Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 4 Average
Kodi's official DRM stance
#61
(2017-05-09, 15:07)natethomas Wrote:
(2017-05-09, 14:25)bam80 Wrote: Thanks jjd-uk.
(2017-04-30, 09:45)jjd-uk Wrote: That's pretty much what we already do where the addon Inputstream Adaptive is the sandbox that hooks into the installed CDM which at the moment comes via Chrome Widevine.
Can Inputstream Adaptive really act as the sandbox which protects us from tracking, etc. from CDM side? Don't we need to make some sort of such sandbox additionally?
If you use an addon like Netflix, I'm fairly certain Netflix is going to track your usage of their content. No sandboxing will stop that. Or are you asking something different?
The EME implementation in Chrome/Firefox is sandboxed so that the CDM Netflix uses does get a unique ID for the sandbox, but the sandbox ID is anonomized so that Netflix can not dig deeper than the sandbox to figure out who owns the computer that Chrome/Firefox is running on, or exactly which hardware you have.

The sandbox is only there for privacy in the practical sence that Netflix will for example not be able to access your web browser cookies or search history. Netflix will not be able to see what content you watch on HBO and vice versa, and nither Netflix or HBO will be able to check if you have any illegally (or legally) downloaded movies on your computer as they can not see anything outsiode their own sandbox.

Netflix as a service will still off-source force you to login so they know which user account is used and on the server-side they can see how many active sessions that user currently have. And as the EME sandbox is not a VPN service the IP-adress thay they stream to will tell Netflix roughly where you are located as long as your internet provider does not provide any location-anonymization service on its own.

Because of the sandbox Netflix will only be able to track what content you watch on Netflix, but that is because you are logged in to Netflix service with your Netflix user-account and stream the content from Netflix servers.

Due to F.U.D. (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt ) I think most people against DRM fear that Netflix and other content providers can somehow spy on what other content users consume on the same computer which you watch Netflix on with DRM and then worse that Netflix could somehow even activly through DRM stop you from playing non-DRM content if they find something copyrighted on your computer.

I believe that the sandbox that EME implements was partially invented to relieve those types of fears.
Reply
#62
In that case using Widevine via Inputstream Adaptive would be exactly the same as via Chrome.
Reply
#63
Thanks RockerC, this is what I meant by "sandbox" term.
Now I'm pretty sure that Inputstream Adaptive addon alone can't guarantee that - it was designed for other purposes. So, at least in the future, I think we will need a real sandbox to protect ourselves. I just don't know how it's technically hard to implement. For example, can we borrow sandbox implementation from Chrome/Firefox, or we will need to implement it from scratch..
Reply
#64
Ah .......XBMP how you have grown since the little black box of wonderment and gaming appeared.


Stay true to what you and those before you started.

Even in the face of adversity.
Reply
#65
I'm quite happy to see the team add DRM modules in some licensable form. If one has paid Hulu, Netflix, AmazonPrime, etc. accounts, one would want to have add-ons that would allow Kodi to access that content. The real obstacle is what can the team actually do that those providers would feel comfortable with. A two step registration mechanism, similar to the URL Resolvers, might help give them a warm fuzzy, when combined with DRM support at some level.
Reply
#66
What it comes down to for me is availability of content...
I downloaded movies and music for years because that is what could be played on my system.
When Spotify became easily usable on my Fire TV, I stopped downloading music and paid for the service.
I stopped downloading movies when I came across streaming addons. I used these instead of Netflix because they could run within Kodi.
When I switched from a PC to a Fire TV suddenly could launch Netflix easily from within Kodi. Its still a step away in that I cannot play the videos in Kodi itself, but it is user friendly enough for the family.

Point being that easy, convenient, and stream-lined access to legal content will pull many user away from the illegal stuff. Neflix, Amazon, Spotify, Hulu, Youtube, etc. all need to be available without jumping through hoops or launching in a browser.
Reply
#67
(2017-05-09, 15:28)RockerC Wrote:
(2017-05-09, 15:07)natethomas Wrote:
(2017-05-09, 14:25)bam80 Wrote: Thanks jjd-uk.
Can Inputstream Adaptive really act as the sandbox which protects us from tracking, etc. from CDM side? Don't we need to make some sort of such sandbox additionally?
If you use an addon like Netflix, I'm fairly certain Netflix is going to track your usage of their content. No sandboxing will stop that. Or are you asking something different?
The EME implementation in Chrome/Firefox is sandboxed so that the CDM Netflix uses does get a unique ID for the sandbox, but the sandbox ID is anonomized so that Netflix can not dig deeper than the sandbox to figure out who owns the computer that Chrome/Firefox is running on, or exactly which hardware you have.

The sandbox is only there for privacy in the practical sence that Netflix will for example not be able to access your web browser cookies or search history. Netflix will not be able to see what content you watch on HBO and vice versa, and nither Netflix or HBO will be able to check if you have any illegally (or legally) downloaded movies on your computer as they can not see anything outsiode their own sandbox.

Netflix as a service will still off-source force you to login so they know which user account is used and on the server-side they can see how many active sessions that user currently have. And as the EME sandbox is not a VPN service the IP-adress thay they stream to will tell Netflix roughly where you are located as long as your internet provider does not provide any location-anonymization service on its own.

Because of the sandbox Netflix will only be able to track what content you watch on Netflix, but that is because you are logged in to Netflix service with your Netflix user-account and stream the content from Netflix servers.

Due to F.U.D. (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt ) I think most people against DRM fear that Netflix and other content providers can somehow spy on what other content users consume on the same computer which you watch Netflix on with DRM and then worse that Netflix could somehow even activly through DRM stop you from playing non-DRM content if they find something copyrighted on your computer.

