Solved Will Firefox be able to play prime video? I get error 7235, missing DRM module - "Widevine Content Decryption Module"

Again, and reluctantly, I'll attempt to clarify:

… I don't want to see FreeBSD compromise "the power to serve" operating system security in order to accommodate desktop environments corporate media copyright enforcement software

I conflated desktop environments with DRM in my first post, and have already apologized for it.

I also digressed into a nostalgic trip down memory lane about what FreeBSD was like 20 years ago. This topic is not about 20 years ago. My digression snowballed into yet another small cluster-banger. It had help in doing so. Whether this was done deliberately or not is open for speculation, but this, likewise, is not the topic at hand. It wasn't deliberate on my part.

Zirias was correct by saying that FreeBSD is not a "server OS," but rather, it is a "general-purpose" OS, and he was correct by correcting me on this point. Thanks. I appreciate it.

I believe that allowing Widevine to have parity, or peer status, with the core OS, would be a serious security compromise. I think that this is the basic reason why Widevine won't work-- because it can't, or won't, conform to the FreeBSD core's security definitiion and requirements, probably because Widevine is literally trying to invasively become part of the core OS. I could be wrong about this on any point or points, but I don't think I'm too far off on most points. It seems obvious. If I'm wrong, you're welcome to try and prove that I am, preferably in a different thread, a thread which doesn't need to quote me out of context, or even mention my handle.

I'm retired, lazy, probably getting senile, and I'm not going to make a big project out of trying to prove this hypothesis. I didn't make an assertion of it. I stipulated that my understanding was peripheral, right from the start. I'm not going to do anybody's homework on this. i don't really care that much. I was only making a suggestion in hopes of contributing to a better understanding of "why Widevine probably isn't welcome here," which doesn't seem to be very well understood by some (not all) proponents of adding a desktop environment to the core, or by some who are unhappy with their own difficulties in configuring FreeBSD to work with foreign and Linux-derived desktop systems. I had difficulties with it too. I worked all my own problems out. It took time, patience, and a willingness to study already-available information.

I hope Widevine will not be made available on FreeBSD soon. Or ever. Emphatically.

I stand by my points about not mixing Linux-derived desktop software with server software in live working environments. But that's not the topic here either. Nothing inherently wrong with Linux-derived software on it's own, but it is, and should be, in ports, and not part of the core system.

Please stop quoting me out of context. I don't need any more "likes" and will not be persuaded by them.

I try to be helpful when I can, but this is no longer so much big fun for me. I'll neither initiate nor participate in any further topic derailments of this already resolved thread. This thread should be over now, because its question was answered early in the thread. But don't let me stop anyone from piling on, and trying to get their last words in.
 
probably because Widevine is literally trying to invasively become part of the core OS
It's just a userspace shared library. Those content decryption modules are a moderate privacy concern due to potential fingerprinting (I'd start with hiding the FreeBSD-specific browser user agent string if I were you, though) and a code injection vector. The browser vendors decided to mitigate the latter part by sandboxing, which is not implemented on FreeBSD. That is the real issue there, rather than some vague "proprietary code is bad for security" angle.

I'm retired, lazy, probably getting senile, and I'm not going to make a big project out of trying to prove this hypothesis. I didn't make an assertion of it. I stipulated that my understanding was peripheral, right from the start. I'm not going to do anybody's homework on this. i don't really care that much. I was only making a suggestion in hopes of contributing to a better understanding of "why Widevine probably isn't welcome here," which doesn't seem to be very well understood by some (not all) proponents of adding a desktop environment to the core, or by some who are unhappy with their own difficulties in configuring FreeBSD to work with foreign and Linux-derived desktop systems. I had difficulties with it too. I worked all my own problems out. It took time, patience, and a willingness to study already-available information.
"I don't know what I'm talking about, but, please, don't argue with me."
 
Sometimes I wonder why I even bother explaining anything in good faith on this forum.

Sometimes I wonder about how could have happened that you have explained something comprehensively on this forum. How did you manage to find the motivation to do it. You know, usually your behavior seems like the academic half hour that professors often allow themselves. Sometimes they don't even come to class. You are a strict professor who knows how to be loved.
 
I think there should be, a middle of the field, between these communications. an implementation of an API, with BSD license, of course preserving. that is not so intrusive. you are stuck with a thought. today FreeBSD has several implementations some of Linux, but it always has a way, in fact this is an operating system, you who are old. has to stop with this mentality that can not not, to a certain extent the code is open, to do as it pleases. so i don't agree with that
 
I know this can happen, but just someone come to work and change that. there's a way to do that. in FreeBSD, which is not so permissive as that, calling some calls from systems. this is already a scope for an unofficial project, today we have several unofficial projects on github. and I support
 
Back
Top