Encryption

[howardc1243]

Years ago some dodgy Chinese companies started making unnamed boxes that shipped with the **** media player pre-installed as well as third party plugins that provided instant access to pirated content. Because these boxes were unnamed and they launched into **** they became known as **** boxes even though the boxes and the piracy aspect had nothing to do with the open source **** media player project.

Major shopping sites block/ban media player products that mention **** and in the past shopping sites have sometimes blocked/banned our product for saying it works with **** even though the HDHomeRun is not a player device and doesn't run ****.

that to me is a very clear explanation.

[howardc1243]

Which is why I asked a while back why the HD Homerun could not be modified so it could at least tune and receive encrypted ATSC 3.0 stations so they could be at least viewed on the TV but not record them until the legal stuff is resolved. Seems like an easy change to me.

Making that change would be a big plus and I know I would buy one. Maybe many others too.

the fly in the ointment is it may not be as secure and the a3sa is high on security.

[howardc1243]

OK, let me see if I can get the problem with encryption of ATSC 3.0 signals straight in my feeble little mind. I read the referenced thread and came up my hypothesis: The problem that A3SA will never do anything about is allowing a networked tuner to decrypt the signal so that that signal may be watched on several different devices, within a home, at the same time. This will never be allowed, right?

<quote>I don't think this is correct. From reading the actual source documents from the various organizations, there would appear to be a current set of implementations that could allow this. However, it would require SiliconDust to substantially change their architecture to implement all those requirements. They really don't want to throw the entire baby out, so are attempting to work with the organizations to propose and receive approval for alternatives and extensions(*). Other companies, starting from a different base, may choose other paths forward.</quote>

as long as there are doodooheads among the a3sa that are set on the 1 device mindset no progress is going to be made, the mindset has to change first.



(*) And nothing is final until it is final. Such proposals, revisions, revisions of revisions, and approvals could take months, or years, or never happen. And SiliconDust is not likely to offer any substantive update on schedules until the fat lady is singing (as you don't talk about closed door negotiations).

[gore]

Which is why I asked a while back why the HD Homerun could not be modified so it could at least tune and receive encrypted ATSC 3.0 stations so they could be at least viewed on the TV but not record them until the legal stuff is resolved. Seems like an easy change to me.

Making that change would be a big plus and I know I would buy one. Maybe many others too.

the fly in the ointment is it may not be as secure and the a3sa is high on security.

High enough on security to the point that no one can watch any of the content at all. Stations are spending millions on ATSC 3.0 equipment and utilities to run that equipment and no one is able to watch it. I am amazed that after this amount of time that some stations haven't just shut it off to wait the months or years that were suggested that it will take to work this ridiculous situation out. Right now it's just a money sink.

Having worked in the cable TV industry for many years, I totally understand that this all goes back to the date when the FCC first allowed TV stations to charge viewers (cable TV viewers) for the ability to watch the reliable signals that cable systems were providing when they were unable to get a solid signal using a TV antenna at their homes. The stations claimed that cable systems were "modifying" the signal even though it was quite obvious that we were doing nothing of the kind, we were only putting up a tall tower and commercial antennas so that we could put out, without any modification, a solid signal our customers could watch. But it was what it was, and those fees went from cheap to ridiculous in just a few years and now stations are making millions from those retransmission fees and are desperate to keep that revenue stream going, even if it means no one can actually watch those signals right now. The revenue stream was also expanded to include satellite TV providers such as Dish and DirecTV. The stations have always been working on a way to expand that revenue stream from just cable TV users and satellite TV viewers to anyone who wants to watch their signals with just a regular TV antenna or rabbit ears at their home, and this is the result of that effort. Obviously the FCC has no desire or will to step into the fray and say enough is enough, which is a very sad situation.

[howardc1243]

Which is why I asked a while back why the HD Homerun could not be modified so it could at least tune and receive encrypted ATSC 3.0 stations so they could be at least viewed on the TV but not record them until the legal stuff is resolved. Seems like an easy change to me.

Making that change would be a big plus and I know I would buy one. Maybe many others too.

the fly in the ointment is it may not be as secure and the a3sa is high on security.

High enough on security to the point that no one can watch any of the content at all. Stations are spending millions on ATSC 3.0 equipment and utilities to run that equipment and no one is able to watch it. I am amazed that after this amount of time that some stations haven't just shut it off to wait the months or years that were suggested that it will take to work this ridiculous situation out. Right now it's just a money sink.

