Encryption

[gore]

My closest TV market is Oklahoma City. In the days of analog, we could receive a perfect signal at my location 70 miles away with a decent antenna. And for a while, digital was perfectly receivable as well. I realize this is a significant distance from the transmitters but with Oklahoma's relatively flat terrain, TV signals can travel long distances in most instances.

Then something changed, ATSC 1.0 is not receivable much at all now. I don't know what changed but something did, so I have to assume that transmit power was reduced for some reason. It could be all the tower shuffling and moving transmitters to shorter towers was what caused the loss of signal. When the ATSC 3.0 signals were turned on, the Oklahoma City market was one of the first in the country to get it, reception came back, all the 3.0 signals are fine and very stable with no drop-outs at all. All of them were in the clear, unencrypted. Now only the Fox station is in the clear, all the others are using encryption and there is currently no way to watch them.

I don't know what tower is being used for the ATSC 3.0 signals, maybe it is the tallest one. The CBS station uses a 1576' tower and is not participating in the ATSC 3.0 transmissions, but their ATSC 1.0 signal is completely gone, it has not been receivable here for over a year.

Because your timeline of events goes all the way back to analog and you didn't note any changes on your system, I'm willing to bet a doughnut that you need a LTE filter.

That could be. Prior to last fall I was using an old flat-panel UHF antenna I had lying around for years, with a generic pre-amp/power supply. That setup received the ATSC 1.0 signals just fine up to a certain point. I got a new Antennas Direct DB8e last fall along with a Blonder Tongue Low-Noise UHF commercial pre-amp and power supply. I used to run the local cable TV system, so I still have access to commercial electronics, and I have lots of experience in antennas and associated electronics. I placed the new antenna on a new 30' pole quite a bit taller than the old 20' one, but none of that did any good, nothing changed. The ATSC signals are still not receivable but the ATSC 3.0 signals are rock-solid. Before the NBC and ABC signals were encrypted, they came in rock-solid as well. After encryption was turned on I can still receive the Fox station and it is rock-solid as well. I know I am a long way from the transmitter towers, but the fact that the ATSC 3.0 signals are receivable with no problem while the ATSC 1.0 signals are completely gone would indicate that something else is going on, I just can't put my finger on it.

[freway01]

Getting back on message, it looks like the score is now Za$$erbox one, HDHomeRun zero. The 'Antenna Man' reported on his Youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgnnMJODpoY) that the Za$$erbox M1 is now capable of recoding ATSC 3.0 video. Meanwhile, crickets from the SD team.

The 'Antenna Man' also said that the broadcaster Sinclair will begin broadcasting the Tennis Channel T2 in 4K in some of the cities they own stations in.

[nickk]

Recording DRM isn't the problem. The thing that A3SA is making difficult is streaming via a network to popular player devices.

[Cabal]

Getting back on message, it looks like the score is now Za$$erbox one, HDHomeRun zero. The 'Antenna Man' reported on his Youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgnnMJODpoY) that the Za$$erbox M1 is now capable of recoding ATSC 3.0 video. Meanwhile, crickets from the SD team.

The device is question is not a network gateway, it must be plugged into a TV. The rules are not comparable.

Also, the A-brand device already has a firmware that can record DRM (may be beta, I don’t really follow).

[freway01]

Getting back on message, it looks like the score is now Za$$erbox one, HDHomeRun zero. The 'Antenna Man' reported on his Youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgnnMJODpoY) that the Za$$erbox M1 is now capable of recoding ATSC 3.0 video. Meanwhile, crickets from the SD team.

The device is question is not a network gateway, it must be plugged into a TV. The rules are not comparable.

Also, the A-brand device already has a firmware that can record DRM (may be beta, I don’t really follow).

Per Za$$erbox's release notes, both 'remote access' and using the box for 'security' purposes without an internet connection is coming (https://*********.com/pages/release-notes). I'm not a user of the Za$$erbox either, but it is a solution for users who can't receive the ATSC 1.0 signal but can the ATSC 3.0 signal.

I'm a longtime user of HDHomeRun devices, and supporter of the protect, but it sure would be nice if someone would from SD would provide some sort of progress. I've been asking that they create a thread that only they can post to where they can provide a sort of release notes similar to what Za$$erbox does.

[Cabal]

I wouldn't put much stock in their "future plans", given the current restrictions in place.

[freway01]

I wouldn't put much stock in their "future plans", given the current restrictions in place.

I'm not a Za$$erbox user or fan, but at lease their box is recording ATSC 3.0 DRM'd video, which is more than we can say about the Flex 4K.

