Youtube video direct and Get youtube download url

[Oddysey]

JJoe,

Not to intimate any disrespect here, but.... I did effectively disable all of my filters before testing Dave's filter set. Let me refer you to the first couple of lines of my post just ahead of yours, Post #12 in this thread, wherein I stated, and requote here:

Quote:I did try them in a non-Proxo environment....
With my browser set to no Proxy service available (it just goes straight through, as originally intended),

I don't know how to state it any more clearly - there are no other filters in existance during this test - only one of Dave's Header filters in in existance during the test. Wanna see my config set? Sure, here's the short and sweet of it:

Code:

##
## Proxomitron Config File
## File named "YouTube Special Test"
##

[Global]
Enable = TRUE
FreezeGIF = TRUE
FilterHTML = TRUE
FilterHeadersOut = TRUE
FilterHeadersIn = TRUE
EnableProxy = FALSE
EnableAutoRun = FALSE
ForceTextures = FALSE
NoTextures = TRUE
SysTray = TRUE
UseSSLeay = TRUE
PriorityBoost = TRUE
BypassURL = "$LST(Bypass)"
Port = 8080
MaxCapURL = 100

[WinSizes]
(omitted for brevity)

[Blocklists]
(also omitted for brevity)

[HTTP headers]
In = FALSE
Out = TRUE
Key = "!-|||||||||||| URL: Youtube Video Direct (out)"
URL = "(www.|m.|)youtube.com[^/]+/((watch*v=|v/)(?+{11})\1)$JUMP(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\1)"
Replace = "\0$LOG(wYoutube Video Direct)"

In = FALSE
Out = FALSE
Key = "!-|||||||||||| URL: Get youtube download url (out)"
URL = "[^/]++.(youtube|googlevideo).com/videoplayback\?"
Replace = "$LOG(!W$UESC(\u)&title=)"

[Patterns]

[Proxies]
Rotate = TRUE
Random = TRUE
OpenLog = TRUE
Count = 10

And at the risk of sounding snarky (which is certainly not my intent), I respectfully submit that when I kill the Proxomitron program entirely, then reset my browser to standard non-Proxy settings, I see the expected results from each example URL as defined in my previously referenced set of links. There can be no doubt that when a "watch?v={11chars}" form of the address is used, then the standard, unblemished version of the entire YouTube video page will be presented to the user. It takes an intentional re-write of the incoming code to force a different result, something that YouTube is not about to do on their end, considering the amount of advertising dollars involved in the equation.

The only problem for me is that Dave's filter #1 doesn't work as he intended, at least from my reading of his initial post, and that happens only when I have his single filter, in the code just above, enabled. (Toggling between filters for each phase of the test, to be sure.) But, this is a "non-problem" in that I already have the capability of doing what Dave does, albeit with a different filter construction. I submitted my original reply only because Dave included the same thing in his $JUMP as what might be found in his Match statement. That's what we often call "inelegant", when we're being polite.

HTH





Oddysey