Status of Bluray on Linux

iBertus · 2010-09-04 05:30:06

Hi Guys,

I was walking around my local big box electronics retailer today and noticed that Bluray drives have really dropped in price. The prices have come down enough to make me start to think about dropping one in my machine to use for backing up photos. I started googling and realized that the current status of Bluray support on Linux is complicated. I don't really care about playing back movies (although this would be nice) and really just want to use it to burn data discs. My question is just how difficult this is to accomplish on Linux.

Mr.Black · 2010-09-04 07:27:09

I'm not sure about the playback part, but apparently Cdrtools (Cdrecord) has support for blu-ray now since version 3.00 released in June, k3b has support for it as well (obviously just a frontend for cdrtools). So it looks like you'd be able to burn them now without getting Nero Linux . Unfortunately thats all I can find which does look good enough to me, however its hard to find info on all of this, there is very little feedback out there regarding Linux and blu-ray.

Here it is straight from the horse's mouth:

cdrtools: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/R-3.0.html

k3b: http://k3b.plainblack.com/k3b-news/k3b- … 0-released

brasero: Unknown, haven't seen/heard anything.

Last edited by Mr.Black (2010-09-04 07:35:30)

LeCrayonVert · 2010-09-04 09:27:37

Have a look at http://lxbdplayer.sourceforge.net/english.html
lxbdplayer is available on AUR http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37924
k3b supports blu-ray since 2.0

Last edited by LeCrayonVert (2010-09-04 09:30:58)

zenlord · 2010-09-04 09:44:05

just remove cdrkit and install cdrtools and you're all set.

BaconPie · 2010-12-27 19:00:14

So, erm, what (and more importantly why) is the status of Bluray on Linux? I do want to play movies.

What are my options if I were to buy a BD-player.

ConnorBehan · 2010-12-29 23:03:27

The why is easy: Bluray movies are full of DRM and any attempts to play them on Linux require a lot of reverse engineering.

For the most up-to-date status, you are probably better off asking on Doom9, but I'll give it a shot.

Playing a Bluray movie on Linux is obviously not an easy task. The first thing you should check is whether the movie only has AACS encryption. For titles released before 2007 this is usually the case. These types of movies can be decrypted with programs like DumpHD and then the huge resulting files can be played back in any media player.

Titles released in 2007 or later are much harder because they usually contain BD+. Most people use Slysoft software (which is closed source and not for Linux) to crack BD+. The only free and open source solution that I'm aware of is libbluray which can play BD+ discs from 2008 and earlier. It hasn't been updated since then. For 2009 and later, I *think* there is still no open source way to do it but I could be wrong.

Please do not confuse the aforementioned libbluray with the libbluray that is part of the VideoLan project. Even though this libbluray has received recent updates, it does not make any attempt at playing encrypted movies. It can only play Bluray movies that have no encryption (which is almost NONE of them). Personally I don't know why open source developers would create such confusion by naming their project "libbluray" when another "libbluray" already existed. The fact that they are advertising this library's inability to crack DRM as if this is a good thing makes me think that this group has been compromised.

Anyway my advice is: unless you know ALOT, don't buy a Bluray drive to play movies if the only OS you use is Linux!

BaconPie · 2010-12-29 23:44:01

ConnorBehan wrote:

Anyway my advice is: unless you know ALOT, don't buy a Bluray drive to play movies if the only OS you use is Linux!

So, because the movies are encrypted there is no way to play them? Why make a format that cannot be played?

I don't care too much for the politics of FOSS; I use plenty of closed source goods. I just want to play BD's. If it can happen on Windows, then why can't it happen on Linux? Just because my kernel is open source doesn't mean everything else on my computer has to be.

What a mess.

Last edited by BaconPie (2010-12-29 23:44:50)

SS4 · 2010-12-30 00:25:15

BaconPie wrote:

ConnorBehan wrote:
Anyway my advice is: unless you know ALOT, don't buy a Bluray drive to play movies if the only OS you use is Linux!
So, because the movies are encrypted there is no way to play them? Why make a format that cannot be played?
I don't care too much for the politics of FOSS; I use plenty of closed source goods. I just want to play BD's. If it can happen on Windows, then why can't it happen on Linux? Just because my kernel is open source doesn't mean everything else on my computer has to be.
What a mess.

It's not the fact it's not open source but because no company is developing software for Linux since users are generally unwilling to pay much, if any, money.

