OPERATION BACKUP

[archive.ph/FudZS] theregister.co.uk/2019/07/03/youtube_bans_hacking_videos/

You can use youtube-dl with a playlist
For example, click on the "video uploaded -> play all" from someone and it will put all their uploaded videos ever in a playlist, then you can use this link to fetch everything (mind your diskspace)

Someone make a big text file with thousands of worth-saving files.

Just archive whole channels. These are the most relevant ones I've been able to find:

youtube.com/user/ChRiStIaAn008/videos
youtube.com/user/HackersOnBoard/videos
youtube.com/user/DEFCONConference/videos
youtube.com/user/mediacccde/videos
youtube.com/user/Channel2600/videos

There were two interesting videos from HOPE about key disclosure law and obstruction of justice when deleting shit with an EFF lawyer but I've been unable to find them.

Cool. One correction though, youtube-dl chooses the best quality by default.

This one got a few
youtube.com/channel/UCM26-TUcgpp-9e0Quxbyqdw/videos

Backing up old hacks is useless

Just an FYI, the Archive Team has been aware of this issue and have been currently aiding to archiving, but their archive bot is currently full in queries.

Few more
youtube.com/user/SecurityHackingVideo/videos
youtube.com/channel/UC5xaWxNU6Oh8aIUSbUCRlig/videos
youtube.com/user/SecurityTubeCons/videos
Oops, maybe it wasn't from HOPE, it probably were these ones from Shmoocon
youtube.com/watch?v=w_fndqxWZWI
youtube.com/watch?v=LzssKvRwrzQ

Some of them are good just for their entertainment value. Plus some workflow ideas and concepts still apply after the things have been patched.

This program seems to download a whole channel first (at least, maybe all URLs fed to it, haven't gotten there yet), and only then begin uploading. There's no reason why this should be the case, you could download videos individually so you don't need to have lots of storage to download a big channel.

CAVEAT:
"best" does not equal "highest quality" for youtube-dl in all cases.
youtube-dl considers certain factors when deciding what is defined as 'best', and is not infallible. If you want to automatically download the highest quality videos it is better to script the process than rely on it picking for you.
e.g. the "best" option may select 720p when 1080p is available, it may select variant formats (e.g. [ogg audio + mp4 video] OR [m4a audio + webm video] = mkv file instead of mp4/webm), it may pick a standard resolution over the originally uploaded resolution....etc.

If you use Jdownloader or something similar, you can download and entire channel's videos just by feeding it the channel URL. I was doing that with Tranny Phantom's (Randy Stair's) channel as Youtube was deleting it, and only lost two videos as they were deleted mid-download.

[x] Doubt
Don't see a problem there, as long as it results in the best quality audio + best quality video, which is likely to be made of mismatched codecs when youtube transcodes from the original video to various bitrates and codecs and doesn't offer access to the original.
Has youtube ever upscaled videos? I don't remember ever seeing that. If you have a standard res and a higher but non-standard res I bet youtube-dl would pick the highest one. I doubt you can write a script that'll do a better job of choosing than the developer of youtube-dl.

Bumping this thread as important.

In the past, there has been cases when content has been deleted from archive.org (these might have been a DMCA claim, however.) but having an archive is always better than not having one.

this.

Good.

Stop doubting and use youtube-dl enough to know from experience then.
You not seeing a problem - is the problem. YouTube will always transcode to have a matching pair (m4a, mp4) (ogg,webm) available. youtube-dl sometimes selects a mismatching pair even when a matching pair is available. It's rare but does happen.

Obviously.
e.g. 854x640 is picked by youtube-dl when the original is 640x640 resulting in needless black bars on either side of the square format. 854x640 does not equal "best" in such cases.

Obviously.
Your "best" does not equal someone else's "best" which does not equal youtube-dl's "best". This variance (i.e. preferences) requires scripting.
From the youtube-dl manual: "By default youtube-dl tries to download the best available quality, i.e. if you want the best quality you don't need to pass any special options, youtube-dl will guess it for you by default."
Sometimes it guesses correctly, sometimes it doesn't. You may take what it gives, others with standards decide for themselves and tell it via scripting.

pebkac obviously.

It used to pick a shitty resolution by default a while ago, and the "best" resolution picker might've been flawed. Then they changed it so it'd pick the best by default, and maybe improved that functionality. Plus sometimes youtube changes break it and it picks shitty resolutions like 720. Maybe you have an old version. Don't use the one on the Ubuntu/Debian repos, for something as fast moving as youtube you should install the one from their git repo and update before using it with the -U switch
Yes. But why do you assume there's a pair with both the best video AND audio? Most likely you will find the best video in one pair, and the best audio in another pair, leading to incompatible formats that are merged into mkv if you want both the best video and audio.

I see this as a necessary requirement if using youtube-dl.

wut? The manual says it will guess faggot. What it guesses "best" is may be different to what you think "best" is - which is why anons script it.

Utter tripe. You use the word "if" because you have no idea and are guessing. I stated from experience.
youtube-dl will pick the larger 854x640 resolution because it cannot see the video content and must assume the 640x640 is a cropped version missing content even when this is not the case.

No need to backup DefCon, all their videos are available from their site through torrents, discs, and direct downloads, at least from my understanding.

