Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

blog.samuelmaddock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 632 posts

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#111

Post by int_19h »

mcv wrote: post #80
thefounder wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you need Google's approval because now all major browsers have a black-box/binary blob which downloads other funky binary stuff so that it can decrypt video content. As you might figure out Google/Wildevine org gives the blackbox only to approved developers/devices/applications. Bonus DRM: If your license is not "the most certified" your browser/player will play only shitty/low quality versions of the video. The…

So how do open source browsers like Chromium and Firefox do this? Surely if they have access to the blackbox, then anyone does? And if they don't, it means you can't watch Netflix on some major browsers.

You have to install the (closed-source) widevine plugin for Chromium.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#112

Post by DCKing »

mmastrac wrote: post #12

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. 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.

> 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.

It really isn't. The W3C at the very least permits a solution whereby content companies liberally distribute binary blobs for every platform under the sun. Hell, it even permits an open source solution that e.g. speaks directly to the DRM hardware in graphics chips (don't know if that would be technically feasible, don't shoot me).

It doesn't have to be this way.

In this context it's really specifically Google being assholes about this. They can choose to not be assholes about this. The fact that the W3C allows them to be assholes about this doesn't change the fact that Google is choosing to be this way about it.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#113

Post by sabujp »

Zak wrote: post #101
tiraniddo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The weird thing about this is I can find a high-quality torrent for anything on Netflix in under a minute.

DRM are like locks on a house, just keeps honest people out

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#114

Post by merb »

Basically it's possible to download Google Chrome and extract it:

https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/?h=chromium-wide...

Basically Arch Linux Downloads Google Chrome, Extracts the *.so file and puts it into the chromium lib directory. (This could've been done in his own browser aswell.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#116

Post by sherincall »

mcv wrote: post #80
thefounder wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you need Google's approval because now all major browsers have a black-box/binary blob which downloads other funky binary stuff so that it can decrypt video content. As you might figure out Google/Wildevine org gives the blackbox only to approved developers/devices/applications. Bonus DRM: If your license is not "the most certified" your browser/player will play only shitty/low quality versions of the video. The…

So how do open source browsers like Chromium and Firefox do this? Surely if they have access to the blackbox, then anyone does? And if they don't, it means you can't watch Netflix on some major browsers.

Not sure if it's still the case, but it used to be that Firefox on Linux could only stream 720p videos.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#117

Post by sigi45 »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #33

Right, thats the whole thing that sucks about DRM and these video providers in general. Not only do they want to protect their content from unauthorized viewers, they want to control how it is consumed. Which to me is especially outrageous because netflix and youtube are the only two with a good user experience. (I used to count Hulu, but at some point they really fell off) I would think that Amazon would lead the ch…

The world doesn't rotate around netflix and co. You do not need to consume them if you don't want to. There is also no right from yourside to how you wish you like to consume it.

I would prefer to have NO DRM of course don't get me wrong. But still in this case, it is not your decision and apparently most people really don't care for that at all. They wanna see netflix in there browser. Thats why google and co did it. Thats why no one cares that there might be a electorn based browser somewhere which is unable to implement its core feature of sync viewing.

And while i like the idea, just because is just not good enough. Noone will cancel there netflix subscription over this.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#118

Post by gloflo »

sabujp wrote: post #113
Zak wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weird thing about this is I can find a high-quality torrent for anything on Netflix in under a minute.

DRM are like locks on a house, just keeps honest people out

Except the lock is remotely controlled by your adversary.

And your house also belongs to them. According to your analogy.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#119

Post by tedivm »

tiraniddo wrote: post #92
jcranmer wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

We could just blame all of them, since they were all involved.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#120

Post by djmips »

zepto wrote: post #48
otterley wrote: post #41

Flagging for inaccurate/inflammatory title. Google isn’t stopping the author from creating a web browser.

In an absolute sense this is true, but in all practical senses the title holds.

I feel like the op is missing technique and blaming Google with inflammatory title and preying on people's hated of DRM. If this was a more mundane technical problem it wouldn't be at the top of HN and it would be obvious that they just don't have the chops.
Post reply on HN