I am not what the long term plan is for mozCamera, or what the best
approach to achieve this unified UI.
Agreed. There's no reason to separate these two security-wise.
One important question is, will we require that application enumerate
some permission in the app manifest in order to use getUserMedia? We
did this for geolocation and for the notification APIs, where even
though normal web pages can use these APIs, if an app wants to use
them we require the app to enumerate a permission in its manifest.
Requiring the permission to be in the manifest does have the advantage
that we can make those permissions show up in the settings app's UI
for configuring application permissions. I'm inclined to require the
same for getUserMedia for the same reason.
gUM on b2g currently requires video-capture/audio-capture to be declared in the
manifest, and I agree we should continue this.
But I think that regarding what we put in the permissions part of the
manifest, and what we display to the user both in prompts and in the
settings UI, we should treat mozCamera and getUserMedia the same. So
we should figure out a single permission name which would cover both
APIs. I'm fine with this being "video-capture" if that's what the
WebRTC team prefers.
If we are not going to expose mozCamera and video-capture to the same app
levels (i.e. if mozCamera is privileged only), I was thinking we would need to
keep the permissions separate. For example, if we merged to use ‘video-capture’
- this has to be prompt for web-apps and web content, but we want to deny
mozCamera access to hosted and web content. I suppose we could change the
mozCamera permission check to check for both the permission, and the app level,
which I assume is what you have in mind.
That sounds like a more simple approach to what I had in mind so (e.g. grant
both permissions with one prompt) so I’ll raise a bug to merge the permissions.
Do we plan to expose mozCamera to regular web apps and web content, and perhaps
could we therefore eventually just use the same permission)? Or do we need
want to remain having separate permissions, and unify the prompt and the
permission in the settings app somehow?
Starting with the v2.0 release I'd like to expose mozCamera to
privileged apps. I'd like to not expose it to normal webpages given
that we likely need to deprecate the API at some point.
Eventually I am indeed hoping that getUserMedia will be able to meet
the same use cases as mozCamera does, however so far that is not the
case.
Ok great - this is exactly the guidance I was looking for.
Maire - if there are no objections from the webrtc team, this is approach I
will advocate in bug 938467.
I discussed this with Randell, and we have no objections. Thanks, Paul.
-Maire
--
Maire Reavy <[email protected]>
Mozilla
_______________________________________________
dev-b2g mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