[DSperber]

I wouldn't put much stock in their "future plans", given the current restrictions in place.

It's unknown exactly what they are really describing.

But as I interpret things they are not hindered by wanting to stream DRM content around the network to popular player devices which are themselves connected to TVs.

Rather, they already have possibly multiple of their own already secure devices around the network, each one per TV, and each one already individually capable of live-view and DVR record/playback of DRM content. No need to use any popular 3rd-party player devices in the "delivery system".

So they just need to deliver content from one of their secure one-per-TV devices to any other of their secure one-per-TV devices that is already on the network, at another TV location. It's really just a design mechanism to facilitate network sharing of still encrypted DVR recordings between their secure devices, each one of which could have individually made the identical DVR recording in the first place and played it back with the decryption occurring on that device. I don't think they will face the same obstinance from A3SA for this type of topology design.

Pure speculation, of course, based on their stated "future plans" and what is already now available.

[freway01]

I wouldn't put much stock in their "future plans", given the current restrictions in place.

It's unknown exactly what they are really describing.

But as I interpret things they are not hindered by wanting to stream DRM content around the network to popular player devices which are themselves connected to TVs.

Rather, they already have possibly multiple of their own already secure devices around the network, each one per TV, and each one already individually capable of live-view and DVR record/playback of DRM content. No need to use any popular 3rd-party player devices in the "delivery system".

So they just need to deliver content from one of their secure one-per-TV devices to any other of their secure one-per-TV devices that is already on the network, at another TV location. I don't think they will face the same obstinance from A3SA for this type of topology design.

Pure speculation, of course, based on their stated "future plans" and what is already now available.

I've been a user of SD products for over 7+ years, and I love them. I don't use or want a Za$$erbox, but because they are cable to record ATSC 3.0 DRM's content, they would be a bridge for people who are out of the range of an ATSC 1.0 OTA signal, but within the range of the ATSC 3.0 that need to DVR DRM's content.

My main point is they are communicating with their users and potential customers their future and in some cases, a timeline. I follow this thread and I don't remember reading and comments from SD following the release from the A3SA's DRM specifications back in February.

[DSperber]

I've been a user of SD products for over 7+ years, and I love them.

Not so long for me. I jumped in with the Flex-4K about 1.5 years ago. Loved it, and still love it... for non-DRM ATSC 3.0 here in LA.

I don't use or want a Za$$erbox, but because they are cable to record ATSC 3.0 DRM's content, they would be a bridge for people who are out of the range of an ATSC 1.0 OTA signal, but within the range of the ATSC 3.0 that need to DVR DRM's content.

Precisely.

After waiting a very long time for SD to solve the DRM problem (which is still ongoing and unsolved), I decided to try this alternative path just to "play in the sandbox". So now I own both devices. I now have two options to have something that meets my needs.

My main point is they are communicating with their users and potential customers their future and in some cases, a timeline. I follow this thread and I don't remember reading and comments from SD following the release from the A3SA's DRM specifications back in February.

Again, precisely correct. And in 2 weeks I will finally have my long-awaited DVR record/playback functionality for ATSC 3.0 DRM content. Although not ideal full-network whole-home implementation but limited to one-device-per-TV, it is at least something that "works" on that one TV. I can certainly live with that.

[Cabal]

I don't see the proposed plans as anything different than what is posted on the first page of this thread. No one has yet offered any proof that what they're suggesting is currently possible or allowed. What you guys are reading is marketing material in the form of a "future" changelog.

So they just need to deliver content from one of their secure one-per-TV devices to any other of their secure one-per-TV devices that is already on the network, at another TV location. It's really just a design mechanism to facilitate network sharing of still encrypted DVR recordings between their secure devices, each one of which could have individually made the identical DVR recording in the first place and played it back with the decryption occurring on that device. I don't think they will face the same obstinance from A3SA for this type of topology design.

The boxes in question are vanilla Android (TV?) operating systems, I haven't seen anything to suggest there is anything special, secure, or "blessed" about them. Hell, people in other threads are posting about getting the HDHomeRun and YouTube apps running on them.

I have nothing against the Z-company and am happy they're making progress in this space. But let's not confuse their marketing material with some sort of breakthrough that is in direct opposition to the past 12 months of experience from all parties involved.

[freway01]

I don't see the proposed plans as anything different than what is posted on the first page of this thread. No one has yet offered any proof that what they're suggesting is currently possible or allowed. What you guys are reading is marketing material in the form of a "future" changelog.

