Encryption

[diplexer]

I would love to know if SD has actually been able to decrypt an DRM protected channels with the fkex 4k in their testing with the a3sa? At least we would know if the equipment is actually a ble to do the job. Please let us know that you actually have decrypted anything. If not, I think we're getting the run around.

[Cabal]

I would love to know if SD has actually been able to decrypt an DRM protected channels with the fkex 4k in their testing with the a3sa? At least we would know if the equipment is actually a ble to do the job. Please let us know that you actually have decrypted anything. If not, I think we're getting the run around.

The HDHomeRun device doesn't do any decrypting in the proposed design.

[HoTst2]

I would love to know if SD has actually been able to decrypt an DRM protected channels with the fkex 4k in their testing with the a3sa? At least we would know if the equipment is actually a ble to do the job. Please let us know that you actually have decrypted anything. If not, I think we're getting the run around.

The HDHomeRun device doesn't do any decrypting in the proposed design.

That's what Nickk told me sometime ago ...

That the client itself (for example, an Amazon Fire Cube in my case) actually does the DRM decryption of the broadcast, so has to have an innate ability to already do it.

But SD must provide the necessary firmware updates to the gateway and homerun app to provide the client with the information it needs to decrypt the broadcast. ....

If that makes sense to anyone...

[zippy]

Security decryption can be more then running the fnal decrypt key through a widevine decyption routine.

If the actual hdhomerun unit has a private key and uses x.509 to exchange it's puiblic key with digicert to obtain the broadcasters public key and thus ends up with a fnal decrypt key and delegates that key to an hdhomerun app, how much of the DRM process actually runs on the hdhomerun unit.

[danieljlevine]

My 1xx channels in Baltimore and DC areas have different behaviors in the HD Homerun App on iOS.

102.1 WMAR show: Unable to play channel: No Video Data
111.1 WBAL shows: Unable to play channel: Content Protection Required

Is there something wrong with the 102.1 broadcast? I’d expect it to either play or show the same message as 111.1.

[MikeBear]

My 1xx channels in Baltimore and DC areas have different behaviors in the HD Homerun App on iOS.

102.1 WMAR show: Unable to play channel: No Video Data
111.1 WBAL shows: Unable to play channel: Content Protection Required

Is there something wrong with the 102.1 broadcast? I’d expect it to either play or show the same message as 111.1.

WMAR is also encrypted per Rabbitears.info. Not sure why you aren't getting the Content Protection Required messaged.

[DrSmith]

I would love to know if SD has actually been able to decrypt an DRM protected channels with the fkex 4k in their testing with the a3sa? At least we would know if the equipment is actually a ble to do the job. Please let us know that you actually have decrypted anything. If not, I think we're getting the run around.

And there's the thing. We don't even know if SD has done a single test with A3SA. From the info we have been told, it sounds like SD has done lots of internal testing and they have a plan with A3SA, but not a single minute of actual testing with actual A3SA has been disclosed.

[HoTst2]

I mean, what's up with all the virtual silence on the issue as though they're enforcing a mutually agreed upon gag order or something? . ...

I suspect something like an NDA is in place. I'd be surprised if there isn't one.

Yes, but that only begs the question ...

Why the need for an NDA on progress reports to their customers on this issue?

Even if things are totally stalled with no progress at all or expected in the foreseeable furure. Why can't SD simply tell us that with at least some explanation as to why?

Just don't understand the need for secrecy here. ......

[philsoft]

Just don't understand the need for secrecy here. ......

I am having trouble understanding the PERCEPTION of secrecy.
1. SD has CLEARLY stated that they are currently testing a potential (at least partial) solution for us.
2. They have stated that this potential solution currently operates only with "test" channels (I presume this to mean channels in certain markets)
3. They recently stated with some excitement that there was "progress"

This tells me that they are working on a solution that will be released as soon as it can be. I don't see any secrecy there, and can see no real advantage to clutter things up with tedious details beyond that.

[HoTst2]

Just don't understand the need for secrecy here. ......

I am having trouble understanding the PERCEPTION of secrecy.
1. SD has CLEARLY stated that they are currently testing a potential (at least partial) solution for us.
2. They have stated that this potential solution currently operates only with "test" channels (I presume this to mean channels in certain markets)
3. They recently stated with some excitement that there was "progress"

This tells me that they are working on a solution that will be released as soon as it can be. I don't see any secrecy there, and can see no real advantage to clutter things up with tedious details beyond that.

Well I'm certainly not interested in cluttering up this discussion thread with any intricate technical details either (slow as my mind works today ). A lot of which would probably be justifiably under an NDA anyway due to corporate propriety.

But not to defer to others, however since he laid them out so well. I see no reason why SD cannot answer the reasonable questions such as DSperber most recently listed in his post back on 11/19 at 10:38 am (PST).