As for my opinion on blu ray I'm not too bothered since I have a blu ray player but I would like to make backups of hd video

ConnorBehan · 2010-12-30 01:56:05

If that's the case, I suggest you email the makers of WinDVD and PowerDVD saying you'll be willing to pay for the use of Bluray playback software for Linux. They ported their DVD players to Linux. Who knows? Maybe they'll do the same for BD eventually.

Gusar · 2010-12-30 11:46:50

The libbluray from the VideoLan project can indeed only play decrypted dics. But, and this is very important, the same libbluray can at runtime load libaacs and libbdplus, two other projects hosted at VideoLan, and as their names imply, they facilitate disc decryption. So there's no conspiracy theories here. *rolls eyes*

Also, while Slysoft's AnyDVD HD is Windows only, there's another popular decrypter, and this one comes with a Linux version too - MakeMKV: http://www.makemkv.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=224. Unlike what it's name implies, the software is also capable of a full Blu-ray rip and of on-the-fly decryption.

So while watching Blu-rays is not yet as simple as playing DVDs, despite players (mplayer, XBMC, MythTV) directly supporting libbluray+libaacs, it's not nearly as gloomy as ConnorBehan describes it.

Last edited by Gusar (2010-12-30 11:49:56)

BaconPie · 2010-12-30 12:50:47

ConnorBehan wrote:

...saying you'll be willing to pay for the use of Bluray playback software for Linux.

I wouldn't be willing to pay. I don't pay for DVD playback.

Gusar wrote:

The libbluray from the VideoLan project can indeed only play decrypted dics. But, and this is very important, the same libbluray can at runtime load libaacs and libbdplus, two other projects hosted at VideoLan, and as their names imply, they facilitate disc decryption. So there's no conspiracy theories here. *rolls eyes*

This makes more sense. I'll do some more digging around MakeMKV. Thanks.

ConnorBehan · 2010-12-30 18:43:09

Gusar wrote:

Also, while Slysoft's AnyDVD HD is Windows only, there's another popular decrypter, and this one comes with a Linux version too - MakeMKV

Oh thanks. I didn't know about MakeMKV. Of course the component of it that actually does the decryption is closed source so I wouldn't be thrilled to have to use it regularly.

BaconPie wrote:

If it can happen on Windows, then why can't it happen on Linux?

BaconPie wrote:

I wouldn't be willing to pay. I don't pay for DVD playback.

You just answered your own question. The only reason you have the option of not paying for DVD playback is because open source enthusiasts expended a lot of time and effort beating the encryption scheme. Expect the same for BD.

Gusar wrote:

The libbluray from the VideoLan project can indeed only play decrypted dics. But, and this is very important, the same libbluray can at runtime load libaacs and libbdplus, two other projects hosted at VideoLan, and as their names imply, they facilitate disc decryption. So there's no conspiracy theories here. *rolls eyes*

That depends on what you mean by hosted. Libbluray and libaacs are made available for download by anyone at VideoLan and they can play a Bluray disc with no BD+ as long as you use one of the exploits to obtain a non-revoked key yourself. So at the very best, these allow you to use the functionality that existed before VideoLan took over maintainership. Libbdplus is NOT released and as far as I'm concerned until it is released it might as well not exist. The reason for its non-disclosure could be anything from "we have not made any progress in reverse-engineering BD+ and we don't want to embarrass ourselves" to "lobbyists are paying us not to release it."

Gusar · 2010-12-30 19:26:38

ConnorBehan wrote:

The reason for its non-disclosure could be anything from "we have not made any progress in reverse-engineering BD+ and we don't want to embarrass ourselves" to "lobbyists are paying us not to release it."

LOL. Seriously, LOL.
You really think lobbyist have any sort of control over an open-source project hosted in France? And if they did, it would be targeted at libbdplus only and not at libaacs and libbluray too?

The reason it isn't released yet is probably much simpler - it's hard to make a solid BD+ engine. One that will be tamper-proof (some Avatar versions targeted specifically the MakeMKV BD+ engine). And there doesn't seem to be much interest form the open-source community to work on Blu-ray stuff. It kinda died when AnyDVD HD and MakeMKV entered the scene. I guess people are simply too content with simply using those.

Oh, and there's this: Only Fox uses BD+. So there's quite a bit of Blu-rays out there that libbluray+libaacs can handle. Well, if you can get the keys for the latest MKBs that is, there haven't been any new processing key discoveries for some time now. Some people do have ways to get keys, but they haven't disclosed them.

