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 (2019)

blog.samuelmaddock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 194 posts

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#171

Post by waterhouse »

btilly wrote: post #164
Aerroon wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because if you can playback 4k video from Netflix with a browser under your control, then you can playback 4k video to a file and thereby create a cracked copy that can be pirated. Can't you just record the screen to do this? Or split the signal in the cable or have the screen itself send the data on to another device. At the very least you can always just physically record the screen itself. At the end of the day,…

Why yes, you can. And so there is pressure on every single hardware vendor to do fancy handshakes to guarantee that it is only going to authorized places that will do authorized things with it. Exactly to make the bypass that you're describing harder to do. Occasionally this creates a problem that people notice. For example see https://www.macworld.com/article/3116414/oops-you-cant-play-... for one of them. At the en…

> Netflix believes that it does.

Or they believe that their media partners, who license the media to Netflix, believe that it does. Or perhaps those media partners are members of the MPAA, which wants to take a hard-line stance and never do anything that looks like backing down, even if their own technical advisors say it's getting silly.

But, yes, whatever Netflix's reasons, those who buy from them will do so under Netflix's terms.

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#172

Post by smogcutter »

mvolfik wrote: post #157
zucker42 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Potentially, there's a 5 year jail sentence for doing that[1]. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1204

The thing is he isn't circumventing copyright protection. He is just allowing it to play in his browser too, no downloading etc. I'm a legal noob, but there always was that "fair interests" like making stuff work on different devices/OSs (youtube-dl is hiding behind this a bit), would it not apply here?

“Legal noob” is definitely one way to say “I am absolutely not a lawyer”.

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#173

Post by tbodt »

sneak wrote: post #163
tbodt wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from being illegal, defeating the various layers of obfuscation and extracting the private keys requires a very particular set of skills, beyond the reach of most programmers. And then they'll just rotate the key and add more obfuscation, once they're done suing you out of existence.

Reverse engineering publicly available proprietary software distributed as freeware to reimplement free software replacements is not illegal.

Can you help convince me of this?

Also I'd encourage you to contact the owners of the repositories listed in Google's DMCA notice against the Widevine cryptographic key and help them file a counter-notice. https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/11/2020-11-0...

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#174

Post by cbozeman »

Fice wrote: post #156

DRM is fundamentally incompatible with open source and free software. DRM is all about restricting what your computer can do (what code it is allowed to run), so it can be trusted by third parties with handling protected information. Content providers want to be able to trust your computer in not allowing you to have full control of what it does. If users can execute their free software rights (modify software and ru…

>> The only approach to DRM is to boycott its use completely, there is no workaround or compromise.

I couldn't agree more.

DRM is a plague that needs to go away. Digital content producers use it in the hopes it'll deter piracy, but the truth, as clearly shown by GOG.com, is that DRM is pointless. If your software and content are reasonably priced and worthwhile in some way, people will buy it.

I recently looked into what it takes to play 4K Blu-ray UHD discs natively, and its fucking laughable. A specific Intel-only CPU, only certain motherboards, certain monitors that support certain specs... OR you could just download an .mkv from some torrent website that plays flawlessly...

Which are people more likely to do? Instead of potentially adding 1.5 billion Windows users to the pool of available 4K UHD Blu-ray customers, they made it so fucking annoying that it practically guarantees piracy. Nice job breaking it, Hero.

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#175

Post by avmich »

zucker42 wrote: post #106
speedgoose wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you consider to not get a license? You could perhaps download and execute Widevine pretending to be Firefox or Chrome. Is there advanced spying software in Widevine preventing to do that?

Potentially, there's a 5 year jail sentence for doing that[1]. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1204

Let's rephrase: can you create a clone, a derivative work of a working OS browser, which only has DRM part not changed?

I'm not sure if you're asking for technical or legal advice. If legal, then since most of us are not lawyers here, strictly speaking we can't judge if "Hello, world!" program will put us in jail or not.

