Linux Users Can Now Use Disney+ After DRM Fix (bleepingcomputer.com) 26
"Linux users can now stream shows and movies from the Disney+ streaming service after Disney lowered the level of their DRM requirements," reports Bleeping Computer:
When Disney+ was first launched, Linux users who attempted to watch shows and movies were shown an error stating "Something went wrong. Please try again. If the problem persists, visit the Disney+ Help Center (Error Code 83)."
As explained by Hans de Goede, this error was being caused by the Disney+ service using the highest level of security for the Widevine Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology. As some Linux and Android devices did not support this higher DRM security level, they were unable to stream Disney+ shows in their browsers... Yesterday, Twitter users discovered that Disney+ had suddenly started working on Linux browsers after the streaming service tweaked their DRM security levels...
Even with Disney+ lowering the DRM requirements, users must first make sure DRM is enabled in the browser. For example, Disney+ will not work with Firefox unless you enable the "Play DRM-controlled content" setting in the browser.
As explained by Hans de Goede, this error was being caused by the Disney+ service using the highest level of security for the Widevine Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology. As some Linux and Android devices did not support this higher DRM security level, they were unable to stream Disney+ shows in their browsers... Yesterday, Twitter users discovered that Disney+ had suddenly started working on Linux browsers after the streaming service tweaked their DRM security levels...
Even with Disney+ lowering the DRM requirements, users must first make sure DRM is enabled in the browser. For example, Disney+ will not work with Firefox unless you enable the "Play DRM-controlled content" setting in the browser.
Yes we can. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, to watch the very good dogs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
https://abc7ny.com/entertainme... [abc7ny.com]
There were probably other reasons (Score:5, Insightful)
Virtually every person I've spoken to about D+ has indicated that they had buffering issues at least some of the time when watching content. The higher DRM schemes aren't supported by some of the CDNs Disney hasn't been using.
My guess is that they got enough complaints that they decided to add capacity at the expense of lowering the DRM.
Even The Mouse realized that Widevine level 3 wasn't protecting The Mandalorian from ending up on The Pirate Bay, and the lack of capacity was undoubtedly costing more in customer service and retention than the DRM saved.
My question is whether it'll stay this way. Once Disney gets past the first wave of everyone watching everything, and demand levels out a bit, and the new CDNs get told they need to support Widevine 3 in order to get a contract, the restriction level will go up again. Linux support is incidental now, and its absence will be deemed collateral damage because all Disney needs to do is push an update to their mobile apps and Roku/Fire/Chromecast plugins for this to be a non-issue for 99.999% of their customers.
Re:There were probably other reasons (Score:5, Informative)
Linux support is incidental now, and its absence will be deemed collateral damage because all Disney needs to do is push an update to their mobile apps and Roku/Fire/Chromecast plugins for this to be a non-issue for 99.999% of their customers.
I think you're overlooking the fact that Android users were also affected by this - and that's almost certainly a LOT more than .001% of Disney's customer base. Many people are using their phones and tablets as their primary media consumption device nowadays.
I'm certain that Disney couldn't care less about desktop Linux. But they do care about getting their product to as many eyeballs as possible, and that means Android needs to be supported.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're overlooking the statement of GP saying "all Disney needs to do is push an update to their mobile apps".
Re:There were probably other reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
Even The Mouse realized that Widevine level 3 wasn't protecting The Mandalorian from ending up on The Pirate Bay
Widevine level 3 is what they went to. Level 1 is what they came from. Level 1 is the strictest version and level 3 is the least restrictive.
The higher DRM schemes aren't supported by some of the CDNs Disney hasn't been using
I have a feeling that Disney isn't putting raw assets out there for JIT encryption by some rando CDN. I've got no evidence to back that up, but Disney just strikes me as not the company that wants anyone else touching their IP unless it is under lock and key already. I think with your assumption, you allowing Disney to have a lot more trust with CDNs than I would think Disney would trust others.
the restriction level will go up again
The streaming thing has been going for a while now. Netflix was just like Disney and at the start when they left the Flash based player, used a level 1 encryption scheme. Eventually they said the complexity never justified the trouble, shit just kept getting pirated anyway. Doing a level 1 requires a ridiculously complex key scheme and real-time encryption or an even crazier ahead of time encryption scheme. The trouble that Disney+ had the start are issues that others who have tried level 1 schemes have also had. I know this might come as a surprise to some, but I think Google might have over engineered their Widevine protocol.