ConnorBehan · 2010-12-30 21:24:53

Oh absolutely. If VLC included a processing key in libaacs and put it in their git repos on DD-MM-YYYY, the developers would not be able to play Blurays released after DD-MM-YYYY anymore. Telling people the keys you've found is stupid and that's the way it's going to stay until there is a reliable code like libdvdcss to find the key on the spot every time a disc is inserted.

But I really don't think it needs to be that way with libbdplus. A key is one thing, but software itself can't do any good if no one has it. Yes some titles will look for tell-tale signs of the BD+ engine being used (just like some versions of MS office look for a wine registry key), so it may be a vulnerable library during the early stages of its release but a vulnerable library is better than no library.

Gusar wrote:

Only Fox uses BD+.

Oh, I thought Warner Bros did too but I'll take your word for it. That's good news I guess.

Gusar · 2010-12-31 11:48:29

ConnorBehan wrote:

Oh absolutely. If VLC included a processing key in libaacs and put it in their git repos on DD-MM-YYYY, the developers would not be able to play Blurays released after DD-MM-YYYY anymore. Telling people the keys you've found is stupid and that's the way it's going to stay until there is a reliable code like libdvdcss to find the key on the spot every time a disc is inserted.

New MKBs are used every few months anyway, so no, it's not stupid to release processing keys for previous MKBs.

ConnorBehan wrote:

Gusar wrote:
Only Fox uses BD+.
Oh, I thought Warner Bros did too but I'll take your word for it. That's good news I guess.

Hmm, you know, I'd have to check. Historically it was only Fox. I think it's still only Fox, but if someone has links that say my info is outdated, please post.

ConnorBehan · 2010-12-31 17:17:32

Gusar wrote:

New MKBs are used every few months anyway, so no, it's not stupid to release processing keys for previous MKBs.

Oh well then my criticism stands. I roll my eyes at those who could easily release these keys but don't just as I roll them at the developers of libbdplus.

Gusar wrote:

Hmm, you know, I'd have to check. Historically it was only Fox. I think it's still only Fox, but if someone has links that say my info is outdated, please post.

On closer inspection the Warner Bros films I was thinking of had Fox as a distributor, just not the studio, so you're right. In my search, I did find this http://hd.engadget.com/2009/04/29/param … crovision/ which might be a sign of things to come.

R00KIE · 2010-12-31 17:28:26

On the issue of using bluray on linux it's as Mr.Black and zenlord say, just use cdrtools and it should work (I haven't tested it myself though, I don't own a bluray drive) but the cdrtools author does release regular updates and bluray should have been supported for quite a while now.

On the issue of video playback ... bluray is full of drm, it's not that there isn't people smart enough to figure out out to bypass all the drm, its more like anyone releasing code that would be able to bypass all or most of the drm would be convicted to several lifetimes of damage awards, just look at the dvd and css case that has been in courts until not many years ago, so don't expect a lot of progress on that.

People may not mind running closed source software but there are a few catches, it keeps the knowledge only for a few people, it is subject to breakage when system libraries or the kernel change and it will be supported only as long as the "knowledgeable/enlightened" people want or deem necessary (will you be able to use the media you bought in 5, 10 or 15 years on the OS you will be using then?).

Because the source is closed you cannot know if it compromises your system security in any (obvious) way, I know this is sort of a moot point, no one reviews all the code anyway, but at least open source code can be reviewed by anyone that so desires and anyone can submit a patch to fix problems (just take the case of flash and adobe reader as examples, exploits are discovered regularly and no one expect adobe can try to solve the problems, which they do only when they feel like doing so). All of these limitations/impositions of closed source software are not in line with the spirit of open source software and that is why most of us decided to use linux, however we have to be willing to pay the price of having more freedom, this usually translates in not being able experience the latest drm encumbered trends.

paulburton · 2011-01-05 16:15:24

I just uploaded PKGBUILDs for aacskeys and dumphd to AUR, and this shell script will play back a bluray disc in VLC

Use it as:

vlcray /media/discName

Note I've only tried one disc so far!

fphillips · 2011-01-06 06:43:18

http://aur.pastebin.com/kAFF9yNb

Here is a PKGBUILD for libaacs, useful for MythTV users, mplayer-bluray, and probably XBMC and VLC, too.

If someone wants to maintain libaacs-git in AUR, please do.

ConnorBehan · 2011-01-06 22:12:09

I also don't count dumphd as a long term solution because it's Java!

skottish · 2011-01-09 17:02:53

paulburton wrote:

I just uploaded PKGBUILDs for aacskeys and dumphd to AUR, and this shell script will play back a bluray disc in VLC
Use it as:
vlcray /media/discName
Note I've only tried one disc so far!

