Not possible to enable DRM content streaming in Firefox

Hardware Librem 5
4

The founding values appear to vary per machine. :slight_smile:
I hazzard a guess, the mini has Firefox installed without the ESR suffix.

5

Its a hard fight. Try to stream that with your not privacy orianted gaming console or less important smartphone.

Its about the extraction of data. Using a DRM-Media stream is much more privacy related like to have some old, without Internet DRM DVD, Blueray or offline DRM Gameing usage.

1 Like
6

Regardless, Firefox itself (Mozilla Foundation) has always taken a more permissive approach of being open to being closed i.e. by including dodgy code. :wink:

On top of that, it will depend on what distro a customer is using on the Mini. It could be PureOS but it could be e.g. Debian or Ubuntu or Mint, or something outside the Debian family. @leetaur ?

“ESR” (Extended Support Release) is not directly relevant. Yes, it could mean that two releases of Firefox are based on two different versions of Firefox (the ESR version typically being older) - but either of them could include or exclude the dodgy code. If you are really making a comparison between two different versions of Firefox, just use Help / About Firefox to get the actual version.

For comparison, my desktop is at Firefox 109.0 and it does include the dodgy code and from time to time Firefox asks me whether I want to enable dodgy code but so far I have always declined.

Closed source code, by definition, can’t be built by a third party. So if a build already exists for x86 CPUs then a distro can choose to include it, or not. Ditto for ARM CPUs. But if a build does not exist for a given CPU then it can’t be included period.

Maybe look to see whether there is a flatpak Firefox that contains the dodgy code. Or, if that fails, explore other browsers, since they can all differ in what they include and what they exclude.

7

You might want also to read the paragraphs on Encrypted Media Extensions in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#Standards

1 Like
8

Yes, as linked article confirms:

As correlated here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viDsl58VKNo and as correlated even before EU went through the same process:

9

It is about that @wimdows question isn’t obsolete and that i.MX8MQ have capability to stream whatever Librem 5 owner wants it to stream (as ignoring environment in which we live now, in 2023, is not thoughtful nor helpful approach either, although I’m not about to provide any direct help here as still unsure if one exists, as probably non-free related).

EDIT: https://w3c.github.io/encrypted-media/.

EDIT II:

How about: Google Widevine DRM option is grayed out in Purebrowser. Nightly version might help but I’m having no time to test this.

10

I am running PureOS (byzantium) on the Mini. Using Firefox’s Help-About, it is version 102.7.0esr (64-bit).

1 Like
11

I tried to use the Widevine for DRM streaming on L5 but it failed, because i found no 64Bit ARM-Package of Widevine.

1 Like
12

Then @wimdows does appear to be raising a valid point about a discrepancy in the packaging of Firefox for PureOS on Mini v. Librem 5. Whether that’s an x86 v. ARM difference, or something else I don’t know.

And that is just one more reason why closed source is evil.

13

I am aware of the pitfalls of streaming this stuff. But the L5 offers a very decent video quality, so it seems a bit of a waste not to use it for watching my local cable television companies offerings, the archives of our local tv-stations, things on netflix, youtube (which already works, btw), etcetera.

14

This “works” sounds to me like self-explanatory as in accordance with the following link: https://www.xda-developers.com/google-is-deprecating-widevine-for-chromium/?

I’ll stay calm anyway: https://www.eff.org/issues/drm.

15

because it’s not using DRM?

1 Like
16

Well, you fell precisely into one of the pitfalls of this stuff: as far as I can tell, it’s not possible to use DRM even if you want to, because there’s no Linux/ARM version. You’re at the mercy of the powers that want to restrict, and those don’t care. Now you’re powerless to watch videos only because someone went out of their way to make it harder, which is precisely why we protest against closed software and DRM in particular.

3 Likes
17

I guess so. I just mentioned it because it belongs to the dark side as well.

18

Well, it would have been nice to be able to watch ‘cable’ on my L5 and maybe even Netflix. But it is no biggy if I can’t. There are always my Ubuntu desktop (connected to my dumb tv) and tablet (Windows) for that.
Listening to music (Spotify or internet radio) on my phone are way more important to me. And they both work. (Although the bluebooth connection to my speakers and hifi set could be better, I must say.)

19

Good choice of words, because, following the meme, DRM is why we can’t have nice things.

To preempt accusations of powerless ranting, I recommend everyone to take political action, because law is what makes avoiding DRM illegal in some countries.

Also, consider getting engaged with the FSFE, and check out https://www.defectivebydesign.org/

1 Like
20

In my opinion: The only possible way to play DRM ressources on Librem 5 is to use the 32Bit Widevine from the Google-Chrome-Project an include it into a 32 Bit Firefox or Chrome Browser. Thats the way of other Linux ARM distributions …

1 Like
21

Looks like that this only counts for the 32-bit hard-float ARMv7: "aarch64 ChromeOS uses 32bit userspace. For Debian that corresponds to the armhf port."

EDIT: “- Notify user that ARM64 needs 32-bit userspace”

22

Hi Quarnero,

i think still its about extraction of data, cause the Browser with its DRM and the usage of Streaming Netflix, is still some kind of a big Blob. Usual folks will not compile or set up some extra near Nil personal Data usage Browser. to watch some one Film or log in for Netflix and so on.

Personal i think about it like use your Tablet or TV to watch… and hope there is no Camera with I.A. behind the Screen, and try to disassemble the Internet connection of that Device.

1 Like
23

If you take my approach from another perspective, right to have another choice might be taken away (if it isn’t taken away already, as mentioned in my earlier post here, even if this act called or even managed to be implemented through democratic methods/laws). And although here about another subject, I’ll repeat that I do respect your opinion and indeed learn from you (not from the party offering DRM deal, to myself as yet another end-user).

And as quite correlated, I’ll stop watching Formula 1 anyway (let Sky watch it by themselves, although streaming methods not quite comparable)!

I agree, and to be honest (if this thread about my usage scenario) from my side, only when and if I missed some important content from arte, as very fine and from time to time indeed very important streaming content example, my opendreambox 2.6 Ethernet is enabled (and my 50Hz capable streaming monitor doesn’t have any camera built-in anyway, yet include “regular” 60Hz as optional feature that sometimes needed for my usage scenario, when original content/upload to be streamed from my side to YouTube related, for example).