Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The x264 Project Bangs Out A Blu-Ray Encoder

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The x264 Project Bangs Out A Blu-Ray Encoder

    Phoronix: The x264 Project Bangs Out A Blu-Ray Encoder

    While over the past year the FFmpeg project has been working on Blu-ray support, last November MPlayer gained codec support for most Blu-rays and HD-DVDs, Xine-lib gained better Blu-ray disc support, today the first working free software Blu-ray encoder has arrived...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODE3OQ

  • #2
    Well "support" for mplayer is overrated. It is very unlikely that you can buy a new bd and play it directly using libbluray. What matters is m2ts support - and there subtitles are still missing for mplayer. vlc 1.1/git or xbmc can show em. But its really nice to see that x264 can be used to create m2ts, as some bd titles with h264 used very bad encoders, most vc1 encoded titles looked better. also bluray menu support is something that need to be implemented - for those movies which are not just in the biggest file on the disk.

    Comment


    • #3
      as soon as x264/ffmpeg gets complete blu ray support we can expect a flood of shareware/commercial blu ray encoding tools show up. all of which will be freeloading on top of those two tools.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Kano View Post
        its really nice to see that x264 can be used to create m2ts
        Do you even have a clue what you're talking about? Someone with "Debian Developer" as title should be able to differentiate between codec and container.
        x264 can't create M2TS files, because the MPEG2 Transport Stream format is a container format. You can create raw AVC files using x264, which you have to mux into a transport stream using another tool.

        Comment


        • #5
          It is not my "title", i never set this. I am NO debian maintainer of anything. I create Kanotix, that would be correct.

          Certainly you are correct that m2ts is a container but when mplayer is mentioned with bluray support then not the codecs are not the problem but pgs subtitles.

          Btw. do you really need to distinct between x264 (tool) and libx264? The lib can be used by ffmpeg, mencoder or whatever. Also you are not correct that x264 (tool) can only create h264 raw - from h264 -h:
          Outfile type is selected by filename:
          .264 -> Raw bytestream
          .mkv -> Matroska
          .flv -> Flash Video
          .mp4 -> MP4 if compiled with GPAC support (no)
          What holds anybody back to create m2ts output type?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kano View Post
            Also you are not correct that x264 (tool) can only create h264 raw
            I never wrote "can only create raw". Raw output is the requirement for Blu-ray authoring tools. Quote: "Do keep in mind that you have to export to raw H.264 (not MKV or MP4) or else the buffering information will be slightly incorrect."

            Comment


            • #7
              Won't some kind of proprietary copy protection/DRM make commercial BD impossible for FLOSS implementations?

              Just like we had with Lucas Arts DVDs?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                Won't some kind of proprietary copy protection/DRM make commercial BD impossible for FLOSS implementations?

                Just like we had with Lucas Arts DVDs?
                yep. Blu-ray players are forbidden from playing unencrypted BDs, so this doesn't matter for users at all. To clarify, AACS is required but not BD+. There's no chance that x264 or anyone else will be able to duplicate AACS since 1) it's illegal in the largest software dev country in the world (USA), 2) AACS allows for key revocation, so the encryption would have to be completely broken, and 3) AACS is actually really good encryption.

                Blu-rays on Linux... HAHAHAHA

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jbrown96 View Post
                  yep. Blu-ray players are forbidden from playing unencrypted BDs, so this doesn't matter for users at all. To clarify, AACS is required but not BD+. There's no chance that x264 or anyone else will be able to duplicate AACS since 1) it's illegal in the largest software dev country in the world (USA), 2) AACS allows for key revocation, so the encryption would have to be completely broken, and 3) AACS is actually really good encryption.

                  Blu-rays on Linux... HAHAHAHA
                  I suggest you refrain from commenting on this since you clearly don't have any idea about encryption or video players.