No, I used the word "if" because only if you actually try it yourself by downloading videos with different aspect ratios there's any hope for you to stop talking out of your ass although you're probably retarded enough to fuck it up somehow.
It's not my fault you have the IQ of a chimpanzee and thought a video uploaded by a user with black bars meant youtube added the black bars when encoding it. The resolutions offered for download always keep the original aspect ratio, except for some of the mobile ones, which will never be picked by youtube-dl because they're of a lower bitrate and resolution than the other ones.
Yes, and in my previous post I explained to you why your script would have to guess too, so it wouldn't be any better than youtube-dl's internal algorithm. Because in some cases there's no way to determine which version is of a higher quality without downloading both and comparing them visually, not because youtube-dl guesses when it could know for sure before downloading anything. Or are you too retarded to comprehend basic arithmetic?
No, that's not what "guessing" means in this context. It means that even when there's a clear objective difference in quality between both files, when the difference between the bitrates (adjusted by the efficiency ratio I mentioned earlier) is under a certain threshold, there's no way to know which one of the files is of higher quality (objective OR subjective) without doing a visual inspection. There's no way to script thatunless you downloaded both and ran them through a neural net.

Then how does mpv do it?
It always auto-picks the highest resolution and most recent as in, vp9 or later formats.

Attached: allisbotnet_orlycover.png (500x700, 120.11K)

It guesses based on the factors you mentioned, plus bitrate. But it won't always pick the highest quality one if the qualities are very similar, because those three factors (bitrate, resolution and codec efficiency) are just proxies for actual quality (fidelity to the source file). For any resolution,bitrate,codec triplet the quality of the outcome will vary based on the codec settings (aka profile) and the nature of the source footage. Some codecs deal better with some kinds of content than others.

...

Do we have a repo/ftp/archive?

Post the URL of the video then.

setup a peertube server
joinpeertube.org/en/

saged & ignored.

Pro tip for downloading shit in parallel: go to the user's channel videos, scroll to the bottom, export as text in firefox. Open in kwrite, run this regex in search and replace to remove everything but the links
([^[\>]+)(?:$|\

I made no claim faggot. I stated. Learn the difference. The other user was claiming what I've seen doesn't happen.
Faggot confirmed.

I don't know what that is, sorry.
Both words mean the same thing bro.

it's real scummy of these companies to let creators build a brand on current rules and guidelines, just to pull the rug right under them. I really hope they pissed off the wrong audience this time.

As of now, Youtube might inadvertently become the biggest antisec threat actor yet.

You were told from the beginning.
But everyone who said so was "just a tinfoilhead" or a "conspiretard" and corporations will hold forever.
Centralisation of data always leads to exactly this.

Is there a way to backup whole channels (all of a channel's vids basically) in one go? Manually going one-by one is quite tedious.
Also, what is the least retarded/convoluted way to control the quality of the streams which are selected for the downloaded copy of the video?

yes mega is good if you want that no one can access the files. might as well not backup them if you are going to put them there.

better not if you dont have access to high speed internet. and i dont mean the normal stuff that anyone can get. dont even try if you cant get at least 100gbps.

doesnt sound very reliable to me. videos could be lost anytime because they are centralized instead of being distributed to all nodes.

Attached: a_000.png (959x553, 94.65K)

Nice way of writing a whole page of text without actually saying anything. I hope these people aren't the same who write the code.

>youtube.com/user/Channel2600/videos
youtube.com/watch?v=A1083xLLvOE
Oh wow

You can select playlists
--yes-playlist
(I think)

Attached: ohdearanitagamergate.gif (256x234, 2.67M)

Attached: Selection_235.png (1036x792, 367.09K)

Yeah, 2600 and Chaos Computer Club are leftie shitholes nowadays. Still have some interesting technical talks though.

I believe you can just pass the channel url instead of video url

bump for murmusctf

That talk gave me cancer

fyi:
youtube-dl supports all sorts of websites, not only yt
youtube-dl supports proxies
#!/bin/shyoutube-dl --proxy socks5://127.0.0.1:9150/ --hls-prefer-native $*

Don't use MEGA, it requires JavaScript and there is no proper linux tool.
Use anonfile.com or mediagoblin or host your own shit, possibly even at home (install openwrt on router and set up QoS traffic shaping).
Maybe set up an onion hidden service on your pc.
Use Torrents.
Don't use ipfs, there is no privacy.
If you can afford to run a bunch of servers, consider tahoe-lafs for redundant storage.

javascript is not the only problem with mega. you will never download a tb of videos with their 1gb datacap. they basically paywall everything.

Do we have an IRC? At least an room at freenode or anything?

IPFS == torrents

Nigger, there's like 10 people posting regularly on here. What good do you think an IRC would do? Only 2 people would post there once a month. Besides, this is a better format than IRC because you can take your time to compose a well written response.
There's a general Zig Forums room on Rizon but it's full of cancer.
Also

bump

We do have an IRC, it's literally in the board sticky. It hasn't really been worthwhile in several years though...

only worthless brainlet faggots use the imageboard associated irc channels.

ddownr.com/

A problem with using tubeup that way right now is that it doesn't check to see if the video is already uploaded. It just downloads and overwrites it, so if you ctrl+c for whatever reason and fire it up again it'll begin the process from the very beginning lol.
But it's possible to fix that by manually deleting the lines that were already uploaded before firing it up again, which shouldn't take much time.

See the above. My solution ended up being more flexible than yours, heh. The flag you mentioned might still be useful though, because instead of scraping the URLs manually you could just use youtube-dl+echo to output the links into a text file.

When using tubeup the youtube-dl speeds aren't too bad, because as it waits before the video is uploaded before beginning downloading again, it seems it isn't enough to trigger youtube's throttling most of the time.
Still, nobody in this thread seems to have uploaded shit. I'm uploading ChRiStIaAn008's vids and will continue with the other users when that's done. Hope I don't get banned from archive.org from uploading without warning, if anybody has powers there you might want to whitelist the channels mentioned in this thread.

f-droid.org/app/org.schabi.newpipe