Linux support is incidental now, and its absence will be deemed collateral damage because all Disney needs to do is push an update to their mobile apps and Roku/Fire/Chromecast plugins for this to be a non-issue for 99.999% of their customers
Maybe, but keeping a Level 1 is a hassle. I don't think Disney is changing course because they want to add Linux compatibility. More than likely they're changing course because there's no reason to keep an overly complex system that doesn't do the one thing it is supposed to do, stop privacy. If the more simpler method keeps privacy at the same level as the more complex one, then there isn't really a reason to keep dumping money into maintaining the more complex one. Now if Disney produces their own encryption scheme for use in browsers, that's another story. But I highly doubt they'll go back to level 1 Widevine. If anything they might just make their own, that sounds more like something Disney would do.
Re: (Score:3)
Widevine level 3 wasn't protecting The Mandalorian from ending up on The Pirate Bay
Widevine level 3 is what they went to. Level 1 is what they came from. Level 1 is the strictest version and level 3 is the least restrictive.
Level whatever seems to make no difference, they are all conveniently available as torrents regardless.
Re: (Score:2)
The Disney rips were a little lower quality than Netflix ones, so perhaps the DRM was having some effect.
Netflix streams are ripped with some special ripping software that extracts the compressed video feed and also the subtitles for every supported language. You can then torrent that lot packed up in an MKV container so you get the exact same quality as streaming (and resulting file size). Same for Amazon.
Actually add Apple to the list of streams that can be ripped directly too. For All Mankind is okay, ne
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of devices out there that don't support WideVine Level 3. My phone only supports WideVine level 1, according to the DRM Info app. It's a relatively new Samsung phone with Android 9 (Samsung A8 2018). Granted Disney+ still worked on this device even prior to the change so I wonder if Widevine 3 is only required when running on browsers or other "open" platforms and not on devices line phones, tablets, Roku/Fire/Chromecast.
What difference will this make - realistically? (Score:2)
Yesterday, Twitter users discovered that Disney+ had suddenly started working on Linux browsers after the streaming service tweaked their DRM security levels...
My hunch:
Given the [dismal] Linux numbers in media, I doubt this Disney+ service will see any "meaningful" uptick in subscriptions.
Re: (Score:2)
Android != GNU (Score:2)
Except Linux also means Android.
Only for kernel-level things. The Android userland is almost completely different from those that aim to mimic UNIX (namely GNU/Linux and musl/Linux).
Congrats, to both of you! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It was me :)
those Mandalorian torrents though...
Lost me at enable "Play DRM-controlled content" (Score:3, Insightful)
No thanks, I'll just rip the blu rays I get from ebay and play them on whatever the f**u**ck I want.
Not full HD (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with the sentiment though: DRM does not thwart pirates but it hinders and punishes paying customers. The stuff I got from TPB or ripped from Blurays never gave me any trouble when playing them. But my setup still throws random HDCP DRM errors on Netflix or Prime when one of the devices in the chain is no longer recognised or whatever (rebooting everything a couple of times fixes this, but even a second wasted on this crap is too much). Combined with t
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
>"DRM does not thwart pirates but it hinders and punishes paying customers."
Interesting analogy that it is exactly like almost all "common sense gun control." All it does is punish, restrict, harass, and criminalize the good people. Bad people continue to do whatever they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really, because you can't yet make a perfect copy of a working gun for free and transmit it over the internet to thousands of people who can then use it with near zero chance of being caught or punished.
If gun control really didn't have any effect on criminal's ability to get guns they they would be commonly used in crimes in countries with strict gun control. But they aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
>"If gun control really didn't have any effect on criminal's ability to get guns.
It doesn't, not much, anyway. And lots of gun control has nothing about "getting" a gun. Magazine capacity, so-called "gun free zones", etc.
>" they they would be commonly used in crimes in countries with strict gun control. But they aren't."
Those are countries where it isn't a right [for good people] to have a gun and thus ALL gun access is tightly controlled across the board. Not a valid comparison. A better comparis
Re: (Score:2)
Problem with that comparison is that you don't have internal borders so local gun control laws are not that effective or comparable to national ones.
Anyway the weaker laws are just because it's so hard to pass stronger ones or amend the constitution, not because they are preferred.
Why would I ever support organized crime? (Score:2)
To get more artists crushed into soulless machines that stamp out the same crap over and over again?
To intensify the exploitation and poverty of artists in general?
To get my hard-earned money stolen by racketeering leeching thieves who never worked a honest day in their lives and add no value to this world whatsoever?
I use Linux precisely because of its very Star-Trek-y social sharing culture. That is what makes open source so successful.
There, we use legitimate business models, where if I want something to