                  First off, ENCRYPTION is in NO WAY restricted.... anywhere. USA/DMCA does NOT restrict encryption -- it restricts UNAUTHORIZED DECRYPTION. If you are the one doing the encryption, then you are, by definition, authorized.

                  Secondly, one can know the ENCRYPTION keys withOUT knowing the DECRYPTION keys. It does NOT compromise the encryption for a "for public use" key to be used in the encryption of public materials.

                  Third, JUST WHERE did you come up with the idea that a BD player won't play an unencrypted disk? What a BD player WON'T play is an ENCRYPTED disk that was made AFTER that player had ITS DECRYPT KEYS REVOKED.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jbrown96 View Post
                    yep. Blu-ray players are forbidden from playing unencrypted BDs, so this doesn't matter for users at all. To clarify, AACS is required but not BD+. There's no chance that x264 or anyone else will be able to duplicate AACS since 1) it's illegal in the largest software dev country in the world (USA), 2) AACS allows for key revocation, so the encryption would have to be completely broken, and 3) AACS is actually really good encryption.

                    Blu-rays on Linux... HAHAHAHA
                    AACS... All I can say if F-...

                    Even if somebody was to implement the whole thing, there would be no keys and two patent infringements... *sigh*

                    Well fsck that... happy downloading ripped h.264 movies and put 'em on a DVD. Much better anyway...

                    EDIT: Typo's

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                      I suggest you refrain from commenting on this since you clearly don't have any idea about encryption or video players.

                      First off, ENCRYPTION is in NO WAY restricted.... anywhere. USA/DMCA does NOT restrict encryption -- it restricts UNAUTHORIZED DECRYPTION. If you are the one doing the encryption, then you are, by definition, authorized.

                      Secondly, one can know the ENCRYPTION keys withOUT knowing the DECRYPTION keys. It does NOT compromise the encryption for a "for public use" key to be used in the encryption of public materials.

                      Third, JUST WHERE did you come up with the idea that a BD player won't play an unencrypted disk? What a BD player WON'T play is an ENCRYPTED disk that was made AFTER that player had ITS DECRYPT KEYS REVOKED.
                      You don't understand the encryption system used by AACS. It's a multi-stage AES encryption, which uses symmetric keys. Knowing the encryption process necessarily means you understand the decryption process. Since the work to create an AACS disk would allow for decryption, it's illegal in the USA.
                      While the individual AES steps might not be illegal, the entire process certainly falls under a circumvention device and would be illegal.
                      There are no "for public use" keys available for free. AACS LA is very strict about payment. They would never allow x264 to release their keys for free (beer and/or speech).
                      For disks that have a BD structure (opposed to BD-R structure), AACS is required. Players are forbidden from playing them, largely because they would be illegal copies in 99.9% of cases. You could try to put a BD structure on a BD-R disk, but the players aren't allowed to play it. On a PC, you could probably get by this, but not on a standalone player.

                      Even if we step outside all of the decryption/encryption talk, all of these processes are heavily patent encumbered. While MPEG-LA hasn't stepped in to stop X264, I think that AACS LA would destroy them. MPEG-LA has an interest to foster the creation of H.264; they lose some money on people using free stuff like x264, but they make more money by the increased use of H.264. Large companies buying licenses are where the money is made. AACS LA on the hand depends on the integrity of AACS to sell its product. If anyone can bypass that, then they are irreparably harmed (and I mean a substantial crack, not individual titles/players). They have zero incentive to give away or allow others to create keys "for public use." It undermines the entire security of AACS. When your entire business model is built on security, you tend to take it very seriously.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        AACS was already cracked a loooooooooooong time ago. And then I do not mean just 'a' key, but the motherkey ("of DRM" as it was called). Want proof? Just look at all the sigs of /. users. Some still have them in there.

                        Ever since 'they' just created a new scheme with new keys and the old scheme is now in every new player, along with the new protection just so that old titles can still be played.

