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

YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 686 posts

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#551

Post by boomboomsubban »

crtasm wrote: post #526
boomboomsubban wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my understanding, every video has the rolling cipher as it is just what YouTube calls the links the media files are at.

My understanding is in general a fixed signature is used, only certain content has the rolling cipher. If all videos used the same system then youtube-dl would not have had any reason to make major label music videos part of their unit tests.

Youtube-dl's counter claim states that though those lines of code did not violate the DMCA, they have replaced them with videos without copyright music.

That sounds like they didn't really have any reason to make major label music videos part of the tests, it was just a developers personal preference. Though, it doesn't prove this is the case.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#552

Post by Rochus »

mmcdermott wrote: post #539
Rochus wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I've read it. That's why I came to my conclusion. Btw. nearly all of the facts in the referenced letter were expressed in HN discussions just a few hours after the takedown. From my point of view they were obvious.

I agree that they were obvious and, as you say, the HN conversations show that they occurred to many technologists. That said, I think there is an argument to say that the EFF was better qualified to write the letter. The reason being that MSFT wants to look like an impartial content host (to avoid being liable) and the EFF is explicitly an advocacy group. If MSFT advocates for content on that platform, it could be p…

> If MSFT advocates for content on that platform, it could be portrayed as a conflict of interest by the RIAA lawyers

Well, that's what they are actually doing now; factually, it does not matter whether there was a letter by EFF or not; they should have come to the same conclusion even without the EFF; moreover, Github/MS are not accountable to the RIAA; conflicts of interest are not an issue here; in fact, to meet the due diligence a hoster would have to check whether a DMCA request meets the formal requirements and is well substantiated, otherwise the hoster could even be liable to pay damages to the unjustifiably blocked project.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#553

Post by mmm_grayons »

smnrchrds wrote: post #264
reacweb wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe their purpose was Widevine. The youtube-dl takedown was a way to distract the attention. I don't think we should rejoice until Widevine is back.

I am out of the loop. What happened to Widevine?

Some guy wrote a tool to intercept the keys for level three on windows. Most streaming services offer only low-quality streams with level three, but big G dmca'ed the repo and most forks. Mirrors are still up all over, though; here's one: https://github.com/kipyegonmark/widevine-l3-decryptor

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#554

Post by Rochus »

rzwitserloot wrote: post #479
TechBro8615 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIU the argument is more that youtube-dl is effectively a web browser and doesn’t do anything that a web browser doesn’t do. Further, it does not include any “secret” key for DRM circumvention like might be bundled with e.g. Chrome in the case of Widevine, where browser vendors agree to protect the secret key.

That's a DMCA argument (I'm not hacking). But it doesn't really work: If you protect your house with no lock, not even a door, but just a little rope with a sign on: "Do not jump over or duck under this ribbon, or cut it!", that's, for the DMCA, enough - so you get into fun games where you claim that, say, a long random unique key that is right there in the HTML youtube.com serves which links to the video is a 'secur…

> "Do not jump over or duck under this ribbon, or cut it!", that's, for the DMCA, enough - so you get into fun games where you claim that

No. There must be an effective technological measure (objectively, according to the state of the art); see https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201 (a)(1)(A): No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#555

Post by baobabKoodaa »

MauranKilom wrote: post #382
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whenever you watch a video you are downloading it. Why is this comment downvoted? It's highlighting one of the most common misunderstandings that laypersons have regarding video download/streaming. Most people think that you can "view" content on the internet without downloading it. In this context, a tool which purports to "download" content, you know... sounds like it's nefariously doing something that the "viewi…

This may be completely true in a technical sense, but that's not how the law works (see https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 ). And while the same bits pass through your connection, this equivalence already breaks down right away: There is clearly a difference between persisting a media file to disk vs having it ephemeral in browser memory.

I agree there is a legal/practical/moral difference between streaming and downloading something. But there's no need to obscure the technical difference by downvoting people when they point it out.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#556

Post by Rochus »

ggoo wrote: post #546
Rochus wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right; but the motivation looks rather like the attempt to restore the good reputation after an obvious mistake; one might have expected Github to check the DMCA request a priori and reject it if unfounded.

Even if so, that doesn't mean that these are not good changes.

Sure, better now than never. Let's hope it's not just a marketing campaign and that they are really serious about it.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#557

Post by bonzini »

Aissen wrote: post #402
yellowapple wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if a program used a licensed browser as an intermediary to obtain Widevine-protected content, would that be circumvention?

I even sidestepped the obvious of loading widevine.so, running it, symbolic execution, etc. It's mostly a thought experiment to show how everything is stupid in the end. I'm afraid in a few months/years, we'll see the hardware security level to become mandatory for Netflix, etc. And then YouTube.

Loading widevine.so (extracted from a ChromeOS image) and running it is exactly how Kodi reproduces DRM-protected videos.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#558

Post by crtasm »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #551
crtasm wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is in general a fixed signature is used, only certain content has the rolling cipher. If all videos used the same system then youtube-dl would not have had any reason to make major label music videos part of their unit tests.

Youtube-dl's counter claim states that though those lines of code did not violate the DMCA, they have replaced them with videos without copyright music. That sounds like they didn't really have any reason to make major label music videos part of the tests, it was just a developers personal preference. Though, it doesn't prove this is the case.

It is not the case, and all that has happened is a removal: https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/commit/1fb034d029c8b7...

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#559

Post by drdeca »

justinclift wrote: post #483
xigency wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only workaround is to login with a browser and copy the cookies from it to youtube-dl. That's really easy to do with postman.

"Postman" seems like a pretty generic name. Looking quickly online, maybe you're meaning this one? https://www.postman.com

I'm pretty sure that is what they mean, yes. It is a nice tool. Lets you write HTTP(S) templates with parameters and whatnot, save them in groups, send them, handle the response, etc.

Re: YouTube-dl's repository has been restored

#560

Post by Siira »

nonbirithm wrote: post #417
jtbayly wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already have to sign in to view some videos, don’t you? Does YT-dL not have a way to handle those right now?

It does, but it's broken. https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/issues/23860 The developers are not responding to the issue, and from what I understand it is borderline impossible to fix, because there is an entire security team behind the Google login protection. The only workaround is to login with a browser and copy the cookies from it to youtube-dl.

You can automate fetching Chrome’s cookies. This is generally very useful for scraping.
Post reply on HN