Reconciling Mozilla’s Mission and W3C EME

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/05/driven-by-necessity-mozilla-to-enable-html5-drm-in-firefox/

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/firefox-closed-source-drm-video-browser-cory-doctorow

 

FYI, that second link's href is the same as the href in the first link.

At the page JRViejo linked to earlier and also linked to in that ARS Technica article (https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/), down in the comments, it was mentioned that a technical FAQ would soon be coming.

Scanning it, I noticed ARS Technica said "Firefox will give each site a unique ID, preventing providers from tracking users across multiple sites". I think Mozilla's wording is more accurate... "we vary this unique identifier per site (each site is presented a different device identifier) to make it more difficult to track users across sites with this identifier.". The W3C has a section on security and, right below it, privacy: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html#security. Internet users are frequently tracked across sites using site-specific cookies and external mechanisms for associating those cookies. I think the same type of threat would apply here... no actual prevention, just speed bumps.

 

Open source advocates slam Mozilla for supporting DRM

http://venturebeat.com/2014/05/15/open-source-advocates-slam-mozilla-for-supporting-drm/

 

I'm fairly new to running with a limited user account so I have a few concerns. To me DRM means digging deep into the computer and needing admin rights. Does this mean part of our browsers will now need admin access to run content? Should we be concerned about serious admin exploits? Should we be concerned that Adobe is part of this?

Flash and Java don't need admin rights to run in our browsers correct?