Encryption

[nblair5]

I scrolled back and it has been 4 months since the last time someone politely asked for an update and was admonished for being high maintenance. I saw a firmware update drop this week but it doesn't look like it has anything related. Has SD just moved on?

As I understand how this works, the SD hardware only needs to tune to the ATSC 3.0 station. The HD Homerun is ATSC 3.0 certified to do this. It would then pass the stream on to a decoder app. The actual decription would happen in the HDHomerun app and not the SD hardware. Therefore firmware updates to the HDHomerun devices won't fix DRM. Also the streaming hardware that holds the app has to work with Widevine. Not all the streaming devices support Widevine. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

I think you're capturing it correctly, and my mention of the firmware update as a trigger for this post may have been imprecise. Most user configurations shouldn't expect a DRM update anytime soon, and for those that do, I believe the client app will be the enabler rather than tuner firmware. However, I'm asking about the one specific use case where activity was confirmed in the Feb2024 update (stickied at the top of this thread), but there seems to be an aversion to providing ANY level of update and shaming of those who ask, as if they haven't read the FAQ.

"Will DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 channels play on my Android or Fire TV device?
Using a gateway product - we expect it will be possible in the future but it is not possible today. The Google Widevine DRM decryption is possible but there are other requirements that are draft/incomplete at this time. There is activity happening."

[NatHillIV]

Read it and weep. Doesn't this mean that without major changes Silicon Dust tuners will NEVER be able to handle encrypted signals?

https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/pearl ... rogramming

[nickk]

Read it and weep. Doesn't this mean that without major changes Silicon Dust tuners will NEVER be able to handle encrypted signals?

https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/pearl ... rogramming

This Ex Patre letter to the FCC is complete bullshit.

1) Silicondust does not use prohibited components.
2) Gateway devices do not decrypt video - A3SA requires that the video remain encrypted across your home network.
ie the choice of SoC has zero impact to gateway devices handling protected content.

We are submitting a response to the FCC.

[pshanew]

Read it and weep. Doesn't this mean that without major changes Silicon Dust tuners will NEVER be able to handle encrypted signals?

https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/pearl ... rogramming

This Ex Patre letter to the FCC is complete bullshit.

1) Silicondust does not use prohibited components.
2) Gateway devices do not decrypt video - A3SA requires that the video remain encrypted across your home network.
ie the choice of SoC has zero impact to gateway devices handling protected content.

We are submitting a response to the FCC.

They're clearly grasping at straws now. But Pearl's deliberate obtuseness (obtusity?) will likely produce enough fear, uncertainty, and doubt to confuse some in the FCC to think there's something there. They're not always the sharpest tools in the shed when it comes to understanding the subtleties of technology. I appreciate you guys fighting the good fight. But when the big players start using these tactics, you know that the gloves hove come off. It seems like station owners are willing to do anything to move forward with restrictive DRM and ensuring that gateway devices are left out of a very selective club.

My FLEX 4K is still perfectly good for ATSC 1.0 for at least a couple more years. And I consider it a bargain for the usage I've gotten. You guys even replaced my Kickstarter Connect 4K for no charge when it had issues a couple of years after it was delivered (with a refurbished FLEX 4K). So I have no doubt you have your customers' best interests at heart.

[nblair5]

I scrolled back and it has been 4 months since the last time someone politely asked for an update and was admonished for being high maintenance. I saw a firmware update drop this week but it doesn't look like it has anything related. Has SD just moved on?

As I understand how this works, the SD hardware only needs to tune to the ATSC 3.0 station. The HD Homerun is ATSC 3.0 certified to do this. It would then pass the stream on to a decoder app. The actual decription would happen in the HDHomerun app and not the SD hardware. Therefore firmware updates to the HDHomerun devices won't fix DRM. Also the streaming hardware that holds the app has to work with Widevine. Not all the streaming devices support Widevine. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

I think you're capturing it correctly, and my mention of the firmware update as a trigger for this post may have been imprecise. Most user configurations shouldn't expect a DRM update anytime soon, and for those that do, I believe the client app will be the enabler rather than tuner firmware. However, I'm asking about the one specific use case where activity was confirmed in the Feb2024 update (stickied at the top of this thread), but there seems to be an aversion to providing ANY level of update and shaming of those who ask, as if they haven't read the FAQ.