Having worked in the cable TV industry for many years, I totally understand that this all goes back to the date when the FCC first allowed TV stations to charge viewers (cable TV viewers) for the ability to watch the reliable signals that cable systems were providing when they were unable to get a solid signal using a TV antenna at their homes. The stations claimed that cable systems were "modifying" the signal even though it was quite obvious that we were doing nothing of the kind, we were only putting up a tall tower and commercial antennas so that we could put out, without any modification, a solid signal our customers could watch. But it was what it was, and those fees went from cheap to ridiculous in just a few years and now stations are making millions from those retransmission fees and are desperate to keep that revenue stream going, even if it means no one can actually watch those signals right now. The revenue stream was also expanded to include satellite TV providers such as Dish and DirecTV. The stations have always been working on a way to expand that revenue stream from just cable TV users and satellite TV viewers to anyone who wants to watch their signals with just a regular TV antenna or rabbit ears at their home, and this is the result of that effort. Obviously the FCC has no desire or will to step into the fray and say enough is enough, which is a very sad situation.

and the t administration is putting a gutless wonder as chairman of the fcc and he is not going to help, according to a more recent video from lon seidman

[bandit5731]

https://ibb.co/86kF9Sj

this for DRM with hdHomerun support? Are we getting there?

[NedS]

https://ibb.co/86kF9Sj

this for DRM with hhHomerun support? Are we getting there?

Unrelated to ATSC 3.0 DRM

[mountainman]

Sorry if this is a newbie question. I am in the Denver area and trying to view the non-DRM ATSC3.0 channels (there are 2 DRM and 2 non-DRM). The signal strength and quality for the combined channel (34 KWGN) is 100% and 100% (via the Signal GH app on iOS). However, trying to view any of the 4 channels gives "No video data" error. I have a Flex 4K and a Clearstream 4Max in the attic with a single 50' run to the HDH using a Channel Master preamp on high gain (this gives the best reception results). Does anyone else have luck in the Denver area getting any of these channels?

Edit/additional information: Under the web interface, the non DRM channels give Signal Strength (64%), Signal Quality (79%) and Symbol quality (100%) but no streaming rate. Modulation lock is atsc3.

[nickk]

Sorry if this is a newbie question. I am in the Denver area and trying to view the non-DRM ATSC3.0 channels (there are 2 DRM and 2 non-DRM). The signal strength and quality for the combined channel (34 KWGN) is 100% and 100% (via the Signal GH app on iOS). However, trying to view any of the 4 channels gives "No video data" error. I have a Flex 4K and a Clearstream 4Max in the attic with a single 50' run to the HDH using a Channel Master preamp on high gain (this gives the best reception results). Does anyone else have luck in the Denver area getting any of these channels?

Edit/additional information: Under the web interface, the non DRM channels give Signal Strength (64%), Signal Quality (79%) and Symbol quality (100%) but no streaming rate. Modulation lock is atsc3.

Can you please post this as a new thread... we will help.

[techpro2004]

Someone beat sd to having a atsc 3.0 drm gateway device. I wont post the make or model here but part of it is [removed by moderator]. can sd comment on this?

edit:

Just noticed silicondust is listed here (https://a3sa.com/about-a3sa/) under adopters. can sd comment on that as well?

[tbadaczewski]

So you are saying someone has a device on the market that can get through all that encryption? If so, isn't this ther biggest news in years?!

[Flyoffacliff]

It looks like it! Frustrating that SD would rather censor messages then offer an honest reply on the subject. It was originally intended to stop competitive products from appearing in search results but now they seem to be blocking even obscure abbreviations.

[removed by moderator - see forum rules]

Not sure how some off-brand company beat SD when SD already has the hardware to support this it's just a licensing issue, but let's hope this means we see it on SD hardware quite soon now that the software side has worked out apparently.

[tbadaczewski]

Gives me some hope atleast, and I'd love to hear more backstory on this and what process the competitor went through. Is it a simpler device? Did they submit for approval first? Did the country of origin speed the process (less regulation)?

[DrSmith]

I don't see anything on that product page about DRM support. So they are just as much of an ATSC 3 gateway device as the SD Flex currently is. Full gateway support for non-DRM channels. But that product is not actually even for sale, is it? You have to click and fill out a form for a quote. Ooooh, and they have DOBLY [sic] support. bwa ha ha.
Nothing to see here...

[techpro2004]

The one I was referring to is not listed there. [removed by moderator - see forum rules]

edit: under product description type in "atsc 3.0" with out the quotes It will be in that list.