Live data from Hacker News

W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

boingboing.net

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#221

The saddest part of this story is that Netflix/Amazon/younameit will continue to ignore and block Linux users as the niche market they are -- even if a future Firefox or Chrome version comes with the new standardized DRM everyone asked for. Lose/lose situation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the new "standardized DRM" is just EME which all major browsers, including Firefox and Chrome, already implement, and which has been used by e.g. Netflix for several years now.

And Netflix works on Linux on Chrome and Firefox already, using those APIs.

The actual Content Decryption Modules are not part of the standard, though. Firefox and Chrome use Google Widevine.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This was basically wanted by Firefox, Apple, Microsoft and Google. This was absolutely NOT wanted by Firefox. They were the only browser to represent the users in this fight. Don't put Mozilla in the same group as those other traitors.

> They were the only browser to represent the users in this fight. They were folding, too.

If they didn't fold, they'd just lose more users to other browsers. Sometimes it's wise to retreat or lose a battle to stay in the fight.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#223
post #54

I'm a bit uneducated when it comes to the cryptography involved, but I'm wondering why people here are so determined DRM can't ever work? Is it because someone will somehow get a copy and upload to torrents/streaming sites which of course won't have DRM. Thus only potentially annoying legitimate (eg. Netflix) users? Or are there other concerns?

DRM doesn't work. Every form of DRM has historically been broken in one way or another. There are a couple of current systems that haven't been broken yet but it doesn't matter; content will be available from unauthorized sources the day they are released for streaming and no technical means is going to stop that. Even Denuvo, the darling of the major games publishers, is broken on a regular basis. The company acknow…

DRM does work. Whether Denuvo is successful depends on how it is implemented. Implementations of Denuvo have survived a year+ without being cracked. As you said, DRM often isn't intended to be secure forever, just for long enough that the major sales buzz is over anyway.

You can also think of DRM as branching into online services. DRM commonly required some form of interaction with an online service to validate a key or whatever else. As a result, some DRM is in fact built into the foundation of the software and this is the most successful. Think of World of Warcraft or Everquest. To essentially crack that DRM, you have to recreate the server backend which is a serious undertaking. This has been done, but it took a long time, only applies to older versions and doesn't connect you to the legitimate service.

Steam is an online service and games which use SteamWorks are coupling at least some of their features with the online service, but this is not as complicated as something like World of Warcraft so it is easily cracked. Denuvo attempts to fill that gap by more strongly coupling the software with Steam. As a result, Steam is technically the DRM while Denuvo is helping to enforce it and thus is not labeled as "3rd party DRM" on the Steam Store pages.

There is a balance between the popularity of your software and the difficulty of breaking the DRM. If your software isn't extremely popular, then a crack is not in high demand. If the software is easy to crack, then even if it isn't in high demand it may get drive-by cracked. If it's difficult enough, many people will decide that their time is better spent elsewhere even if it is possible to crack.

As we enter the age of encrypted processing where both the code and data are encrypted during execution on the processor, cracking will be time consuming enough and have enough prerequisites that it simply won't be able to keep up with even the most popular software. It will be a while before this can become mainstream, because unless governments start requiring it, there will always be devices without encrypted processing that companies can't ignore in order to maximize profit. It won't surprise me if we see both governments that require encrypted processing and governments that ban encrypted processing.

Obviously for static media like audio or video this is harder to deal with, but there have been a number of novel solutions to this that just haven't been widely adopted. There are also still a lot of consumers with older hardware that publishers want to target, because not targeting them is worse than the concern of piracy. These are more about mitigation rather than outright making it impossible for a time period.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>or even a framework for minting such schemes on demand This is what video DRM will need. For games, where each game has a somewhat customized version of DRM, taking a few weeks to break is good enough. For video, this will give you a few episodes; but once it is broken it is broken for everything until you roll out a new scheme. Overtime, I would expect the breakers to get more efficient and automated at breaking sc…

This is how Bluray's BD+ scheme work(ed).