"Will DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 channels play on my Android or Fire TV device?
Using a gateway product - we expect it will be possible in the future but it is not possible today. The Google Widevine DRM decryption is possible but there are other requirements that are draft/incomplete at this time. There is activity happening."

Hmm...so SD folks are reading this thread but not interested in addressing this. Oh well, this patient long-time customer's expectations for the company have hit the floor. Good luck with whatever you're trying to do. I suggest deleting "There is activity happening." from your FAQ in the interest of accuracy.

[NedS]

Hmm...so SD folks are reading this thread but not interested in addressing this. Oh well, this patient long-time customer's expectations for the company have hit the floor. Good luck with whatever you're trying to do. I suggest deleting "There is activity happening." from your FAQ in the interest of accuracy.

We're getting enough disinformation and FUD from Pearl that we don't need it on our forum as well. We have already addressed this. We are still working on DRM. There is no new information that we are ALLOWED to share at this time. I want to scream to everyone who will listen about the bullshit we are having to deal with, but we are being advised to say very little. So I'm sorry I can't reassure you, but we have bigger issues at stake.

[NatHillIV]

We're getting enough disinformation and FUD from Pearl that we don't need it on our forum as well. We have already addressed this. We are still working on DRM. There is no new information that we are ALLOWED to share at this time. I want to scream to everyone who will listen about the bullshit we are having to deal with, but we are being advised to say very little. So I'm sorry I can't reassure you, but we have bigger issues at stake.

I am on your side NedS. I simply do NOT understand why Pearl is making life so hard on SiliconDust. It would seem to me they should WANT an already established device to work with DRM. I am afraid at this point there is so much bad blood between SiliconDust and Pearl that working with whoever you have to work with to get there has become even more difficult.

I am sorry I made my initial comment pointing out the Pearl letter to the FCC and am now simply afraid relations have deteriorated to the point that a DRM solution for SiliconDust has become even more difficult.

Not looking for more information, I just want to clarify why I made my initial post that stirred up a hornet's nest.

[nblair5]

Hmm...so SD folks are reading this thread but not interested in addressing this. Oh well, this patient long-time customer's expectations for the company have hit the floor. Good luck with whatever you're trying to do. I suggest deleting "There is activity happening." from your FAQ in the interest of accuracy.

We're getting enough disinformation and FUD from Pearl that we don't need it on our forum as well. We have already addressed this. We are still working on DRM. There is no new information that we are ALLOWED to share at this time. I want to scream to everyone who will listen about the bullshit we are having to deal with, but we are being advised to say very little. So I'm sorry I can't reassure you, but we have bigger issues at stake.

What FUD did I post and where did you address this? Are we talking about the FAQ last updated 17 months ago? If I'm missing something, please point me to it. If not, I suggest you stop responding to your repeat customers the same way as the people causing this problem.

Obviously we'd all like a detailed update, but how about something like "Our last meaningful discussion with the certification authority was on $date" or "Our next planned draft submittal is planned for $date"? Heck, even something like a warrant canary that requires an action on your part to indicate that someone is still employed on working the problem would be helpful.

Or it could be something as basic as, hypothetically there is a thread on your message board that you are actively monitoring, and it has been several months since an update has been given or requested. When a request like that is posted, you could hypothetically respond with something neutral like "We are continuing to work it. There has been activity since the last update, which unfortunately we aren't able to share. The morale of those working the problem has experienced positive/neutral/negative change since the last update. The information posted at this link remains the most accurate we can provide."

Or you could continue to ignore the update requests from your customers that come in a few times a year until you are called out on it and then lash out at them like they are the problem and they wonder why they keep this line of communication open at all. It's your company, do whatever you want with it.

[zippy]

Maybe you need to change "we'd all like a detailed update" to "I would like a detailed update".

I watch the rabbitears ATSC 3.0 threat for how many new lighthouse stations are coming online. Without more ATSC 3.0 channels coming online full coverage in the top 55 markets isn't going to happen. And DRM may not be the biggest ATSC 3.0 problem.

[nblair5]

[removed by moderator - see forum rules]

Mods, at your earliest convenience please PM me to help me post better in the future. I can no longer see the content to attempt to understand how my response differed from the post I was responding to, regarding application of forum rules.

Regardless, I'm hoping this redaction does not apply closure to the questions directed to the post by NedS:
* Does the accusation of disinformation and FUD apply to me? If so, please help me correct them.
* Does "we have already addressed this" reference the FAQ edited Feb2024, or something more recent I've missed?

