Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla Labs Add-On Provides Video and Audio Recording From the Browser

Posted by timothy on from the straightforward-enough dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla Labs is working on an experimental add-on which enables video and audio recording in the browser. Anant Narayanan writes on the Mozilla Labs blog, 'The Rainbow add-on for Firefox is an early developer prototype that enables web developers to access local video and audio recording capabilities using just a few lines of JavaScript. The add-on generates files encoded in open formats: Theora (for video) and Vorbis (for audio) in an Ogg container. The resulting files are accessible in DOM using HTML5 File APIs, which may be used to upload them to a server.' Support for live streaming and WebM is planned for a future version of the add-on."

4 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. This should lead to some "interesting" malware. by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    n/t

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:This should lead to some "interesting" malware. by Caerdwyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're one of those damn HTML5 lubbers, aren't you? \~

      Don't know yet, there's nothing to lub. Not much available in the real world to try with HTML5... ask again in two years. The lub may be hawt, or it may be like lub with a drunken frat boy (lots of tears and shortcomings and stains that won't wash out).

      But the point stands: whether HTML5 is good or bad is pretty much irrelevant to the inarguable fact that Flash is a security mess. Even if HTML5 turns out to be even worse, that doesn't make the current state of affairs with Flash acceptable. Adobe needs to get its act together, regardless of their competition's CERT alert count. The only bug counts their dev team should care about are their own.

      If a Chevy catches fire 20% of the time when you start it, and a Chrysler catches fire 10% of the time when you start it, that still doesn't make Chrysler OK or safe.

      --
      Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    2. Re:This should lead to some "interesting" malware. by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Uhhh...why EXACTLY would you want that? Now I know why Steve Jobs wants that, he has been in a pissed off at Adobe for awhile and doesn't care if H.264 is a patent troll's wet dream, because he holds some of the patents. But why would YOU or for that matter ME want this? We have enough trouble just getting all the major browsers to render the exact same page the same way, not to mention dealing with all the "JavaScript malware o' the day" holes that keep popping up, but why would you want to tie all this multimedia junk into your browser?

      You see the nice part about plugins is you don't have to have them if you don't want to, and even if you do it is pretty trivial to turn them off on a per site basis with something like ABP & NS. And bitch all you want about Flash, but you can drop pretty much ANY format into a flash container, including free ones like VP6 and WebM, while all I've seen pushed for HTML V5 is H.264, probably the most horribly patented minefield in the history of software patents. Also Adobe doesn't care if you package their stuff with FOSS, or even try to cook up something like Gnash, whereas MPEGLA has made it pretty clear you ship something with H.264 you better get out your checkbook, pretty much killing FOSS support. What good is HTML V5 if the websites can't be supported out of the box by anyone but the big three of Google, MSFT, and Apple?

      I think the main complaint is driven by from what I've heard is shitty support for flash on FOSS and Apple devices, but whereas Apple can afford to cut a check to MPEGLA and just pass the costs to users, as can MSFT I really don't see the advantage of switching one walled garden for the other. Now as far as performance all I can comment on is the Windows versions of flash, which currently play nicely even on this 1.8GHz Sempron, but personally I'd rather see projects like Gnash take off and then if Adobe don't get their code together maybe transition the web to something anybody can use like WebM. But considering how long it has taken us to get THIS far I don't know if tying all the video to the browser, especially using a format so patent encumbered is the right way to go. Am I wrong? Why would you prefer HTML V5? What are the real world (not "it'll be better sometime later") advantages and disadvantages of one VS the other? I really would like to know.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Four words: Lower Merion School District by westlake · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Mozilla didn't get Firefox where it is by being morons. Just the fact that it's Mozilla tells me that if this is ever an official release, it's going to have some kind of user confirmation before allowing access to these things (if it doesn't already).

    If it does, I see no evidence for it.

    The potential for abuse here is enormous.

    The user confirmation had damn well better be solid. Particularly when a minor is likely to be at the keyboard.

    It is not necessarilly a good idea to do everything in the browser.

    The added step of opening an external app - particularly an app which enforces explict restrictions on access - is, I think, often the better solution.