InformAction Forums

W3C has officially added EME to the HTML 5.1 standards: http://boingboing.net/2013/10/02/w3c-gr ... rm-to.html

No one can be certain, but is this likely to mean the end of Gecko, the Web as it is, and extensions such as NoScript and Adblock Plus that give control back to the user?

No. It's more likely to affect FlashGot, actually.

What it could, eventually, lead to, if DRM expands massively, is that you wouldn't be allowed to view the source of JavaScript, which would make it harder to decide whether to trust it. But there's nothing like that currently on the radar.

I'm pretty sure you'll always be allowed to refuse to download something.

I know it sucks, but the fact is that just because W3C says something, doesn't mean browsers have to implement it. In fact, in the past that is exactly what has happened. Unless the providers ratify and agree to comply with it, its just a standard that is for all intents and purposes arbitrary and set by a body with no enforcement ability. Enough people shy from it, then businesses who implement it will end up losing more customers than they gain and they will end up having to concede. It has happened before.

Thrawn wrote:I'm pretty sure you'll always be allowed to refuse to download something.

Including categorically refusing to download any HTML5-DRM-protected content?

GµårÐïåñ wrote:just because W3C says something, doesn't mean browsers have to implement it.

I know, but IIUC, IE and Chrome already have... and with those browsers holding most of the market share, will there still be enough of a userbase unwilling or unable to use HTML5-DRM-protected content that DRM in HTML will fizzle out like you described?

barbaz wrote:Including categorically refusing to download any HTML5-DRM-protected content?

Yes, it will be (excuse the language) a major pissing contest between the providers, browsers and the consumers but in the end money speaks. When they lose money, they will need to reconsider. It will be tough for a while but it will ultimately show the power of consumerism which is today the only redeeming quality of capitalism frankly. I site US Congress v. The People

I know, but IIUC, IE and Chrome already have... and with those browsers holding most of the market share, will there still be enough of a userbase unwilling or unable to use HTML5-DRM-protected content that DRM in HTML will fizzle out like you described?

Because Google is the pimp of consumption that currently needs to sell tablets, Android, they Play Marketplace, etc and therefore would benefit it greatly, especially that they have spawn a satanic bastard known as Chrome in the midst of all that was much better, that should have been clue 1 the apocalypse of the free web was coming. Chrome is the free candy a child molester gives out to get them inside the van to do awful things with them. Therefore Google = Predator and if their actions over their existence doesn't speak for itself, people are not paying enough attention.

Unfortunately as much as I love the new IE10, despite not using it as my primary browser, there is the issue of idiots who just run whatever is there and that has been a problem that is not new. The problem is the new generation of Google kiddies who have flocked to their "products" that is the problem. But if AOL was any benchmark, even the mass availability of idiots willing to compromise will not save a company in the long term, so it comes down to the battle of wills. If the people stick with it and unite, it will be ugly but it will prevail. If people just give up, then how is that different than some arbitrary bully coming up and saying, we have decided you will bend over and take it and it starts now and you saying, well the powers have spoken, others are bending, so I guess I should follow.

Just my two cents. As a hacker of nearly 3 decades, I personally find all this offensive on so many levels it boils my blood, but I also know that no matter how tightly they grasp the sand, it will go through their fingers and we'll find a way. Worse comes to worse, the regular people can be the suckers who pay for us to go ahead an make our own special browsers and feed off them. Survival of the fittest I guess.

GµårÐïåñ, your 2¢ are much appreciated, and it's comforting to know that there will probably always be a way out even if it means learning C and C++ and good coding security practices and writing my own Gecko based browser, so thank you. Though I apologize for giving the wrong impression, EME didn't land in an IE release until 11, so until that becomes the default browser for new windows installs that isn't a matter of people just using what's right in front of them. Somehow that doesn't really make the future look any better though.

Just so you know, the Achilles heel for DRM and alike technology is the need to provide backwards compatibility. They can't guarantee that EVERYONE, or all their customers will have the latest and the best that will support their desires. That's why music industry, such as Sony DRM, gave up long ago because beating their DRM was as easy as running it through a WMP9 library and the backward compatibility layer provided the in memory hash which we grabbed, passed to a simple console app that basically just read the input into an output file and voila, music with no DRM. I guarantee you that although Hollywood has more money and they will push this with deeper pockets, they are subject to the same limitations and we'll find the right mix of codecs and decoders to do the same. The will of the people will prevail, just much blood needs to be spilled in the meantime. Literally and metaphorically.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:I know it sucks, but the fact is that just because W3C says something, doesn't mean browsers have to implement it.

Just saw that sadly, Mozilla has caved: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/05/1 ... ing-users/
Anyone have a comprehensive list of the new APIs / properties / etc. that HTML5 DRM will introduce so that I can attempt to at least neuter this with an addon? (I've checked http://html5test.com/ and they aren't detecting HTML5 DRM support in latest SeaMonkey Nightly despite it being there according to mozilla-central changelogs...)
Also, is there some mozconfig option I can set for building SeaMonkey so that my builds won't include DRM support at all?

I'd hate to have to stick with some outdated browser forever just because of this, but if I can't zap DRM support...

The author of Pale Moon doesn't plan to include this.

http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4539

barbaz wrote:Also, is there some mozconfig option I can set for building SeaMonkey so that my builds won't include DRM support at all?

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1038031

https://support.mozilla.org/kb/enable-drm
At least they're being nice about it.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1144875, and some of the bugs it links, make for some interesting reading...

Looks like HTML5 DRM relies on the goodwill of the DRM/CDM providers for "guaranteed" security
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/06/c ... vestigated

In Chromium-based browsers, there used to be a flag for disabling this in chrome://flags. Last time I fired up Chromium, I didn't see the flag listed there anymore. Nor in Vivaldi when I was experimenting with it.

How to disable HTML5 DRM in Chromium/Vivaldi/etc now?


EDIT
Oops, forgot I posted this. The answer is that Chromium 57+ has a setting (in chrome://settings) to disable playing protected content.

https://arstechnica.com/business/2017/0 ... -a-defeat/
Hmm. Not sure what to make of that.

Either way, I'm still keeping DRM out of my own browser, thanks.