[zaytar]

[removed by moderator - see forum rules]

[signcarver]

The only answer SD can give, other than completely giving up (which has not happened), has already been given:

"Will DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 channels play on my Android or Fire TV device?
Using a gateway product - we expect it will be possible in the future but it is not possible today. The Google Widevine DRM decryption is possible but there are other requirements that are draft/incomplete at this time. There is activity happening."

At this time it is not possible for a true gateway device to work with a3sa restrictions. It is expected to be possible and a pseudo-gateway device supposedly is due by years end (but even that might be delayed). That device has an advantage that they control both tuner and client device and thus always has a fallback to get things working in that "closed" system rather than a "gateway" system that can support 3rd party devices.

I do expect a bit more info by January but I do not expect such info to come from SD until they have the possibility of completing such (right now it isnt possible outside of a lab and things that happen inside that lab can't really be discussed.

[nblair5]

The only answer SD can give, other than completely giving up (which has not happened), has already been given:

"Will DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 channels play on my Android or Fire TV device?
Using a gateway product - we expect it will be possible in the future but it is not possible today. The Google Widevine DRM decryption is possible but there are other requirements that are draft/incomplete at this time. There is activity happening."

At this time it is not possible for a true gateway device to work with a3sa restrictions. It is expected to be possible and a pseudo-gateway device supposedly is due by years end (but even that might be delayed). That device has an advantage that they control both tuner and client device and thus always has a fallback to get things working in that "closed" system rather than a "gateway" system that can support 3rd party devices.

I do expect a bit more info by January but I do not expect such info to come from SD until they have the possibility of completing such (right now it isnt possible outside of a lab and things that happen inside that lab can't really be discussed.

Thank you, that is helpful. So there is a potential hardware solution in the works for next year. Other than that, the last indication of activity on software clients was this post in January.

Julie and I are the ones negotiating with A3SA.

It remains today that there is no A3SA-approved pathway that is compatible with Roku, Apple TV, XBox, LG, Samsung, Windows, Mac, or iOS. We have renewed efforts to get this changed.

So I see where SD has signaled that they have not given up on DRM completely. However, this messaging is consistent with giving up on Android TV DRM specifically*, given the explicit status given for 8 other OS's and investment in a pseudo-gateway device. If there was any hope that the draft/incomplete requirements from 17 months ago will ever complete, it seems inconsistent with the information provided.

* And yes, Android TV is a niche choice, but the irony is that my house is configured 100% with Android TV because I purchased them specifically to be compatible with SD's cablecard DRM solution.

[petelombardo]

Just taking a step back and looking at things at a very high level... With the recent news about The Late Show being cancelled due to declining revenue due to declining OTA viewers (true or not, doesn't matter), and some evidence showing such, it's hard to imagine anyone thinking, "You know why viewership is declining? Because it's too darn easy to watch! And it's too fast! We need to throw some DRM in the way, slow things down for people, and make it more frustrating for the average person. That's how we'll reverse this trend!"

I love technology. I am not at all a Luddite. I love making NFC payments (vs. swiping cards), streaming services (vs DVDs), and nearly all modern advances in tech. Until now, I've only focused on how the tech benefits me. DRM definitely does not benefit me. But as I thought more about it recently, I don't see how it benefits the networks either. It's just another obstacle to more viewership/revenue.

During the brief period when all music was DRM-encumbered, I remember I bought absolutely no digital music. When they removed DRM, I bought it again. I'm not a freeloader. I just want freedom with the content I watch/buy. And I get that the streams are DRM'd. And I'm fine with that. Nothing was taken away, and the tech works seamlessly. But applying that tech to broadcast just doesn't make sense to me. Broadcast should be dependency-free, not require internet to work. Streaming requires Internet no matter what, so that's why it works there. But broadcast... that's what you watch when the Internet is down.

Oh well, I think the problem will work itself out in the end. Either the government is going to have to mandate the removal of DRM and save the backs of the people who mandated it, or the A3SA is going to have to loosen up the restrictions on devices a lot, or broadcast TV is going to go the way of 8-tracks. Honestly, the broadcast networks should be trying to remove all obstacles to viewership right now....

#rantover

[Phoenixfury]

Nice update from Lon Seidman concerning DRM.

https://youtu.be/-VY3n9cl7tk?si=P3cSnM8jXZdVFc0e