4 ms·

> Rep: "It's a criminal offence against the copyright act, mate. We've got technical protection methods inside the box so exactly this thing can't happen." Ah,

> Rep: "It's a criminal offence against the copyright act, mate. We've got technical protection methods inside the box so exactly this thing can't happen." Ah, yeah, so "exactly this thing can't happen". Logic 101. Guess DRM was a terrific success then.

jfoster 10y ago
Well, it sounds like they did eventually cut his access, so that's one measure. Presumably they relied on Facebook having his real name in order to know who he was, though it's also possible that they have some stenographic watermarking.
- girvo 10y ago
  > they have some stenographic watermarking They did. Right before access was cut, a code was watermarked on the TV, I assume it was per-box as a number so they knew who it was to cut access to.
  - i336_ 10y ago
    Whoa. Do you have any video or photographic references of this? Just really fascinated with the technicals of how they'd do that.
    - klackerz 10y ago
      My cable provider also has a unique code which flashes on TV randomly. I could provide a photo or video of it if you are interested later when I reach home.
      - i336_ 10y ago
        Someone linked a photo in another comment in this thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13566519 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13566519). If it looks significantly different to that then sure, I wouldn't mind seeing.
    - MatekCopatek 10y ago
      I work in a similar industry and many times content providers require you to implement a system for this kind of identification. It's nothing special technically, you just display a unique ID over the video on ALL client devices for a fraction of a second when a potential infringement is under way - just enough to get evidence that lets you later identify the user from the recording.
    - thejosh 10y ago
      They use to do this in UK pubs for those who were showing something on their TVs without a licensed. They tried showing an image, but the owners would just stick something covering the watermark so they wouldn't be caught q Edit - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930
      - mattmanser 10y ago
        You've got it a bit backwards, they still show a pub glass icon. It's for inspectors to see that it's a pub license, which is more expensive than a home one. The volume in the glass changes daily so you can't just put a sticker or overlay on to replicate it.
        i336_ 10y ago
        While thinking about this for a bit after reading https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930, I thought of something: Why not just get the home package and run it through your own overlay system? The fatal flaw here with this design is that there's nothing in place of the glass. With enough tinkering (a pub subscription and a home subscription to play with, and maybe a fortnight to a month, if that) build something that exactly reproduces the watermark. 1080i-capable HDMI capture systems are expensive but not 5-figures (or even 4-figures) expensive nowadays, and most satellite feeds don't even justify 1080i anyway. Do satellite receivers do HDCP? If they do, RGB video is still very very very good quality for 1080i, and reference-quality RGB capture systems aren't 5 figures (probably very low 4 figures). You could just output via HDMI or whatever of course. To complete the setup, you could have one place receive a legitimate broadcast, and (alongside the TVs/projectors) run that through a capture system which would do differential frame analysis to heuristically figure out what watermark is displaying at the moment. This location automatically pushes the current watermark type out to a bunch of other places - for a nice small fee. Of course, the above is said from an honest academic-security standpoint. :P
        mattmanser 10y ago
        To be able to do this, you'd need access to the pub subscription to be able to see the glass to replicate it, so why bother?
    - stordoff 10y ago
      Sky in the UK do this routinely on their sports channels (example image: https://up.metropol247.co.uk/davidlees/bbc_sky_sports.png https://up.metropol247.co.uk/davidlees/bbc_sky_sports.png ). IIRC, switching channels causes it to temporarily disappear, so I assume the receiver is responsible for overlaying it on the incoming video feed.
      - laumars 10y ago
        It has to be the receiver because otherwise you're then sending a unique video feed to every set top box. It makes far more sense to braudcast 1 video feed and let the clients manage the unique watermarking.

jfoster 10y ago

Well, it sounds like they did eventually cut his access, so that's one measure. Presumably they relied on Facebook having his real name in order to know who he was, though it's also possible that they have some stenographic watermarking.

girvo 10y ago
> they have some stenographic watermarking They did. Right before access was cut, a code was watermarked on the TV, I assume it was per-box as a number so they knew who it was to cut access to.
- i336_ 10y ago
  Whoa. Do you have any video or photographic references of this? Just really fascinated with the technicals of how they'd do that.
  - klackerz 10y ago
    My cable provider also has a unique code which flashes on TV randomly. I could provide a photo or video of it if you are interested later when I reach home.
    - i336_ 10y ago
      Someone linked a photo in another comment in this thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13566519 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13566519). If it looks significantly different to that then sure, I wouldn't mind seeing.
  - MatekCopatek 10y ago
    I work in a similar industry and many times content providers require you to implement a system for this kind of identification. It's nothing special technically, you just display a unique ID over the video on ALL client devices for a fraction of a second when a potential infringement is under way - just enough to get evidence that lets you later identify the user from the recording.
  - thejosh 10y ago
    They use to do this in UK pubs for those who were showing something on their TVs without a licensed. They tried showing an image, but the owners would just stick something covering the watermark so they wouldn't be caught q Edit - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930
    - mattmanser 10y ago
      You've got it a bit backwards, they still show a pub glass icon. It's for inspectors to see that it's a pub license, which is more expensive than a home one. The volume in the glass changes daily so you can't just put a sticker or overlay on to replicate it.
      - i336_ 10y ago
        While thinking about this for a bit after reading https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9419930, I thought of something: Why not just get the home package and run it through your own overlay system? The fatal flaw here with this design is that there's nothing in place of the glass. With enough tinkering (a pub subscription and a home subscription to play with, and maybe a fortnight to a month, if that) build something that exactly reproduces the watermark. 1080i-capable HDMI capture systems are expensive but not 5-figures (or even 4-figures) expensive nowadays, and most satellite feeds don't even justify 1080i anyway. Do satellite receivers do HDCP? If they do, RGB video is still very very very good quality for 1080i, and reference-quality RGB capture systems aren't 5 figures (probably very low 4 figures). You could just output via HDMI or whatever of course. To complete the setup, you could have one place receive a legitimate broadcast, and (alongside the TVs/projectors) run that through a capture system which would do differential frame analysis to heuristically figure out what watermark is displaying at the moment. This location automatically pushes the current watermark type out to a bunch of other places - for a nice small fee. Of course, the above is said from an honest academic-security standpoint. :P
        mattmanser 10y ago
        To be able to do this, you'd need access to the pub subscription to be able to see the glass to replicate it, so why bother?
  - stordoff 10y ago
    Sky in the UK do this routinely on their sports channels (example image: https://up.metropol247.co.uk/davidlees/bbc_sky_sports.png https://up.metropol247.co.uk/davidlees/bbc_sky_sports.png ). IIRC, switching channels causes it to temporarily disappear, so I assume the receiver is responsible for overlaying it on the incoming video feed.
    - laumars 10y ago
      It has to be the receiver because otherwise you're then sending a unique video feed to every set top box. It makes far more sense to braudcast 1 video feed and let the clients manage the unique watermarking.