On 171012-05:58+0300, m712 wrote: > My account had 'nomail' set for a while so I can't reply to the original, so > I'm replying over Enrico's message. > > On 23.09.2017 10:51, Miroslav Rovis wrote: > > > >of google's intrusivity; they can put most any spyware in videos, and I'm > >looking for the knowhow how to safely deal with Youtube videos, a very hard > >to > >gain knowledge, very advanced... not nearly there, not even in my dreams > >there > >yet... Your reply is great: > You can work over that by disabling Youtube JS and then adding a plugin to > parse the Youtube JS and get the video link. youtube-dl does exactly this > (they have a really tiny jsinterp.py file which can extract variables. It > doesn't execute any code, and has no control flow). You can bundle the latest > version of youtube-dl in an addon which rewrites the YouTube page to contain > a simple native browser video and video information only, and then update it > every time youtube-dl is updated. This would prevent users to comment, but if > they really want to comment they'll need to turn on JS. > Or if you're lazy you can redirect youtube to HookTube. > --- :^) --- :^) --- :^) --- :^) --- :^) --- :^) --- :^) --- :^) --- > https://nextchan.org - https://gitgud.io/m712/blazechan > I am awake between 7AM-12AM UTC, hit me up if something's wrong
I'll study your suggestions as soon as I find time to. In fact, I mostly download videos via Youtube-dl anyway. Currently I don't care much about commenting. But... ...But what I actually meant is they can put things in the video proper. That's what I meant, not the JS, although of course controling JS, by addons or, unattainable for long here if ever, by means of understanding all that the scripts do, is very necessary and desirable too. But the Schmoog's Youtube (Youtube was way more honest before the Schmoog bought it in 2013 or around that year) is not like Vimeo, where once you upload the video you can post the SHA512 sum of it somewhere for people, and once they download it, they do get the exact same video that you posted, and they can even be near-absolutely sure they do, if you PGP-sign your SHA512 of it as well. No such thing with the Goog the stinking Schmoog... And so, with the Schmoog, how do you verify the content of the video is clean? (Mind that we are talking the most dangerous spies of the world here. The Dirt of the dirt, the Schmoog...) Got my point? Regards! -- Miroslav Rovis Zagreb, Croatia https://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
