video locked to private due to unverified API project #86
Comments
|
At which step did you encounter this message? youtubeuploader seems to be still working for me, although I've been asking for increased quota (and was eventually granted) which means that I'm already audited. Nevertheless I was able to successfully upload several videos making them unlisted or private (I didn't feel like uploading a public video to notify my subscribers). |
|
I have been using youtubeupload for a month now, everything was fine. For about a week I have been uploading videos to several accounts, as soon as I make the video public, I immediately block it. Tested on Windows 7 and Ubuntu 18.04 |
|
I've just uploaded this video using youtubeuploader: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1IXTedsbp0 The command I've used was: |
|
I think I'm having this same problem. Used this program for the first time yesterday, and the video gets locked to private shortly after upload due to using an unverified third party service. Here's an image of the notification email from youtube. Seems related to this recent change, requiring all youtube API projects made after July 28th undergo an audit before allowing normal uploads. I'm very inexperienced with all this though, so I may well have simply set something up wrong! |
|
I came here to report this as well. I was having no issue using youtubeuploader until last night. I uploaded a video and it was locked to private minutes later, so I deleted it and uploaded another video as a test and the same thing happened. |
This seems to straighten my case that the API key / usage is unverified rather than youtubeuploader itself. I had na audit before (due to asking for increased quota) and I don't have this issue. This is very sad as going through the audit is rather tedious as the process is designed for applications open to the public which is the dominant case from API usage perspective but a rare case as I imagine for every big and popular app there are dozens or hundreds of "private" use cases. |
|
Thanks for the report, I was unaware of this issue. It does sound like bad news for youtubeuploader - yet another hurdle to overcome. From Google's announcement:
Just to confirm, the videos are locked to private (i.e. they can't be manually changed to public after upload) ? |
porjo
changed the title
porjo
changed the title
Can confirm, video is locked to private and can't be changed to public. |
|
I am just looking to upload a few videos a week. Are there any existing, verified API "projects" that I can use or am I stuck getting my own verified for such a small scale use? |
|
I have this problem either. I taught this was my program's error etc. Until we start the confirmation process may I use someone's API (I need just client_secrets.json). We will upload maximum 1-2 video per day. |
|
API's are used to simplify development, but sadly Google/Youtube didn't get that note. Maybe the API should be replaced with Selenium. One project does a similar thing: https://github.com/linouk23/youtube_uploader_selenium But it isn't really practical for automation yet. |
|
Selenium has no relevance to this issue. I further don't think selenium would offer much benefit because web browser interaction is very very minimal. And it would be a dependency on a huge package. |
|
I have the same issue of video made private, with no option to make them public through the web interface. Is there any solutions to this ? |
|
Your API project just needs to be audited. They'll ask for a description of what you're trying to do and eventually they'll approve your usage unless they don't like it. They're not trying to make life difficult, they have to do this because of spam. |
|
They actually do make it difficult.
You have to describe what users will use it, how users will use it, how
long you will retain user data, how does the interface look for users etc.
This is fine if you're making an app which you release for a wider audience
and you make use of YouTube API in it. However if this is some server side
feature for your own usage (big or small, but no outside users whatsoever,
everything in console) then the process makes no sense.
I got approved, however:
- the first time I tried the form was protected by outdated captcha and
there was no way to send it (none of the bypasses worked) which says a lot
- once they've switched to a new form it took me 6 months to be approved,
however they'll email me occasionally (1-2 times a month) with questions
which were always bad (already answered in a form, or they've drawn wrong
conclusions) and every time the emails said that I need to respond in 3
days (!) and if not my process will be canceled.
That's a long period of time in which you can't miss an email with 3 days
deadline
The process is very bad, let's not pretend it's not. Is it needed? Yes,
very much so. It doesn't need to be that bad though.
czw., 15 paź 2020 o 11:49 qome <notifications@github.com> napisał(a):
… Your API project just needs to be audited. They'll ask for a description
of what you're trying to do and eventually they'll approve your usage
unless they don't like it. They're not trying to make life difficult, they
have to do this because of spam.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#86 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAVUEO5CAV5CV7CBN4JRL6LSK3ATXANCNFSM4QJK5GNA>
.