So they just need to deliver content from one of their secure one-per-TV devices to any other of their secure one-per-TV devices that is already on the network, at another TV location. It's really just a design mechanism to facilitate network sharing of still encrypted DVR recordings between their secure devices, each one of which could have individually made the identical DVR recording in the first place and played it back with the decryption occurring on that device. I don't think they will face the same obstinance from A3SA for this type of topology design.

The boxes in question are vanilla Android (TV?) operating systems, I haven't seen anything to suggest there is anything special, secure, or "blessed" about them. Hell, people in other threads are posting about getting the HDHomeRun and YouTube apps running on them.

I have nothing against the Z-company and am happy they're making progress in this space. But let's not confuse their marketing material with some sort of breakthrough that is in direct opposition to the past 12 months of experience from all parties involved.

You may want to watch the Anntenna Man's latest video. In addition to being able watch ATSC 3.0 DRM, I think he is able to record it thanks to a recent update. Not looking to move to Za$$erbox, just hoping something from SD will provide some sort of update on their progress

[Cabal]

You may want to watch the Anntenna Man's latest video. In addition to being able watch ATSC 3.0 DRM, I think he is able to record it thanks to a recent update. Not looking to move to Za$$erbox, just hoping something from SD will provide some sort of update on their progress

???

No one is disputing that. This discussion and thread is about viewing DRM-encrypted ATSC 3.0 broadcasts across a network.

[HopWorks]

Hi All,

It is going to take me a day to read through this thread since I was directed here by Silicon Dust, but I wanted to offer someone to blame for this issue.

It's me. Seriously, it's me. Like when I blame myself for my teams losing once I start watching them on TV, or even go see them in person. It's ALL me when I bet on my team to win, no matter what the odds. And it is definitely ALL ME when I go after a technology that solves a need I have.

And it certainly applies here. The tech works for everyone, even for years, until I go on-board with it. THEN SUDDENLY, there is an issue, and most of the time, it's not solvable. I research forever before I purchase, and EVERYONE is happy with it. Five star reviews with 20k people responded. Then I click that BUY button. Get it, install it, diagnose my simple issues, THEN LIKE A SLEDGE HAMMER COMING DOWN on my happiness of dreams coming true, the train comes completely off the tracks.

It's like my metro-phoenix area broadcasters waited for me to use a technology to get OTA to roll-out their DRM. The timing is so coincidental, it's got to be an act of Karma against me from the God's. So much so that all I can think of is all the times I was certain the Raiders were not only going to go to the Super bowl, they would WIN! And I of course broadcasted that. Then they... well... google it. It's tragic and pathetic.

Am I just imagining it? Not convinced of my power of bad-luck?? How about... I need a nice clear line-of-site path to our South Mountain antennas to get a good signal, that goes straight through an empty lot in our development. THEN, I get this tech to do HD OTA in my home, and a week later, a two story house is going to be built RIGHT in that path. Yeah, believe it. It's like FINAL DESTINATION except that force isn't trying to kill me. Just trying to derail my new idea and options.

So blame me, or at least my Karma. It has to be that, and I am super-sick with disqust and disappointment. And I absolutely LOVE this hardware that I bought two because I needed one to use a separately-aimed antenna so I could get my Perry Mason from a station that was not in the coverage "CONE". It was that one channel or all the others, so I got a 2-tuner one with a window antenna to cover that.

Anyway, forgive me for throwing light on this argument. Believe me, I am plenty upset, and I hope it all works out. I hate DRM like I would anything else that has wronged an honest person like myself. The rich just gets richer, and the poorer get... better at ingenuity apparently.

All this pushes me to learn FPGA and figure out how to clean my DRM-infested signal so I can do with it what I want, live.

Have a great weekend!

[DennisFL]

So blame me, or at least my Karma. It has to be that, and I am super-sick with disqust and disappointment. And I absolutely LOVE this hardware that I bought two because I needed one to use a separately-aimed antenna so I could get my Perry Mason from a station that was not in the coverage "CONE". It was that one channel or all the others, so I got a 2-tuner one with a window antenna to cover that.

That's funny. I did the same thing initially to watch Perry Mason on Me. Later, however, I found it was easier to get all seasons on DVD from the library. Then I noticed that Paramount had all seasons in 1080P. Then I found I could download them with PlayOn and watch them anytime on Emby.

But I still have my stations to the South as one by one the ATSC 3.0s to the North go DRM. Instead of just the Me channel, I use the South antenna for ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. And if a storm upsets my reception, I use Peacock, Paramount, ABC, and ESPN.

Cheers.