Reverse-Engineering YouTube: Revisited
tyrrrz.me
tyrrrz.me
Haha. This is not as universal as the author thinks. Every time I need to reverse-engineer something obscured on purpose, I wish we could just get along.
Every time I have to reverse-engineer something obscured by accident, I call it debugging.
But even if I solve the puzzle, it's like solving crosswords: I just defeated a human mind, the victory is transient, and will soon be forgotten. I'd prefer my victories to be against the frontier of knowledge, and to win universal truths. That means building things rather than tearing down those humans built.
I just wish there was more mathematical certainty and less human vices in programming.
And what you're describing as happening in practice is precisely the disappointing part of prgramming.
In South Korea, a company with known software vulnerabilities is fined everyday until they fix it. Gives incentive to making sure software does the right thing before it gets shipped.
You wouldn't need to tear down barriers if the people that built them thought the same in the first place. Nonetheless, keep up that attitude.
POST /youtubei/v1/player HTTP/1.1
Host: www.youtube.com
Authorization: Bearer ya29.a0AVvZVsqRwNWFI3R0MSxnugyNlxbqIOXcwXkeA6NMOcpv_...
{
"contentCheckOk": true,
"context": {
"client": {
"clientName": "ANDROID",
"clientVersion": "18.04.35"
}
},
"racyCheckOk": true,
"videoId": "Cr381pDsSsA"
}
and `TVHTML5_SIMPLY_EMBEDDED_PLAYER` comes with strong drawbacks. Some videos under that client require a JavaScript signature for BOTH downloading and unthrottling. Each person is welcome to their own opinion, but I just dont think its worth the complexity of parsing some arbitrary JavaScript with Python when you can just log in (programmatically as above). Personally I use the ANDROID client, which avoids all JavaScript signatures. Also not mentioned in the article is that you can actually take the throttled URLs as is, and download pieces concurrently for a pretty good result. So each piece is still downloading slowly, but if you use on the order of 99 connections, you get decent speed. You would think you get IP blocked or something for this, but I downloaded quite a bit using this method as a test and the YouTube server allowed it. The combined resultant speed was only something like 2 MB/s, so big picture it doesn't seem like an abuse. My YouTube OAuth code is here for any interested:> Also not mentioned in the article is that you can actually take the throttled URLs as is, and download pieces concurrently for a pretty good result.
The author mentioned both, the login option as well as the chunking mechanism. Sorry, but did you actually read the blog post?
each person can weigh the pros and cons and make their own decision, but I dont think its as black and white that TVHTML5_SIMPLY_EMBEDDED_PLAYER is the best option, and the article doesn't even discuss OAuth, so I dont think its presenting a balanced take on the different approaches.
Anyone who is hosting on YouTube is looking for a free service.
https://archive.org/help/video.php is also “free”.
Unfortunately mpv and ffmpeg do not currently have mature DASH support and cannot benefit from fast seeks: https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/issues/7033 (didn't look deeply)
throttling is not avoided. the YouTube web client generates a JavaScript signature that disables the throttling, same as what the code in the article does.
https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/issues/29326#issuecom...
"server heavily throttles any request to same URL after initial 2-4MB regardless of retries.
&n is only part of the puzzle. While bad or no &n will indeed trigger 50KB/s throttling, even correct &n only lets you download at most couple megabytes at good speed. Try any video in official YT client and you will see repeated URL request with different &range= parameters all use same &n, but trying to download that URL all at once will always throttle after initial ~2-4MB.
The correct solution (after generating correct &n) is to start using custom URL &range= parameters instead of normal HTTP range headers and default to downloading in 2MB chunks."
That was the case in 2021. I just checked newest "fixed" yt-dlp and if you change chunk size from default 10MB to 100MB you will quickly notice throttling is STILL there kicking right around that 2-4MB mark, but instead of brutal 50KB/s its somewhere around 1MB/s. Default Chunk size of 10MB somewhat helps to mask/hide it by smoothing jumping up and down transfer. youtube-dl (im shocked its still updated, cant download .exe, have to download zip and run "python.exe __main__.py"?) just silently ignores "--http-chunk-size 100000000" altogether and keeps downloading in 10MB chunks to hide the problem. "--print-traffic" shows 10MB chunks.
This is for all stream types other than 22 (mp4 1280x720 avc1.64001F, 30fps, mp4a.40.2). 22 seems to be special and with proper &n= you can slurp whole file with one connection without additional throttling, probably for backward compatibility with older clients?
TLDR: You can still download YT videos IF you chop them up into small chunks. Playing back without chopping up into chunks somewhat "works" because 1MB/s=10Mbit is still above thickest juiciest bitrate YT would ever serve, but problems become obvious when you start fast forwarding/skipping around the video (1-3 second pauses in mplayer). Playing type 22 works great and seeking is instant.
"Personally I use mplayer to stream YT and am currently on a lookout for a simple proxy server I could modify to do the above (divide into chunks, rewrite HTTP range header into URL parameter) for me transparently in the background."
In their client-side code, they provide a worked example of how to use their API. That's hardly the way to keep a secret.
These days they use special hardware accelerators: https://gwern.net/doc/cs/hardware/2021-ranganathan.pdf
Well, kids being clever figured out the Chromebook browser shows a preview video if you hit the 'share' button and go to embed video. This is not content blocked. I didn't dig in to see if it would play age restricted content as I assume all access is being logged somewhere and want to minimize future fall out.