--
*Marcin Wasłowicz*
|
|
Same experience here. They also don't appear to understand what an executable on a computer is, they only understand web sites, it appears. Takes forever to explain what you want to do (or actually already did in the past). Now that I have access (which took 3 month for me) I now do regular private dummy uploads to keep the status as it is. Because you can lose access it if you don't use the API for 90 days. |
|
I literally told them that this was a server side application and provided my entire source code. They asked me for the same information a second time and I told them to read what I already sent or deny my application. They approved my usage. They make it very easy. |
|
I need to fill in a whole bunch of OAuth consent screen stuff, with a privacy policy and a description video because it's using "sensitive youtube API" stuff. What did you all put in those fields? It's horrendous and it makes me sad :( |
Yeah that happened to me and now I’m seriously considering just eating the horrible browser upload workflow instead of this nicely automated one because it’s STILL less hassle than having to go through that stupid audit process. |
|
For everyone interested, this is the batch file I am using to do regular uploads. I just upload a tiny video of a few(?) black frames. It's only 3kB. I set it to visibility private. Edit it to your needs. Also adjust the paths if needed (I can use relative paths). You might want to execute this monthly as a scheduled task. |
|
Same thing here: |
|
@wolf128058 Same issue here, I spent like 3 weeks and 15 emails getting my app verified and now after being verified for the youtube scopes everything I upload still instantly gets locked as private for "spam, deceptive practices ..." without any appeal option. Did you ever figure out a way around that? |
Sorry, but I did not find one. |
|
Same here. I went through the verification process. After a couple of weeks of back-and-forth correspondence they told me that my application didn't have to be verified because it was for use by less than 100 people. They suggested I go through an API audit to have the "locked as private" designation removed. I applied for an audit. After several days of more back-and-forth they informed me that the audit was complete and that no further information was required. They never told me what the result of the audit was and they did not respond to further inquiries. But, my uploads are still "locked as private". It seems hopeless. |
|
I received an additional response from YouTube API services: The error you encountered is not YouTube Data API related. On the other hand, if I try and appeal the "locked as private", I get: Appealing this violation is not available |
|
@Buadhai I had the same issue where I went through the audit form (which doesn't even have an option for that despite the insert api docs specifically linking to it so I just selected "get more quota") to get rid of the "video locked as private" issue and they replied that they removed that restriction now and I could upload videos in the future without being locked. Despite that I also couldn't upload videos still and they still got locked so I replied with that problem again to the same thread and a week later when I tried again it worked. I can now finally upload videos without issues. Not sure if it was my reply about it that made them fix it or it just always takes a while. |
|
Thanks @ulysso. I guess I'll wait a bit. When you say "same thread", do you mean that you submitted the same form again? |
|
Same issue here! The change is documented here: https://developers.google.com/youtube/v3/docs/videos/insert
|
|
I have the same issue. So as I understood I should "Publish App" and then go through audit for 6 month, shouldn't I? Do other solutions for auto uploading have the same problem? I think that that issue should be in README.md. Also, would be nice to have the manual how to pass the audit. |
Unfortunately, yes e.g. tokland/youtube-upload#306 |
|
@porjo Aren't you as the developer supposed to undergo this audit and provide the client_secrets.json with this api program? When I undergo the audit, everything is framed from the developer of the api client standpoint, not the enduser using said client. I don't think the endusers of the program are supposed to be the ones getting audited. Everything is framing it as the developer of the client, how many users will use your api client, etc. I'm having a hard time completing the audit form because it asks specifically how the client interacts with YouTube's API. |
|
@GTAXL Yeah the "developer" is supposed to do that, but in general thats targeted to normal businesses being the developer that hosts a website/app/service/whatever for endusers, because the client_secret is required to be fully secret and never shared with endusers, so in case of an open source app that becomes impossible and every user running the code basically also becomes a developer and has to get their own api key/secret. No way around that (apart from a hosted auth service that gives user credentials to end users maybe but not sure even that would be allowed). And yes it's made even harder by the fact that everything in the process is fully geared towards apps/websites and the reviewers apparently having no clue what a command line program or open source is but unfortunately there's just no easier option for just a simple private uploading app, but currently no way around that. |