I believe that the sandbox that EME implements was partially invented to relieve those types of fears.

Some of the FUD may come from the fact that Edge's DRM hooks deep into the Windows kernel. At the same time, Netflix rewards Microsoft by permitting up to 4k video (with the hardware DRM in a Kaby Lake or newer CPU) output. The Chrome and Firefox CDMs are due to them being detached from the browser and system restricted to 720p output (even though on my Kaby Lake system I can stream 8k video on YouTube in Chrome) - when chatting with Netflix they make the fraudulent claim that it is a lack of browser support that restricts the resolution.

Mozilla actually proposed a better idea, and with the increasing market for rackmount hardware encoders, could actually be practical - inject a digital watermark into the stream so anyone who would redistribute the content can be identified.
Reply
#68
(2017-04-26, 00:09)garretn Wrote: I love this idea. I and I'm sure many others have gone through hoops to get this functionality elsewhere to an otherwise great Kodi experience.

Kodi is a media center, and these days netflix/prime video/drm content belongs in the media center too.

+1 This is really important to the long term use of Kodi by more than just us fanatics. A media centre by definition should be the centre for all my media. I want to access my Amazon Prime via Kodi (but possibly with a better interface than the Prime one - or at least a customisable one).

This will not prevent illegal add ons working, it is added functionality.
Reply
#69
While I can understand the desire to have some way to interact with DRM-crippled streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime in the Kodi interface to have all your media in one place, I would ask the devs to keep in mind that DRM is by its very nature an infringement on consumer rights and a way of circumventing the first sale doctrine and turn what was once a sale into a mere rental so that you no longer own what you thought you owned. Not to mention that DRM always, always fails because no mater the form or complexity, it is always cracked sooner or later. Even Denuvo, what was once thought as the long-sought killer of software piracy, has been neutralized, and games that use it are now cracked within mere hours. What I would like also to be kept in mind is that the reasons for infringement are not always as black and white as it may seem. Many are in fact underserved customers who may have no legal way to get the content they want due to the entertainment industry's continued obsession with outdated georestrictions and release windows. Also, many of the legal services put out by the legacy entertainment industry are loaded with caveats and restrictions and other difficulties as well as a limited library of content and in general tend to be much more difficult and costly to use than the infringement route.

What should also be remembered is the mountains of independent research that point out that infringement in actuality has little if any negative effect on sales and more often than not has a positive one, as it acts as a form of free advertising. Something you may not know is that it's also been demonstrated time and again that those who infringe often spend more on media than those who don't. This is because they often use it as a try before you buy approach - if they don't like something, they delete the download, if they do, they not only buy it but also encourage others to do so as well because they want to support the creators whose work they like and respect. Another common reason for infringement is for having a backup of media that's already been bought. Or often a digital copy that works better and plays with less hassle than the official or disc copy, because with official digital copies you often have to jump through a number of hoops to get it and it is not always at the same video and audio quality as the disc copy.

My point is merely that the issue shouldn't be seen as black and white as it often is, because it's more complex than that. I understand that Kodi has to be neutral about it and that's fine, I know they have a tightrope to walk. I just feel that to be neutral is to not only not openly support it but also not condemn it either. Merely be neutral and aware of the actual facts of the issue and not just what legacy companies that are absolutely terrified of change and any loss of control would like you to believe. There's a very good reason iTunes ditched DRM on music years ago. You might also want to keep in mind the many instances where people have bought media and then the company they bought it from tanked and access to the servers the media was on went with it, thus people lost media they had paid for and had no recourse, all thanks to DRM. Or the times companies like Amazon have retroactively removed ebooks people had already paid for from their accounts, including 1984. Which again was made possible only by DRM, whcih was used by the companies in all these instances.
Reply
#70
(2017-10-11, 04:30)DravinSharde Wrote: While I can understand...

I don't really understand your point. You are giving a lot of great reasons why drm is wrong or doesn't work, but that doesn't really have anything to do with what we're doing, which is working with software that can legally decrypt drm content. Your post might be more useful aimed at groups that are encrypting things?
Reply
#71
I think he is saying, "don't give in to DRM or you become part of the problem."
If I have helped you or increased your knowledge, click the 'thank user' button to give thanks :) (People with less than 20 posts won't see the "Thank you" button.)
Reply
#72
Eh, if that's the case, I don't care. The same could be said for supporting h265 or supporting mpeg2 back in the day over more open alternatives. Intentionally hobbling Kodi when we don't need to doesn't send a message. It just hobbles Kodi.
Reply
#73
If Kodi is a piracy platform, then Windows, Mac OS, Android, iOS are piracy platforms too. Simple as that. That's how I see Kodi, for me it's like an operating system and people decide what they should do or not within it.
Reply
#74
Not being aware of this discussion, I posted this some days ago: https://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=322160

I would be extremely happy to see Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, Hulu and other official plugins. People don't realize how hard it is to get perfect playback from these services app. On all systems they don't support automatic refresh rate switching. On some they simply output at 60Hz no matter the source. I'm not sure about Smart TVs, as I don't have one. But all other systems are simply a nightmare if you are used to smooth playback. I'd embrace Kodi having official plugins for payed content.
For troubleshooting and bug reporting please make sure you read this first.
Reply
#75
Not being aware of the DRM/Piracy issues I installed KODI expecting to be able to see NETFLIX, HBO and WAOO.TV (Danish provider).
This dissusion has been running for 6 months. It's a very complex issue.
But has anyone an idea of what will be happening in the near future.
At the moment I'm better off running a simple browser (Chrome).
Which is very sad.

I for one hope to see official KODI support for all the services anyone may want!
Reply



Kodi's official DRM stance43