Encryption

ATSC 3.0 Forum
Post Reply
NedS
Silicondust
Posts: 3185
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 12:38 pm
x 67

Re: Encryption

Post by NedS »

freway01 wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2024 12:31 pm Not looking to move to Za$$erbox, just hoping something from SD will provide some sort of update on their progress
If there is an update we are able to share with you, then we will share it with you. At no point would we just suddenly forget to tell everyone about some great progress on the most pressing issue on our flagship product. You can stop asking now, because at this point you're just spamming up the thread. And no one cares about some other non-gateway product's support for DRM. That means nothing for us. It does not apply here. It is not relevant here. It's a completely different product category. Understand?

freway01
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:05 pm
x 34

Re: Encryption

Post by freway01 »

NedS wrote: Mon Mar 25, 2024 12:09 am
freway01 wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2024 12:31 pm Not looking to move to Za$$erbox, just hoping something from SD will provide some sort of update on their progress
If there is an update we are able to share with you, then we will share it with you. At no point would we just suddenly forget to tell everyone about some great progress on the most pressing issue on our flagship product. You can stop asking now, because at this point you're just spamming up the thread. And no one cares about some other non-gateway product's support for DRM. That means nothing for us. It does not apply here. It is not relevant here. It's a completely different product category. Understand?
NedS,
I'm not asking you or anyone else at SD to comment about another vendors product, I'm asking about your Flex 4K product. It has been over a month since the A3SA announced their specs and guidelines regarding 'networked/gateway' devices and when I and others asked for feedback from SD (Nick). I believe it was you who posted that Nick will comment once he has time to read the released specs.

Well we've heard nothing from SD (Nick) so customers like me are wondering if the existing Flex 4K tuners most of us have will be able to be updated with only firmware and software, or will it require some hardware following the release of the A3SA's specs and guidelines. Does SD have any kind of estimate when a fix will be ready, even if it goes out as beta to shake out the bugs. There is talk out on the internet that Tab*o is back working on their ATSC 3.0 'networked/gateway' again so who is going to deliver first? We heard more from SD about the obstacle's the S3SA was putting before device makers before the A3SA released their specs and guidelines, than after.

Here's a simple question, if you were a consumer, how would you feel if you purchased a Flex 4K because the SD site advertises it is an ATSC 3.0 tuner, but when you get it, you find out you can't watch a majority of the ATSC 3.0 channels because of DRM, and when you go to SD's forum only to hear DRM support is 'coming'?

NatHillIV
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 5:43 am
x 9

Re: Encryption

Post by NatHillIV »

NatHillIV wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 6:29 am I'm sure Nick will respond when he has time to digest the information he has received. The switch-over is a LONG ways off.
Stilll applies. I own a pair of 4K Silicon Dust products, and I'm not overly anxious.

NedS
Silicondust
Posts: 3185
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 12:38 pm
x 67

Re: Encryption

Post by NedS »

freway01 wrote: Mon Mar 25, 2024 7:04 am I'm not asking you or anyone else at SD to comment about another vendors product, I'm asking about your Flex 4K product. It has been over a month since the A3SA announced their specs and guidelines regarding 'networked/gateway' devices and when I and others asked for feedback from SD (Nick). I believe it was you who posted that Nick will comment once he has time to read the released specs.
I said Nick would provide details, but the short answer was that A3SA did not release anything new. They took a draft spec and published it, and it is still missing all the steps for *how* things are supposed to work. On a practical level, nothing has changed with the A3SA announcement. It looks more like a PR move to cover their butts.
Well we've heard nothing from SD (Nick) so customers like me are wondering if the existing Flex 4K tuners most of us have will be able to be updated with only firmware and software, or will it require some hardware following the release of the A3SA's specs and guidelines.
We've answered this already. The existing HDHomeRun ATSC 3.0 hardware is fine, the issue is with the software side, and as of right now the A3SA has only provided a path forward for Android based devices. Don't hold your breath on anything else, because they've jerked us around about other platforms, even with their recent "announcement". I don't know if it's malice or incompetence on A3SA's part, it could honestly be either.
Does SD have any kind of estimate when a fix will be ready, even if it goes out as beta to shake out the bugs.
No. None at all. Zero estimate, and we will not give one until we have solid information from A3SA.
There is talk out on the internet that Tab*o is back working on their ATSC 3.0 'networked/gateway' again so who is going to deliver first?
I'll believe it when it happens. They're also owned by a major broadcaster who has a seat at the table. They have influence that we do not have. Will they have a gateway product that supports DRM, and if so, will it only work on Android systems? What restrictions will they have for their recordings? What will it cost them to maintain their products? Are they willing to accept certain restrictions because it benefits them as a broadcaster/advertiser?