|
@ulysso From my understanding the API key is linked to the client, the token is for the youtube account in question. The dev providing the api key, doesn't mean we have access to his google account or youtube acc, and vise versa. It's strictly to tell Google what client is making the api calls and if it's verified and authorized to do so. How does this vary compared to say yt-dlp? You don't have to do this process with them, it accesses the API. The API keys are embedded in the extractor for them. I get it, it's a different process, downloading versus uploading, but same concept. |
|
For download, I don't think you need to use the API. |
|
Got the same problem. Can't even submit this silly form, just keeps asking me to check my internet connection and ask later. I tried refreshing the form and quickly filling the fields. |
|
Just to give some optimism to others, I filled out this form and got a response in 4 days from YouTube and can now upload videos that are publicly viewable. |
|
@grnqrtr thankyou for the report! |
|
just got mine approved, took me like 14 days but I also missed providing some information that caused some delays so realistically it was like 7 days. At first I had no hope since the form looked so intimitading and I felt like I filled it so unprofessionally but it still got the point across, I just clearly mentioned that it's not a business/service and strictly for personal use and even linked to this tool's repository. So if anyone else is afraid of the form, fret not they'll take it really easy on you if you make the purpose clear. |
How did you provide additional information to them? Just reply to email? I have the same situation. |
|
@Supded yes, once you get an email everything is followed up in there so you just reply to anything asked. |
It works, thanks! |
Did getting your uploader audited cause previously uploaded videos to become unlocked or only new uploads are unlocked? |
Only new uploads are unlocked, you should re-upload previously uploaded videos. |
Same here; if I just delete that video and upload it again with the browser, not problems at all. |
|
Could anyone, please, that has already passed the audit, be kind enough to report what checkboxes were selected, what sort of text input? I am really having a hard time trying to figure out what to select or type, when all I need is just very short (less than one minute) videos be uploaded. |
|
I don't remember all the questions from the form, but whatever you fill in, the people from the audit team normally ask some questions afterwards. They focus on web applications, interactive web sites, and hardly understand that you are using a command line application, it appears. You have to mentioning this explicitly. They are concerned about the security aspects, but that is no issue with this application. So I think it works to explain that it's not running on a web server, there is a single user that's using the application, that the user is authenticated when he logs into the PC, that there is no data from google being stored or exported elsewhere, and there is no other automatic connection with other systems. |
|
@mixpc I don't remember exactly what I wrote in all the fields, but like @jorisrobijn said, just explain simply what you are trying to do. In fields that didn't apply I would just write something like, "I don't believe this applies to my use case. I merely want to be able to upload videos via a command line interface for one user (me)." If a field required so many characters, I would copy and paste something like this several times: "This field requires at least 200 characters so I am copying and pasting this sentence several times just to fulfill the requirement." I just explained simply what I was trying to do and passed the audit pretty easily and fairly quickly. |
|
@jorisrobijn @grnqrtr Thank you for your feedback, appreciated. And thank you for the link to the form. Request submitted! I'll revert - fingers crossed! @porjo tried two or three apps to upload videos to YouTube in the past and either they were outdated or run successfully every now and then... Yours, superb! 🔝 Only miss uploading to a given channel, but I've seen that's already being managed in a different topic. Thank you! ⭐ |
|
Ok, I've been asked to report back about my use case:
The reason for completing the YouTube API form was "I am completing a compliance audit or requesting additional API quota". So by their feedback I understand compliance audit is not an option but I should request additional API quota. Is that right? And also, how much it be? How should I know? Are they referring to how many MB on average per video file? Thank you! |
|
So do I need to just request quota or do I also need to publich/verify the app? |
and others
We submitted that the video was uploaded using a third party tool that failed our verification. Because of this, we set limited access for the video.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: