6 ms·

Microsoft cant and will not break that trust, because then Netflix and others will stop serving content to Microsoft products. This is similar to HTTPS certifi

Microsoft cant and will not break that trust, because then Netflix and others will stop serving content to Microsoft products. This is similar to HTTPS certificate chain of trust. The root signing authority needs to be trusted, but once you break that trust there's no going back. It is a self-regulating system.

AnthonyMouse 1y ago
Why does Netflix care if Microsoft is hoovering up all the user's data? Why would they even care if Microsoft was giving itself access to the Netflix streams? Unlike with Signal there are no real secrets in there. Plus, what is Netflix even going to do? Stop supporting streaming on Microsoft platforms and then lose a bunch of subscribers for no benefit to themselves?
- j-bos 1y ago
  I imagine it wouldn't be Netflix enforcing that decision but rather the hollywood studios.
  - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
    So ask the same question of them. Would you expect them to care about invasions of user privacy? To give up money over it?
  - lyu07282 1y ago
    But why does Hollywood even care about this DRM in the first place? I don't really understand why all this wasted effort, going so far with HDCP encrypted video signals.. I mean every new release is pirated within hours despite all of these protections anyway, so what exactly is the point? It's even easier and faster to just download a 4K torrent than to get Netflix in 4k working on many system configurations because of these overbearing DRM requirements.
    - Mindwipe 1y ago
      Because that's not true. Pirates get very upset that 4K Netflix webrips often take weeks or months as hardware keys have to be burnt.
      - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
        The DRM is still completely broken. What they're doing is using some watermarking technology to match the video with a particular device and then ban the device. But then the pirates just buy a device, rip thousands of hours of video using it and then post them all together. Each device can get them everything in the entire catalog that they want because they don't have to post any of it until they've coped all of it and banning the device after the fact is too late. They can even sell the device before the key is banned (or to anyone who won't notice/care) and use the money to buy another one, and then the company is only banning the keys of innocent people who might have been paying customers. And even that is assuming there is no way to remove the watermark, which there always is because multiple copies of the same video can't each be uniquely identifying without revealing what's different about them. Meanwhile the inconvenience to paying customers is real when their stuff doesn't work, and every customer who pirates your stuff because the paid offering doesn't work for them is an actual lost sale. It really does seem like the DRM vendors are taking them for a ride.
- nemomarx 1y ago
  In this case, if Recall records the screen constantly then it can get the DRMed video from Netflix, and therefore possibly exfiltrate it to the user for piracy easier? I think they nominally try to prevent you streaming it / recording it to shut that down.
  - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
    The expectation is that Microsoft is exfiltrating this data because they want to use it for AI training, ad targeting etc. That doesn't require the user to have access to it, they'd just need some new rationale for exfiltrating it. Insert malware scanning excuse etc. Also, the issue is that somebody is going to copy a ~30 fps video using screenshots without audio taken at an interval of ~0.2 fps? Nobody is going to do it that way.
    - SunlitCat 1y ago
      But the larger issue is, if Microsoft Windows is able to grab DRMed content, there is some path to grab DRMed content at all. Which means that if someone with lots of time, passion and talent on their hand might be able to exploit that path to get more then just a screenshot without audio every 0.2 fps. The promise of DRMed content at the moment is that (technically) no one is able to do so as there are no backdoors into it, for nobody.
      - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
        There is always a path to grab it, because something on the device has to have it in order to display it on the screen.
        SunlitCat 1y ago
        Ideally, the entire path from source to display is secure and inaccessible (even for the operating system), that is the core promise of DRM. Of course the device must render the content somehow, but DRM is specifically designed to ensure that this path can't be intercepted or exploited. What happens outside of that path, before it's decrypted or after it's displayed, is beyond what DRM is meant to control.
kevincox 1y ago
I believe that they could just ignore the Signal app's request to DRM protect the content. Unless Signal is actually encrypting the whole app content before submitting it to Windows it is just a request. This is a bit different to encrypted video where it is actually being encrypted off device.

AnthonyMouse 1y ago

Why does Netflix care if Microsoft is hoovering up all the user's data? Why would they even care if Microsoft was giving itself access to the Netflix streams? Unlike with Signal there are no real secrets in there. Plus, what is Netflix even going to do? Stop supporting streaming on Microsoft platforms and then lose a bunch of subscribers for no benefit to themselves?

j-bos 1y ago
I imagine it wouldn't be Netflix enforcing that decision but rather the hollywood studios.
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  So ask the same question of them. Would you expect them to care about invasions of user privacy? To give up money over it?
- lyu07282 1y ago
  But why does Hollywood even care about this DRM in the first place? I don't really understand why all this wasted effort, going so far with HDCP encrypted video signals.. I mean every new release is pirated within hours despite all of these protections anyway, so what exactly is the point? It's even easier and faster to just download a 4K torrent than to get Netflix in 4k working on many system configurations because of these overbearing DRM requirements.
  - Mindwipe 1y ago
    Because that's not true. Pirates get very upset that 4K Netflix webrips often take weeks or months as hardware keys have to be burnt.
    - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
      The DRM is still completely broken. What they're doing is using some watermarking technology to match the video with a particular device and then ban the device. But then the pirates just buy a device, rip thousands of hours of video using it and then post them all together. Each device can get them everything in the entire catalog that they want because they don't have to post any of it until they've coped all of it and banning the device after the fact is too late. They can even sell the device before the key is banned (or to anyone who won't notice/care) and use the money to buy another one, and then the company is only banning the keys of innocent people who might have been paying customers. And even that is assuming there is no way to remove the watermark, which there always is because multiple copies of the same video can't each be uniquely identifying without revealing what's different about them. Meanwhile the inconvenience to paying customers is real when their stuff doesn't work, and every customer who pirates your stuff because the paid offering doesn't work for them is an actual lost sale. It really does seem like the DRM vendors are taking them for a ride.
nemomarx 1y ago
In this case, if Recall records the screen constantly then it can get the DRMed video from Netflix, and therefore possibly exfiltrate it to the user for piracy easier? I think they nominally try to prevent you streaming it / recording it to shut that down.
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  The expectation is that Microsoft is exfiltrating this data because they want to use it for AI training, ad targeting etc. That doesn't require the user to have access to it, they'd just need some new rationale for exfiltrating it. Insert malware scanning excuse etc. Also, the issue is that somebody is going to copy a ~30 fps video using screenshots without audio taken at an interval of ~0.2 fps? Nobody is going to do it that way.
  - SunlitCat 1y ago
    But the larger issue is, if Microsoft Windows is able to grab DRMed content, there is some path to grab DRMed content at all. Which means that if someone with lots of time, passion and talent on their hand might be able to exploit that path to get more then just a screenshot without audio every 0.2 fps. The promise of DRMed content at the moment is that (technically) no one is able to do so as there are no backdoors into it, for nobody.
    - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
      There is always a path to grab it, because something on the device has to have it in order to display it on the screen.
      - SunlitCat 1y ago
        Ideally, the entire path from source to display is secure and inaccessible (even for the operating system), that is the core promise of DRM. Of course the device must render the content somehow, but DRM is specifically designed to ensure that this path can't be intercepted or exploited. What happens outside of that path, before it's decrypted or after it's displayed, is beyond what DRM is meant to control.

kevincox 1y ago

I believe that they could just ignore the Signal app's request to DRM protect the content. Unless Signal is actually encrypting the whole app content before submitting it to Windows it is just a request. This is a bit different to encrypted video where it is actually being encrypted off device.