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#176

Post by coldtea »

Leherenn wrote: post #81
coldtea wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in the day yes. Modern web standards upgrades are designed (a) because Google wants them, (b) for regulatory capture -- making it too difficult for a browser to be created (I'm abusing the term to refer to behavior regulated by "web standards").

(c) because they provide features requested by developers/users. Compare modern JS to JS from 10 years ago, it's pretty clear Google is not the only one benefitting from the new standards.

>because they provide features requested by developers/users

That would be if Google cared for developers/users.

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#177

Post by mcjkrw »

zucker42 wrote: post #106
speedgoose wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you consider to not get a license? You could perhaps download and execute Widevine pretending to be Firefox or Chrome. Is there advanced spying software in Widevine preventing to do that?

Potentially, there's a 5 year jail sentence for doing that[1]. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1204

Would it be legal if DRM is not shipped with the browser, but the user can download and install it separately (copy it manually to the browser folder)?

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#178

Post by Aerroon »

btilly wrote: post #164
Aerroon wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because if you can playback 4k video from Netflix with a browser under your control, then you can playback 4k video to a file and thereby create a cracked copy that can be pirated. Can't you just record the screen to do this? Or split the signal in the cable or have the screen itself send the data on to another device. At the very least you can always just physically record the screen itself. At the end of the day,…

Why yes, you can. And so there is pressure on every single hardware vendor to do fancy handshakes to guarantee that it is only going to authorized places that will do authorized things with it. Exactly to make the bypass that you're describing harder to do. Occasionally this creates a problem that people notice. For example see https://www.macworld.com/article/3116414/oops-you-cant-play-... for one of them. At the en…

>Actually it doesn't matter what your belief is on that. In the end, Netflix believes that it does. And as long as they are where you buy the content that you want, that means you have to play by their rules. No matter how stupid you think that they are being.

I meant that Netflix and co have to ask this. Because it's pretty obvious that none of the direct anti-piracy measures have worked. What has worked is making content more accessible and providing other incentives to users for getting the media legitimately. I think Netflix itself is that type of advancement, but I guess they're looking to get more "marketshare".

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#179

Post by Anthony-G »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #162
Anthony-G wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the link to Libro.fm; it looks like a great initiative. Unfortunately, for a lot of titles I'm interested in, I get this message: "You appear to be accessing the site from a country where this title has restricted rights" . Do you know of a similar audiobook provider for the EU?

Unfortunately I don't. What I can do is list all the services I know of which sell DRM-Free Audiobooks in the US: • Libro.fm • Downpour.com • Audiobooksnow.com (Check for a "Downloadable" icon, a very small number of tiles without it have DRM). • Google Play I bounce between the first three of these regularly, based on price and availability. I've never actually used Google Play for audiobooks; they always seems to c…

Thanks for that list. I only got into listening to audiobooks last year when I started walking a lot more (due to Covid-19 restrictions). My local public library had a deal with Bolinda where library members could rent audiobooks at no cost. The catch is that (due to artificial scarcity), the user usually has to wait a couple of months before the title they're interested in becomes available. It turned out that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was immediately available so after listening to that, I continued with the rest of the series. When I became too impatient to wait for the next title to become available, I was able to purchase non-DRM MP3 files from JK Rowling's own site, Pottermore.

Re: I tried creating a web browser and Google blocked me (2019)

#180

Post by nicolas_t »

Thaxll wrote: post #125
coryfklein wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users will balk if you call your application a web browser and it doesn't stream video from most of the major video providers.

There is a big difference between playing some mp4 / webm on a website and Netflix, if every random dev could implement a DRM for Netflix most likely DRM would be useless.

To be fair, given that anything that hits any streaming service is ripped and available to pirating within an hour, DRM has proven to be useless. It doesn't stop pirates at all but it does annoy actual paying customers.
Post reply on HN