I wont use browsers with widevine. I refused to include widevine in any browser I worked on. Widevine is clearly a backdoor and chrome is often installed setuid root
out of curiosity, which browser(s) do you use?
I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
91–100 of 632 posts
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#92The blame for this sits squarely on the w3c for their efforts in trying to replace flash by letting the content companies dictate standards for encrypted playback. If they had held fast, we could have forced the companies to do their key management in something like WebAssembly and avoided this gatekeeping mess.
Blame Google and Microsoft. They were the people who created the specification, and pushed for it, when Netflix came begging for a solution to their DRM conundrum. Even if the W3C hadn't approved it, that's two of the big four browser vendors who are committing to implementing it anyways, which is enough to guarantee a de facto standard anyways.
No, blame the movie studios, record labels etc. They're the one which require asinine DRM support for web browsers. Google/Microsoft/Apple/Adobe want to support media content, but to do so requires towing the line with the media companies otherwise they refuse to license the content (at least in HD+).
Having worked with various DRM teams I know that they have to treat their code as if its the most secret code in the world, if they don't the media companies can swoop in and ban them and then no Netflix for your users. This is why Widevine code isn't open source (other than the glue EME code) and is almost certainly the reason for the refusal to work with a small open-source form of Chromium. If for example the project was used to "steal" content the media companies would be mad at Widevine, with lasting repercussions for all Chrome users.
It's worth noting that typically all DRM teams work as if the hosting environment is an adversary. For example Widevine don't trust anything Chrome says as someone could recompile it and lie about the security. The only times this is relaxed is where the platform is deemed secure, such as CrOS or iOS.
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#93Yes there are many more examples not widely known where Google is abusing their monopoly.
Firebase fcm push notification system is a good example.
If you want to implement your own push notification service on android phones. Well too bad. Only Google is allowed to have special privileges so that their firebase service on phones works even when a phone is in doze mode.
If you run into firebase quota issues like our company is having it is just too bad.
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The blame for this sits squarely on the w3c for their efforts in trying to replace flash by letting the content companies dictate standards for encrypted playback. The blame for this sits squarely on the users for their tolerance of malware (which DRM is) in the browsers that they use.
I disagree; good DRM is transparent and unnoticeable, and if that is the case then users do not care. Who does care about DRM is pirates and content creators whose content is shown without them earning off of it. Yes I am aware of fair use exceptions, but fair use should exempt a user from getting sued over using a fragment of copyrighted content; it does NOT force a content creator from offering their content open f…
Let's imagine a field. A holy place. People flock for miles, pay the land owner handsomely to visit the field.
A judge says that everyone has a right to take a single photo of this field for their collection - no more than that. The land owner disagrees.
We're not saying that the land owner should be forced to provide small organza bags for the visitors to carry their cameras around with them; but posting armed guards at all the entrances with metal detectors, automatedly initiating legal action on anything that looks like a camera and then trying to tell the user it's for their own good... well, this should at the very least be discouraged by the community, no?
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#95> Google, the creators of the open source browser Chrome, won’t allow DRM in an open source project.
Chrome is not an open-source browser. Chromium is, and Chromium doesn't have Widevine support.
Download and sandbox the Widevine binary blob the same way that Firefox does. Done.
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The blame for this sits squarely on the w3c for their efforts in trying to replace flash by letting the content companies dictate standards for encrypted playback. The blame for this sits squarely on the users for their tolerance of malware (which DRM is) in the browsers that they use.
I disagree; good DRM is transparent and unnoticeable, and if that is the case then users do not care. Who does care about DRM is pirates and content creators whose content is shown without them earning off of it. Yes I am aware of fair use exceptions, but fair use should exempt a user from getting sued over using a fragment of copyrighted content; it does NOT force a content creator from offering their content open f…
No such thing as good DRM. All DRM is broken by design, and exists to take your rights away. Never make excuses for this garbage software. DRM must die.
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#97I don't know if this will be helpful to you but an open source media player, Kodi, recently added support for Netflix in the latest version of the app (by implementing a DRM engine for people to use). This requires the use of the widevine library which then downloads things behind the scenes upon use (I believe). https://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=329767 I can't imagine Google gave the OK to Kodi to use widevin…
I hope Kodi makes some decent progress. I installed it a few weeks back and it is a rough experience. The docs on how to do simple things seem to be nonexistant because they don't want to be sued and shutdown entirely.
I think Kodi has made amazing progress. I've not had issues getting it installed on different devices since the 15.x days. Currently run it on 4 different dedicated devices in my apartment as well as some mobile and media devices.
> The docs on how to do simple things seem to be nonexistant because they don't want to be sued and shutdown entirely.
What docs are you looking for? They have a very extensive wiki as well as an active community on their own forum.
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, if the Director had overridden the majority of the membership, the browser vendors would've shipped something anyway, and the YouTubes and Netflixes of the world would be using it anyway.
> No, if the Director had overridden the majority of the membership, the browser vendors would've shipped something anyway That's fine. It's better that the burden for maintaining non-standard plugins be put on the sites and browsers that choose to do that, rather than be placed on everyone else.
How would that have improved the current situation? The videos that Metastream wants to play would still have been DRM'd and would still be playable in the mainstream browsers. What would the benefit have been? What burden is being placed on people now that wouldn't be placed on people in that scenario?
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#99So he tried to create a chromium based browser which sync the DRM protected video playback with other peer and blocked by Google. He totally deserved it. He was just wasting time to build software on top of evil DRM.
Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree; good DRM is transparent and unnoticeable, and if that is the case then users do not care. Who does care about DRM is pirates and content creators whose content is shown without them earning off of it. Yes I am aware of fair use exceptions, but fair use should exempt a user from getting sued over using a fragment of copyrighted content; it does NOT force a content creator from offering their content open f…
I disagree; good DRM is transparent and unnoticeable Yeah, until it isn't. I can't start GTA V for days since the "Rockstar Social Club" won't connect and glibly informs me that "I need to be on-line" I would have agreed with you until then. But not being able to play a game for which I paid full price and not being able to get meaningful support to resolve the issue rapidly changed my stance on DRM. It fucking sucks…
Nowadays you only really "license" the games, rather than own them.
Sucks that it's $60+ to do so, but that's how it is.