Encryption

[xmguy]

Nothing new really. You haven't been able to watch ATSC1.0 without an internet connection with the HDHR software for years. Not that it is listed anywhere you would notice prior to purchase. If you rely on the HDHR software and your internet goes down in an emergency you're SOL.

The Roku HDHomeRun app works great in disconnected mode, and SD has said they plan on bringing this functionality to their other apps. My previous setup (HDHR + tvheadend + Kodi) also worked fine in the absence of a working internet connection.

Not too drag off topic here. But I'll go one further. I've used the SD HR4K connected to my Laptop standalone. No internet, only the ethernet connected directly between the HR and the PC. I use the HR Config GUI and it picks it up just fine.

[NedS]

If the SD application is installed on a android clent that is TEE and has it's own A3SA certificate and connects tothe TV via HDMI will the SD app be smart enough to use the client'S A3SA, widevine L1 and not need the interneT

That's not really how it works. The device doesn't get an A3SA certificate, the application running on the device does, and A3SA requires that certificate be obtained online.

If a playback device, Android or otherwise, came to market that supported DTCP2 then it might be possible, because A3SA has a DTCP2-method that allows decrypting when offline. However, we have yet to see any consumer hardware actually support DTCP2, so there isn't any point in us adding support for it at this time.

[NedS]

Just to clarify further, you're not saying that the certified HDHR app can only run on a certified "NextGen" TV, right? That would rather defeat the whole purpose for which most people bought your "4K" device, i.e. so they wouldn't have to buy a "NextGen" TV. So when all the steps are complete, people will be able to run a "certified" version of your app on all the same hardware where the uncertified version now works for content that is not "protected", right?

Correct, the app is certified. The hardware needs to support widevine L1, but just about everything does. There are some platforms where we might have to figure something else out with A3SA, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. We'll actually be able to support more platforms than we were with CableCARD DRM.

Well, clearly, nobody can force SD to decrypt video on its own product if it doesn't want to. But I wouldn't bet on a3sa rules remaining static forever. I said previously the rules would have to change and they did. I expect it will be a while before they change again, but never is a long time, and a3sa may be forced by market realities to adapt again at some point, just like all the rest of us.

I certainly hope so.

[Trip]

This morning many people are waking up to find that Comcast has added content protection to encrypt some of its NBC Universal-owned stations. These stations include owned by Hearst ABC WCVB in Boston and Comcast’s NBC 10 in Boston.

WCVB and WBTS turned on encryption months ago. Not sure why it's just being reported now.

- Trip

[decaym]

If a playback device, Android or otherwise, came to market that supported DTCP2 then it might be possible, because A3SA has a DTCP2-method that allows decrypting when offline. However, we have yet to see any consumer hardware actually support DTCP2, so there isn't any point in us adding support for it at this time.

Considering that DTCP2 is pay to play (need to pay for a license just to see the spec), I don't see too many companies rushing to implement. I still shake my head that the FCC allowed so many pay for use technologies into a standard intended for public broadcast. Guess it just the way of the world now.

[emveepee]

Correct, the app is certified. The hardware needs to support widevine L1, but just about everything does. There are some platforms where we might have to figure something else out with A3SA, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. We'll actually be able to support more platforms than we were with CableCARD DRM.

Earlier in this thread nickk said L3. Too bad, especially for cheaper tablets.

Martin

[jasonl]

Considering that DTCP2 is pay to play (need to pay for a license just to see the spec), I don't see too many companies rushing to implement. I still shake my head that the FCC allowed so many pay for use technologies into a standard intended for public broadcast. Guess it just the way of the world now.

If by "now" you mean "for as long as telecommunications have existed", then OK. When Bell patented the telephone in the 1870s, he didn't give it away, his business partner set up an entity to control the patents and they got rich off of it.

[xmguy]

Considering that DTCP2 is pay to play (need to pay for a license just to see the spec), I don't see too many companies rushing to implement. I still shake my head that the FCC allowed so many pay for use technologies into a standard intended for public broadcast. Guess it just the way of the world now.

If by "now" you mean "for as long as telecommunications have existed", then OK. When Bell patented the telephone in the 1870s, he didn't give it away, his business partner set up an entity to control the patents and they got rich off of it.

Over The Air TV has ALWAYS been Free. Telephone, has not. Patents incumber companies from adopting. Like HD Radio. But there never should have been DRM within a FREE OTA signal anyway. Just my 3 cents.

[Cabal]

If by "now" you mean "for as long as telecommunications have existed", then OK. When Bell patented the telephone in the 1870s, he didn't give it away, his business partner set up an entity to control the patents and they got rich off of it.

Over The Air TV has ALWAYS been Free.

MPEG-2 and AC-3 were both heavily patent-encumbered at the time of ATSC 1.0 release. Their patents have since expired (2020 and 2017, respectively), but that took decades.

[Cabal]

SD folks -

When encryption/DRM is successfully implemented, will all of my DRM viewing habits (live and recorded) be sent to a non-SD third party?

Will SD be relaying those requests on our behalf?

Thanks.

[joblo]

When encryption/DRM is successfully implemented, will all of my DRM viewing habits (live and recorded) be sent to a non-SD third party?

Whether they are or not, the possibility of it is an argument against using any internet-connected device to view NextGen[tm] TV.

I wouldn't bet on a3sa rules remaining static forever. I said previously the rules would have to change and they did. I expect it will be a while before they change again, but never is a long time, and a3sa may be forced by market realities to adapt again at some point, just like all the rest of us.

At some point, if/when 1.0 is shutdown, emergency notification obligations should either force a3sa to allow even networked tuners like the HDHR to decode without internet,

OR there will need to be at least one unencrypted stream on all full service 3.0 transmitters at all times, in the most robust PLP that carries any video at all.

But the 1.0 shutdown is many YEARS away, so a3sa and the industry generally might not be thinking that far ahead.

[zippy]

Years in the future covers just about any amount of time.

The FCC seems to want to speed things up.

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments ... 2605A1.pdf

https://www.nexttv.com/news/fccnab-team ... transition

[diplexer]

Why Broadcasters enabled encryption before any boxes can decode encrypted stations is just plain crazy. It's just ridiculous to broadcast for only a few TV sets that can decrypt signals. Very few people will buy a new tv for atsc3 but many will buy a converter box first and none can decrypt at this time. Poor decision making by broadcasters. It's not preventing iptv from getting atsc1 signals for 5 years anyway so why the rush to encrypt. Poor excuses.

[MikeBear]

Why Broadcasters enabled encryption before any boxes can decode encrypted stations is just plain crazy. It's just ridiculous to broadcast for only a few TV sets that can decrypt signals. Very few people will buy a new tv for atsc3 but many will buy a converter box first and none can decrypt at this time. Poor decision making by broadcasters. It's not preventing iptv from getting atsc1 signals for 5 years anyway so why the rush to encrypt. Poor excuses.

IMO, they are doing it as fast as they can, so they'll be so entrenched by the time government notices, that even the government won't likely force them to remove it.

[zippy]

the horse has already left the barn

If the FCC really cared, over a year ago, they could have required all new TV's support ATSC 3.0 and encryption not turned on until there were multiple set top boxes that supported ATSC 3.0 and encryption.