Your PKGBUILD for aacskeys is broken. You have unnecessary stuff everywhere, you didn't handle the paths correctly, and you didn't deal with alternate versions of Java. This package has no place in the AUR in it's current state.

ConnorBehan wrote:

I also don't count dumphd as a long term solution because it's Java!

Yes, I too can see the imminent demise of Java. Within 40 to 50 years, it's possible that it's going away...

-->><<--

makemkv works, but you need a lot of disc space, patience, and trust. The stuff being posted at doom9 is interesting, but it's far from convenient.

paulburton · 2011-01-09 17:15:28

skottish wrote:

Your PKGBUILD for aacskeys is broken. You have unnecessary stuff everywhere, you didn't handle the paths correctly, and you didn't deal with alternate versions of Java. This package has no place in the AUR in it's current state.

OK, care to tell elaborate a little? I know there were some unnecessary variables which are just left from the PKGBUILD template (provides, conflicts etc.) but that's hardly a problem, and I just removed them. If you were referring to the java path, good point, it now uses JAVA_HOME. If not, what paths do you mean?

With regards to java I'm not exactly it's biggest fan either, but it is necessary for bluray anyway if menus etc are to be supported at some point as they are built using java...

Last edited by paulburton (2011-01-09 17:17:43)

sandstorm · 2011-01-09 17:19:33

I would also be interested. I can not wait until it works and I can buy my first Blueray.

I just cleaned up my DVDs and saw that I already bought a bunch of them. Time for a change ...

skottish · 2011-01-09 18:22:50

paulburton wrote:

skottish wrote:
Your PKGBUILD for aacskeys is broken. You have unnecessary stuff everywhere, you didn't handle the paths correctly, and you didn't deal with alternate versions of Java. This package has no place in the AUR in it's current state.
OK, care to tell elaborate a little? I know there were some unnecessary variables which are just left from the PKGBUILD template (provides, conflicts etc.) but that's hardly a problem, and I just removed them. If you were referring to the java path, good point, it now uses JAVA_HOME. If not, what paths do you mean?

I'm impressed that you're moving so quickly. Nice.

You should use java-runtime or java-environment depending on usage instead of jdk or java in your PKGBUILDs. openjdk6 is the default Java environment for Arch, but many use the other.

Anyway,

paulburton, since you seem to know this software, I seem to missing something. Are aacskeys and dumphd enough to get all of the information necessary? The thread over at doom9 left me feeling like there is one more piece of the puzzle.

paulburton · 2011-01-09 18:32:36

skottish wrote:

You should use java-runtime or java-environment depending on usage instead of jdk or java in your PKGBUILDs. openjdk6 is the default Java environment for Arch, but many use the other.

Done, java-environment it is.

skottish wrote:

paulburton, since you seem to know this software, I seem to missing something. Are aacskeys and dumphd enough to get all of the information necessary? The thread over at doom9 left me feeling like there is one more piece of the puzzle.

I don't know it all that well, just got my blu-ray drive last week and started playing. Anyway, aacskeys and dumphd are enough to handle discs which use older MKB (Media Key Block) versions, up to version 10 I believe. Newer discs won't work, and I currently fall back to using makemkv for those... There is also software called BDVM debugger that is necessary if the disc uses the extra BD+ DRM. I haven't looked at that, as I don't have any discs that use BD+ yet.

Arch Linux

#1 2010-09-04 05:30:06

Status of Bluray on Linux

#2 2010-09-04 07:27:09

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#3 2010-09-04 09:27:37

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#4 2010-09-04 09:44:05

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#5 2010-12-27 19:00:14

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#6 2010-12-29 23:03:27

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#7 2010-12-29 23:44:01

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#8 2010-12-30 00:25:15

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#9 2010-12-30 01:56:05

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#10 2010-12-30 11:46:50

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#11 2010-12-30 12:50:47

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#12 2010-12-30 18:43:09

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#13 2010-12-30 19:26:38

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#14 2010-12-30 21:24:53

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#15 2010-12-31 11:48:29

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#16 2010-12-31 17:17:32

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#17 2010-12-31 17:28:26

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#18 2011-01-05 16:15:24

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#19 2011-01-06 06:43:18

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#20 2011-01-06 22:12:09

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#21 2011-01-09 17:02:53

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#22 2011-01-09 17:15:28

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#23 2011-01-09 17:19:33

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#24 2011-01-09 18:22:50

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

#25 2011-01-09 18:32:36

Re: Status of Bluray on Linux

Board footer