Nit, since this confused me when I was looking for more context: for whatever reason, Widevine security levels are ordered in decreasing security (whereas the article has them backwards). Widevine on Linux only supports L3, which means that there's no guarantee that any processing is done inside the CPU's trusted execution environment. Which, uh, reads as "no security guarantee" to me.
I’m not really ok with other people’s code running on my Secure Enclave. BitTorrented video has no security guarantee either.
> I’m not really ok with other people’s code running on my Secure Enclave.
All the code that runs on your secure enclave is other people's code.
“First of all, as always my opinions are my own, not those of my employer.” Why do you need to write that? It’s a benign article and more so it’s about as protective as the useless “Store is not responsible for carts that damage your car” signs.
Companies react in strange ways. I recall a forum post a few years back about an issue with a backup solution. The poster ran into a problem and shared it in response to a question.
Someone from the storage company went apeshit, figured out who the poster was, and met with the CIO of the guys employee to get him to remove the post.
> desktop Linux and many Android devices only support level 1. In this case e.g. Netflix will not offer full HD or 4k resolutions And yet 4K webrips of recent Netflix shows are readily available on torrent sites. I don't understand who these higher levels of DRM are trying to target. They obviously don't stop the serious pirates from ripping and sharing the content with everyone. Yet the lower levels are "good enough…
Obviously, the point is to screw up the customers - every DRM can and will be broken at some point
So, at least from my basic research, the levels seem to be switched in this post: L1 is the highest level, not L3. So if Android and Desktop Linuxes support L1, that should not be an issue. Perhaps its is a minor error and he meant L3. That being said, is it possible for the user to have their Desktop Linux support L1 somehow? Android is a Linux that clearly support L1 and can show these formats (I imagine), so can t…
Android depends on the hardware, but generally speaking Western devices support Widevine Level 1 and its implemented in hardware. Desktop Linux will only ever support Level 3. But Chrome on Windows also supports Level 3, and Disney+ works in Chrome, there, so the article isn't correct.
Why do say that Linux will only ever support Level 3? Is there some fundamental limitation?
So, at least from my basic research, the levels seem to be switched in this post: L1 is the highest level, not L3. So if Android and Desktop Linuxes support L1, that should not be an issue. Perhaps its is a minor error and he meant L3. That being said, is it possible for the user to have their Desktop Linux support L1 somehow? Android is a Linux that clearly support L1 and can show these formats (I imagine), so can t…
Android depends on the hardware, but generally speaking Western devices support Widevine Level 1 and its implemented in hardware. Desktop Linux will only ever support Level 3. But Chrome on Windows also supports Level 3, and Disney+ works in Chrome, there, so the article isn't correct.
So I guess my question is why will Desktop Linux only ever support Level 3? If its the equivalent hardware that a Windows device would support L1 (or does that not exist?), then wouldn't, say, an Android device in para-virtualization be able to show you the content in HD? Wouldn't the right pieces extracted from Android and loaded into Desktop Linux allow you to watch L1? Just hypothetically. I guess my question is: is Desktop Linux actually incapable of doing it for some reason, or is it just that no one will ever distribute a distro that can do it out of the box, but you could theoretically assemble it yourself.
Nit, since this confused me when I was looking for more context: for whatever reason, Widevine security levels are ordered in decreasing security (whereas the article has them backwards). Widevine on Linux only supports L3, which means that there's no guarantee that any processing is done inside the CPU's trusted execution environment. Which, uh, reads as "no security guarantee" to me.
I’m not really ok with other people’s code running on my Secure Enclave. BitTorrented video has no security guarantee either.
The security guarantee here isn't for the user, though. It's more of a placebo effect for the content producers.
The thing is, as they cover in their post, there’s nothing to “fix.” It isn’t broken. The error is actually that it refuses to run without a higher security level than many platforms support.
It runs in Chrome on Windows, which also only supports Widevine Level 3, same as Linux. The post is just... not very good and full of factual errors.
This may very well be true, I’d like to note I don’t claim to know anything about how Widevine works. Of course, this is a very different criticism of the post.
>In this case e.g. Netflix will not offer full HD or 4k resolutions, but otherwise everything works fine, I don't understand the point of this type of thinking. Video DRM isn't like Denuvo where it can actually get you a few days or even weeks before any pirated versions exist on the web. If it can be watched by a human pirates will copy it, even if they have to rip it straight from the display controller of their mo…
Do they actually rip the videos from display controllers? I though they just used those shady HDMI splitters that actually strip the HDCP: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17463105
> desktop Linux and many Android devices only support level 1. In this case e.g. Netflix will not offer full HD or 4k resolutions And yet 4K webrips of recent Netflix shows are readily available on torrent sites. I don't understand who these higher levels of DRM are trying to target. They obviously don't stop the serious pirates from ripping and sharing the content with everyone. Yet the lower levels are "good enough…
Device manufacturers. Play nice, or we won't grant you the magic pixie dust to play our content in glorious 4k.
> desktop Linux and many Android devices only support level 1. In this case e.g. Netflix will not offer full HD or 4k resolutions And yet 4K webrips of recent Netflix shows are readily available on torrent sites. I don't understand who these higher levels of DRM are trying to target. They obviously don't stop the serious pirates from ripping and sharing the content with everyone. Yet the lower levels are "good enough…
DRM punishes paying customers and does nothing to stop piracy. It reminds me of those "you wouldn't kill" segments at the start of DVD's that you couldn't skip, but just moaned at you to not pirate the DVD. But the only people they were telling this to was paying customers who bought the DVD. People who pirated the DVD, just plugged it into their computer, ripped out the content then published.