Is this why my BluRay player needed to be updated to be able to play newer discs?

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#225

Shame, shame, shame. We're losing the internet day by day, if we haven't done so already. I've seen people and posts here and there calling for attention on these issues, but imho it's all too subtle. We should start using harsher terminology for what's actually happening. This is flat out CORRUPTION, and I'm not seeing anyone express it as such. It's probably too late already, and unfortunately, this is merely a ref…

Frankly I'm far more interested in which developing or first-world locales, if any, exist where net freedoms like these are protected by the majority, rather than having to be fought for by the minority against a wave of complacency and apathy.

I'm pretty much done with trying to fight the american capitalist ideology which empowers these companies to steamroll over the average consumer happy to give up their own rights and freedoms then left to complain with the extortionist environments that leads to.

I don't think the world can continue on the way it's going without some serious ideological fragmentations in the near future, and the moment some country embraces its "Pirate Party" or creates an "Internet Bill of Rights" establishing the core tenets the EFF and others fight for as the basis of their internet-related litigation - is the moment I know where the sane people all probably went (or would go as time goes on).

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. For simple economic reasons, such as too much testing effort vs. too little revenue.

For "simple economic reasons" you believe companies will go out of their way to block Linux users for some reason? If the browser supports it, that's all that really matters.

To support EME on linux, they need to create an EME plugin for linux. Leaks in that plugin would kinda break DRM, so it needs to be designed well.

Writing and maintaing a crypto plugin is quite expensive.

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#227
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're losing the internet day by day, if we haven't done so already. Let's just "fork" the web from W3C (or 3WC as some people like to call them by now) instead.

No, the W3C is the web. You'd be forking to what? This was basically wanted by Firefox, Apple, Microsoft and Google. They are the modern web. Trying to go against them is how we ended up with XHTML, a standard no-one really wanted, or implemented.

[deleted]

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#228
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DRM was coming to browsers with or without the W3C’s blessing. In fact, it was already there via plugins and wasn’t going away. This has changed nothing except where the implementation is documented. The hysteria over this is just ridiculous.

Just because some horrible thing currently happens to exist doesn't mean you need to (explicitly or implicitly) endorse it. We should make implementing DRM as expensive and inconvenient as possible.

Although I share your enthusiasm, I don't think closing the barn door after the horse left is going to help. Customers have to organize and demand an end to DRM by force of withholding money, clicks and eyeballs ...

"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#229
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is already very difficult to distribute your own content without subjecting it to some other entity's distribution system, and soon it will be impossible. Chrome and friends will refuse to load unsigned content, and then the death of the free web will be complete.

> Chrome and friends will refuse to load unsigned content, and then the death of the free web will be complete. I'm going to need some citations that this is even remotely in the plan (and requiring HTTPS isn't the same as refusing to load unsigned content, since that's on the transport level).

I don't think he ever said HTTPS. By "unsigned content" he meant that video files for example can't be played unless a Hollywood rightowner has granted playback access for the file.

However in the future this DRM will be an freedom-of-speech issue. The goverment could use it as means to silence people. North-Korea is currently ahead of us. Any videos you take could be automatically signed and later on pulled by the gov. by revoking the signature. Now extending this to basic text, images, VR?, and whatever new mediaformats there will be in the future.

I highly recommend watching video where a tablet from North-Korea gets inspected. It explains how NK keeps control of its citizens.

https://youtu.be/fAtWwadP6CY

Re: W3C abandons consensus, standardizes DRM, EFF resigns

#230
I am so mixed about this. In principle, this is a terrible idea, and I share many of the concerns in this thread -- I am not a fan of DRM. But as a consumer/end-user, I'd much prefer a standard DRM over Flash/Silverlight any day of the week.

The real question is how we get rid of DRM in the long term. Piracy isn't going away. Hopefully content owners will one day realize the economic cost of implementing DRM isn't worth its return, and only serves to alienate paying customers. I imagine it might take some years for them to realize this however.

Post reply on HN