                        Ofcourse the reason you can't play new BDs in old BD players that are not linked to the internet is because they are only supporting 'the old spec' <- yeah right, and massive sarcasm!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jbrown96 View Post
                          You don't understand the encryption system used by AACS. It's a multi-stage AES encryption, which uses symmetric keys. Knowing the encryption process necessarily means you understand the decryption process. Since the work to create an AACS disk would allow for decryption, it's illegal in the USA.
                          While the individual AES steps might not be illegal, the entire process certainly falls under a circumvention device and would be illegal.
                          There are no "for public use" keys available for free. AACS LA is very strict about payment. They would never allow x264 to release their keys for free (beer and/or speech).
                          For disks that have a BD structure (opposed to BD-R structure), AACS is required. Players are forbidden from playing them, largely because they would be illegal copies in 99.9% of cases. You could try to put a BD structure on a BD-R disk, but the players aren't allowed to play it. On a PC, you could probably get by this, but not on a standalone player.

                          Even if we step outside all of the decryption/encryption talk, all of these processes are heavily patent encumbered. While MPEG-LA hasn't stepped in to stop X264, I think that AACS LA would destroy them. MPEG-LA has an interest to foster the creation of H.264; they lose some money on people using free stuff like x264, but they make more money by the increased use of H.264. Large companies buying licenses are where the money is made. AACS LA on the hand depends on the integrity of AACS to sell its product. If anyone can bypass that, then they are irreparably harmed (and I mean a substantial crack, not individual titles/players). They have zero incentive to give away or allow others to create keys "for public use." It undermines the entire security of AACS. When your entire business model is built on security, you tend to take it very seriously.
                          Yes I am positive this will definitely prick up the ears of MPEG-LA and AACS-LA's legal team. If this project really gathers steam, there might be the possibility of the DMCA being invoked to stop this. As we have seen with dvdcss there's a lot of legal precedent out there that can kill this.

                          I'm also sure the encryption will be broken, but at the same time the smart hats at AACS-LA will retaliate with a newer encryption process that would necessitate ALL players to have firmware updates

                          I would not ever hook my player to the internet just for the spooks to update it without warning

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                            AACS was already cracked a loooooooooooong time ago. And then I do not mean just 'a' key, but the motherkey ("of DRM" as it was called). Want proof? Just look at all the sigs of /. users. Some still have them in there.

                            Ever since 'they' just created a new scheme with new keys and the old scheme is now in every new player, along with the new protection just so that old titles can still be played.

                            Ofcourse the reason you can't play new BDs in old BD players that are not linked to the internet is because they are only supporting 'the old spec' <- yeah right, and massive sarcasm!
                            And I'm sure that the motherkey's been changed...and everyone and their brother has to update their players. Not a pretty sight!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I'm no developper at all and I'm little at a lost with all this Bluray topic.
                              I still don't very understand some things.
                              You can find in stores BluRay players (the Bluray player for connecting to your TV, in your living room) for less than 150-200 euros (or dollars) that will play all the bluray discs you can feed him, no matter if the Bluray is to be bought in two years.
                              The Bluray player is also not connected to internet, so he can't grab new disc keys or revocate it's keys that are stored in its eeprom but you would have feed it with an uncrypted bluray or whatever.

                              So, knowing that, why is it so hard to find the keys for working for all the Bluray existing and to come and writing down a BluRay reader for linux, just it's exists on DVD ?

                              This post is by no way to mean that it's should be done and is supposed to be easy, it's just to understand why it's so hard.

                              Can't some hacker group buy a cheap Bluray player, pull down the Eeprom contents on PC and apply this to a linux player ?
                              TOTALY ILLEGAL, I know, but it has been done quite fast on DVD, why so much difficulty with bluray, knowing that a stupid bluray player can do it for less than 100 bucks ? (i also know that complexity has no relation with price in this case).

                              And if it's to find the key with brutal force, some grid computing using GPU calculation couldn't do the job in a sizeable time ?!?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X