Right now we know nothing. We can only speculate, and speculation means nothing at this point. Wild guesses, shots in the dark.
We heard more from SD about the obstacle's the S3SA was putting before device makers before the A3SA released their specs and guidelines, than after.
Because nothing has changed. They have not released the full information needed to implement playback on a client (even Android) from a gateway device. They only have information for devices with built-in tuners that play directly to an HDMI connected display (set-top-boxes).
Here's a simple question, if you were a consumer, how would you feel if you purchased a Flex 4K because the SD site advertises it is an ATSC 3.0 tuner, but when you get it, you find out you can't watch a majority of the ATSC 3.0 channels because of DRM, and when you go to SD's forum only to hear DRM support is 'coming'?
My first HDHomeRun product, long before I worked here, was a PRIME. When there were channels I couldn't watch on every device, or record, and I learned it was DRM, then I knew the blame lied with those who implemented DRM. But I'm a fairly technical person, who has a long standing hate for DRM and what it has done to tech and consumer rights. I don't know what a "normal" person would think.

RickD_99
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2022 7:18 am
x 2

Re: Encryption

Post by RickD_99 »

I believe instead of pestering Nick or Ned about “updates” the better question is when is SD going to start playing hardball and get the lawyers involved in this situation? It’s abundantly clear (at least to me) that A3SA has no intentions of providing a pathway for network gateway products like the HDHR and any further efforts to appease them is a waste of time and resources. I don’t believe I’m exaggerating when I say that this DRM situation is an existential threat to SD’s business model. Better to start the legal efforts in 2024 rather than 2027 when the dye may already have been cast!

freway01
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:05 pm
x 34

Re: Encryption

Post by freway01 »

Thanks NedS for some clarification.

Yes, the owner of the Tab*o is one of the major broadcasters on the A3SA, but isn't SD part of the A3SA too as an adopter? Is SD and the other members of the S3SA, both broadcasters and adopters talking to each other and collaborating on standards and specifications? I didn't see Google or Alphabet on the list so why is the ATSC and A3SA putting all of their eggs in android and not open source?

jasonl
Silicondust
Posts: 16861
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:23 pm
x 33

Re: Encryption

Post by jasonl »

I don't think you quite understand the dynamic. This operates under the golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules. Adopters have no decision making power. We can propose different solutions for different areas and then it's up to A3SA to approve them, reject them, ask for them to be resubmitted with changes, etc.. And the people making those decisions aren't doing it full-time, they work for the broadcasters and this is just one of the various responsibilities they have, so things never move as fast as anyone would like.

HoTst2
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat May 13, 2023 3:57 pm
x 7

Re: Encryption

Post by HoTst2 »

[removed by moderator - see forum rules]

HoTst2
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat May 13, 2023 3:57 pm
x 7

Re: Encryption

Post by HoTst2 »

HoTst2 wrote: Tue Mar 26, 2024 12:13 am [removed by moderator - see forum rules]
You'll have to forgive me, but I really don't see anything I said contrary to others like the previous poster "RickD_99" just said. And based on the previous recent frank and rather terse statements on the A3SA and DRM situation NedS just made.

But I bow to your authority anyway and see that it's best to just remain largely silent on this subject from now on. ...

diplexer
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2022 7:56 am

Re: Encryption

Post by diplexer »

[removed by moderator - see forum rules]

Online
signcarver
Expert
Posts: 11111
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:04 am
Device ID: 10A05954 10802091 131B34B7 13231F92 1070A18E 1073ED6F 15300C36
x 25

Re: Encryption

Post by signcarver »

The rules here basically state that one cannot say support will never happen... so until they state otherwise, there is no FUD allowed about it not happening. If your attitude is wanting answers, I wouldn't look for them here as until it actually happens there isn't much to mention that hasn't already been said a million times so there is no reason to ask yet again.

When I was able to work on a DRM capable project many years ago, the first rule was thou shall not talk about drm development, the 2nd rule was that when the first rule was violated expect several months of delays so personally I am happy for the silence.

anonymouse
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2024 11:38 am
x 10

Re: Encryption

Post by anonymouse »

signcarver wrote: Tue Mar 26, 2024 11:09 am If your attitude is wanting answers, I wouldn't look for them here as until it actually happens there isn't much to mention that hasn't already been said a million times so there is no reason to ask yet again.
This. A million times over. Reading this thread is like reading posts from kindergartners who skipped their nap time!

HoTst2
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat May 13, 2023 3:57 pm
x 7

Re: Encryption

Post by HoTst2 »

anonymouse wrote: Tue Mar 26, 2024 12:09 pm
signcarver wrote: Tue Mar 26, 2024 11:09 am If your attitude is wanting answers, I wouldn't look for them here as until it actually happens there isn't much to mention that hasn't already been said a million times so there is no reason to ask yet again.
This. A million times over. Reading this thread is like reading posts from kindergartners who skipped their nap time!
If the comments here are really that annoying, pointless, and puerile. ....

Then may I suggest the moderators simply lock this thread and not allow any further comments on the DRM subject like this altogether anywhere on the forum then. ...

KingdomeCome
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:49 am

Re: Encryption

Post by KingdomeCome »

[removed by moderator - see forum rules]

Miggity
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 6:29 pm
x 5

Re: Encryption

Post by Miggity »

The only thing I can add to this is that if Nick, Jason and Ned cannot find the time or energy in their day between them to organize and decide what is for lunch, I'll buy. Whaddaya say guys pizza? Sub sandwiches?
Keep your chins up, we are all curious, but not all of us are impatient.

Post Reply