[Ssc-dev] InformaCam 0.1.42: more video fixes!

[David Oliver]

ok, thank you for this clarification, but I need one more.

It is my understanding that various and sundry cameras insert plenty of
their own information into the file header.  This might include location
info and all manner of other info taken from elsewhere on the device.
 This, in addition to, the basic information that is required for display.

Does InformaCam scrub this non-essential camera-provided data from the file
header, or does InformaCam only "augment" what is there with its own data?
 I'm thinking about "the John McAfee problem" here.





David M. Oliver | david at g <david at olivercoady.com>uardianproject.info |
http://g <http://olivercoady.com>uardianproject.info | @davidmoliver | +1
970 368 2366


On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Nathan of Guardian <
nathan at guardianproject.info> wrote:

>
>
> On April 16, 2014 9:37:49 AM EDT, David Oliver <david at guardianproject.info>
> wrote:
> >This would seem to be important news for our Benetech cooperation.
>
> I think I expressed issues related to media encryption usability in our
> last report, and happy to share this with them. (Also Barbra is still on
> this list).
>
> >
> >Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I think you are implying that
> >while
> >there is an encrypted metadata blob within the media file header, there
> >is
> >no unencrypted metadata in the file (except the minimal necessary to
> >play/view the contents in a standard player/viewer), right?
>
> If you export the file for sharing to someone you have a public key for,
> then the metadata will be encrypted to that key, and signed with your key.
> If you export for general sharing, then it will just be signed with your
> key.
>
> Either way, until you choose to share, all of the captured metadata is
> stored encrypted.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/ssc-dev/attachments/20140416/d70ef346/attachment.html>