And SD has no need to get into or divulge any intricate technical details to do that from everything I can see. ...

But so far, just crickets chirping in the night from SD on any questions like his. ...

[philsoft]

I see no reason why SD cannot answer the reasonable questions such as DSperber most recently listed in his post back on 11/19 at 10:38 am (PST).

And SD has no need to get into or divulge any intricate technical details to do that from everything I can see. ...

But so far, just crickets chirping in the night from SD on any questions like his. ...

To what end? They almost certainly have little they could tell us that would make everyone happy. In detail, I see it this way.
1. We bought a device KNOWING the standard was not finalized (or if one did NOT know, then that is on them). Other companies declined to release products BASED on that standard BECAUSE the standard was not finalized.

2. SD has made it CLEAR that they are working on a solution, and recently there was a relatively excited statement made letting us know that there was "progress".

3. We KNOW that our real issue here is NOT with SD (who would undoubtedly LOVE for everything to just work, and for all of us to be ecstatic) but with the broadcasters.

4. They can not give ANY kind of estimate on a date because that is just how it works now. Companies have learned the hard way since the dawn of the Internet, that giving release dates is a recipe for DISASTER. In spite of the fact that there will be folks who will say "I won't make you regret giving us a date", there will ALWAYS be the folks that will say "Well I never made that pledge". So giving release dates (Of ANY kind - week, month, year) is just too risky.

We gotta get the information that we can get, and figure out how to utilize that information to achieve a goal. Arguing for answers that (in my view at least) are irrelevant, is just an exercise in futility.

[HoTst2]

I see no reason why SD cannot answer the reasonable questions such as DSperber most recently listed in his post back on 11/19 at 10:38 am (PST).

And SD has no need to get into or divulge any intricate technical details to do that from everything I can see. ...

But so far, just crickets chirping in the night from SD on any questions like his. ...

To what end? They almost certainly have little they could tell us that would make everyone happy. In detail, I see it this way.
1. We bought a device KNOWING the standard was not finalized (or if one did NOT know, then that is on them). Other companies declined to release products BASED on that standard BECAUSE the standard was not finalized.

2. SD has made it CLEAR that they are working on a solution, and recently there was a relatively excited statement made letting us know that there was "progress".

3. We KNOW that our real issue here is NOT with SD (who would undoubtedly LOVE for everything to just work, and for all of us to be ecstatic) but with the broadcasters.

4. They can not give ANY kind of estimate on a date because that is just how it works now. Companies have learned the hard way since the dawn of the Internet, that giving release dates is a recipe for DISASTER. In spite of the fact that there will be folks who will say "I won't make you regret giving us a date", there will ALWAYS be the folks that will say "Well I never made that pledge". So giving release dates (Of ANY kind - week, month, year) is just too risky.

We gotta get the information that we can get, and figure out how to utilize that information to achieve a goal. Arguing for answers that (in my view at least) are irrelevant, is just an exercise in futility.

Well, all I can say is that I disagree...

As I feel DSperber's questions were very well put and relevant. And very reasonable to ask SD for better answers other than vague "we're working on a solution."

Now I'm not expecting it will please everyone nor is that possible no matter what response SD gives...

But they can certainly do a lot better than they've done keeping their customers better informed of the state of progress or not on the DRM issue.

However, I won't keep pushing the issue. As I realize many here loathe any criticism of SD.

[diplexer]

The flex 4k is nearing 4 years since it first arrived. What is the supported life of the device? At the current rate of progress we may never see a DRM solution before a newer device takes over.

[signcarver]

The flex 4k is nearing 4 years since it first arrived. What is the supported life of the device?

The flex device is newer than the KS delivered device and the KS was delivered around October 2020 which was only 3 years ago, not 4 but most HDHRs have a life of "forever" as I have never really seen one die other that power supply for the most part (some I have installed from 15 years ago are still in use and still supported).

[DSperber]

While waiting for the SD-published "DRM solution" for my Flex 4K to materialize (if/when it ever does...), I have placed an order for a dual-tuner Zapperbox M1. It will be here next Monday.

I will continue my playing in the ATSC 3.0 sandbox as an early adopter, this time with a whole 'nother product design but with a living and breathing actual working solution to DRM content. Yes, view-live-only of DRM content on one TV for today but at least I would be able to watch NBC and CBS. And record/playback of DRM supposedly quite imminent and announced for the next firmware release. And no internet connection required (which is a real breakthrough) somewhat further out. In my opinion that means these issues HAVE BEEN TECHNICALLY SOLVED AND AGREED TO BY ALL PARTIES, and it's more a matter of coding time and testing that we must wait for.

So they seem to have a plan/roadmap, they've met their previous target objectives for past deliverables., and I hope to see similar success for current upcoming target deliverables over the next few months.

Something for me to play with while waiting for SD.