Web and TV IG: GGIE meeting

29 Jul 2015


Bill Rose, Nilo Mitra, Dale Rochon, Paul Higgs, Leslie Daigle, Giri Mandyam, Mark Vickers, Daniel Davis
Glenn Deen


Call admin

<Bill_Rose> Review/adoption of 7/15 minutes- Adopted without change.

<Bill_Rose> Agenda Bash – No change to the agenda

Use Case: Streaming-UC-5 Streamed Content Ad Insertion Interstitial Ads


<gmandyam> ATSC meeting some broadcasters voiced concern with the potential for rogue apps to replace ads with alternative, unauthorized media. There are many ways to remedy this. This Use Case should highlight the issue and request W3C advice.

Action Item: Bill Rose: Add note to Streaming UC-5 highlighting the issue and requesting W3C guidance/advice, need to discuss during review and gap analysis.

<Nilo Mitra> Please clarify what is meant by inserting rogue media?

<gmandyam> For example in DASH you can indicate to a DASH client/player where insertion opportunities exist. ATSC asked what app creates this? If a rogue app exists it might insert other media at that point.

<Nilo Mitra> A manifest for the content and ad is received. The app then directs to another site for the interstitial period insertion?

<gmandyam> Yes

<ddavis> With regard to getting a W3C opinion, it is not for me to say. It is open as to how this could be handled. Could be left to broadcasters to prevent it. Existing standards might be used to authenticate using e.g. hash, etc., to guarantee insertion content is correct.

<gmandyam> When we address this UC we should discuss potential ways to prevent this even if we don’t provide a solution. Could be handled by proper business practices but a response from W3C to ATSC would be good.

<Dale Rochon> A rogue app could also attribute an ad to an actor other than the provider so the revenue would go to the wrong organization.

<ddavis> there are a number of related issues that should be explored across multiple groups and might be best addressed by a liaison: WebEx Security WG – looking at similar issues so might have input. Already have a liaison with ATSC.

<ddavis> http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison

<ddavis> there is related work in W3C on Subsource Integrity: http://www.w3.org/TR/SRI/

<Dale Rochon> what about IAB?

<Nilo Mitra> seems like IAB would be the right place to look for a solution to the issue of ad placement, attribution, transactional metadata, etc.

<Dale Rochon> IAB Digital Video WG is the right IAB group for us to bring this issue to. Should come from W3C. Not sure if SMPTE would be a target group. Working on content ID binding but not necessarily how it would be used in this context.

<Dale Rochon> Issues: where to insert ad; inserting correct ad; correct attribution of ad played; was ad played all the way through; metadata associated for attribution, insertion, measurement, authentication, targeting, etc.

<Bill_Rose> read Streaming UC-5 to the group.

<Dale Rochon> don’t know if ad decision process needs to be identified in the UC. There is a process but not sure if we need to define the process. There is also a reporting process generating what is happening and reporting it downstream.

<ddavis> (for Mark Vickers who was muted): “Another thing that would help this problem of rogue web apps interfering with the broadcast video is a way to securely identify the source of applications delivered in-band with the video. Web security, like CORS, is based on websites as sources, not in-band data like in TV. This way, the web app that arrives with the TV signal, presumably from the video producers, can be given priority over other website origins.”

<ddavis> For reference, ad-insertion use cases created by the HTML/Media Task Force: https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/Media_Task_Force/MSE_Ad_Insertion_Use_Cases

<Dale Rochon> is there a way for this process to delegate the authority? Can the owner authorize another party to do the insertion? A passing of the token?

<Bill_Rose> National broadcaster may need to pass token to local broadcast for ad insertion.

<Dale Rochon> Other scenarios for token passing. Market level insertion; sub-DMA insertion; individual device insertion.

<Nilo Mitra> UC-4 mentions some of these scenarios, not necessarily for ads. New UCs for ad insertion could expand UC-4.

<ddavis> https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/GGIE_TF/UseCases/Streaming#Streaming-UC-4_Manipulating_streamed_content

<Dale Rochon> can be alternative content, not just ads. E.g. Infomercials

Action Item: Dale R and Nilo M to work on submitting new UCs/extend UC-5 to explore some of the issues raised above. E.g. Decision process, reporting process, token passing, etc.

Use Case: Content Identification UC-1 User Device Retrieval of Content Address Using EPG/Title


<Dale Rochon> working with 24TB Study Group for EIDR and Ad-ID . Others working in this area: CIMM.org; Ad-ID.org is a “daughter” of American Assoc of Advertising Agencies working on identifying ads. The ID exists. Working on problem of how to associate and ensure it survives distribution. Might want to establish early on the liaisons with the issuing orgs and work with existing ID authorities.

<Bill_Rose> [walked through Content Identification UC-1]

<ldaigle> this probably makes sense to router people but application people might be less open to each other. In reading through the use of the term DNS may be confusing. May want to replace the term DNS in the UC.

Action Item: Leslie to follow up with Glenn on use of “DNS” in the Use Case.

Next meeting

<Bill_Rose> The next call will be postponed by 1 week to August 19, 11:00 PM ET. A notice will be provided for the call following the 19th, either the week of August 26th or September 2nd.

<Bill_Rose> Meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

Action Items created during this call

[End of minutes]