15 ms·

Sony software updates breaks movie theater projectors

243 points by donohoe 3y ago

crazygringo 3y ago
Super curious if there's any kind of contractual recourse where theaters can recoup the lost income from Sony. It's one thing if a projector breaks mechanically or due to a pre-existing bug; it's another thing when an update breaks it. In an age where updates are increasingly the norm, I wonder if there's legislation needed to hold manufacturers accountable for updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware?
- csdvrx 3y ago
  > updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware? "Every update is a downgrade": http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000606.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000606.h...
  - m463 3y ago
    I liked this: > Notice, I'm no Luddite. I don't reject technology. I depend on it.
  - donmcronald 3y ago
    This is my experience with Roku TVs. They used to be ok, but they can't resist updating them and I have 3 that run noticeably slower than they did originally. It's probably a combination of the OS and apps. Even worse, something got updated that broke CEC integration with my sound bar on one of them, so now I can't use the built in volume control and need to use 2 remotes instead. I know it's a real first world problem, but it infuriates me that they can slowly ruin a TV that I own and I have no recourse. I'm so sick of the tech industry I hope the whole thing collapses. We need major legislation updates to make tech companies liable for all awful they're doing to the world.
    - transcriptase 3y ago
      Roku and smart TV manufacturers are infuriating. They choose a processor that’s barely sufficient to run the software it releases with, and proceed release a constant stream of updates with nothing of value to the user. Meanwhile every update has the device running 5% slower, making it noticeably sluggish after a couple years. It almost feels intentional, but I’m sure no bean counter is going to permit spending a few dollars extra per unit for something they probably see as reason for people to upgrade.
- mikequinlan 3y ago
  >hold manufacturers accountable for updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware Wouldn't the license agreement that you agreed to when you installed the software specify any responsibilities of the vendor and define what recourse you might have? Why would government action be needed?
  - delecti 3y ago
    Precisely for that reason. Most license agreements require the end-user to waive any recourse. That's what customer protection laws are for.
  - ncallaway 3y ago
    Because the government has put constraints on what kind of agreements are valid (especially in the domain of sales to consumers). It happens all the time across many domains (look up the Uniform Commercial Code, for more general examples, or laws around vehicle sales). I have less inclination to be involved in business to business transactions, but there’s absolutely a societal debate to be had around what laws and regulations we have on transactions of software. Society runs smoother, with more transactions, and this economic wealth, when consumers can assume a reasonable baseline of behavior that is being regulated by the government. If every purchase and every transaction requires deep due diligence there will be far fewer transactions.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    Because I have no negotiating power. Every license agreement says there's no recourse, so I can't pick one that does have it. There's a major free-market failure because there's no negotiation over the agreement. There's no representative for consumers pushing back. So that representative needs to be the government. This is the entire reason for consumer protection laws.
    - 4death4 3y ago
      There is a negotiation over the agreement. If you don’t agree with an agreement, then buy a different product. Thats how all agreements work. It’s just not very fun to negotiate when there’s a large power imbalance.
- hypeatei 3y ago
  Meh, shit happens and maybe software rollback should be codified. Let the compensation be between the two parties involved (Sony and the customer) - similar to SLAs in the cloud.
  - malux85 3y ago
    There is an enormous power imbalance between Sony and the customer which will lead to abuse. They will filibuster and or beaurocrat-ize away any will to pursue lawsuits, or they will offer token trivial compensation (which doesn’t nearly reflect the actual lost income) Your “meh” apathy is what leads to the abuse of power by the larger parties
    - AniseAbyss 3y ago
      [dead]
    - hypeatei 3y ago
      I just don't see the need for a law which turns a civil issue into a criminal one. There are already existing frameworks for this - contracts. If someone isn't comfortable with the terms, then they don't use Sony products. If your argument is that Sony is too big and has a monopoly on projectors - then antitrust laws exist.
      - handoflixue 3y ago
        As a society, we've already concluded that contracts are insufficient to cover a huge class of situations (minimum wages, banning non-competes, etc.). Why would you think they're sufficient to handle this one? We already have simple systems that handle "you broke my stuff" fairly well - why would we want to lean on something as slow and complex as antitrust laws to resolve this? The Epic vs Google lawsuit started in 2020. 3 years is a long time to wait to collect damages for broken projectors.
        hypeatei 3y ago
        > Why would you think they're sufficient to handle this one? It's a business transaction where contracts are the norm. Sony may not be very flexible on terms, but no one is forced to buy their projectors and agree to the terms. > why would we want to lean on something as slow and complex as antitrust laws We would if consumers had no other choice but to buy Sony projectors only - that doesn't seem to be the case, though.
- amelius 3y ago
  > In an age where updates are increasingly the norm, I wonder if there's legislation needed to hold manufacturers accountable for updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware? Maybe there should be a law that says: 1. Upgrades may be performed but never behind the user's back. 2. In particular, the user determines exactly when an upgrade is performed. 3. The user may roll back any update at any time. 4. Any services which the software depends on should be compatible with all versions of the updated software. EDIT: 5. Security backports should be made available. However, the user should always be in control over whether they are installed. Sometimes working code is more important than 100% secure code. Also this rule will prevent companies from quickly forcing an update and sweeping security breaches under the rug.
  - BizarroLand 3y ago
    I would say that if a manufacturer releases something with software attached then they should also have to release the source code with a time lock so that people would be empowered to dig through the waste bins of electronic history and be able to find/make/learn/do more with it.
  - tantalor 3y ago
    Not gonna happen in a million years
    - vlovich123 3y ago
      Some of those suggestions are things that sound good at first glance but are simply not great ideas. For example, support for downgrades means you a security vulnerability can be reintroduced by a malicious user which may not be desirable. Writing software that’s backwards and forwards compatible across all releases can be extremely expensive to impossible (eg a feature in your application that requires a new OS or you need to use a now removed API when running on older releases). There are difficult technical issues involved and trying to legislate specifics may not be the best idea vs other approaches that improve real freedom (eg you have to release sufficient details to your customers that they can write their own software for your hardware).
- iancmceachern 3y ago
  In my experience in this industry they often have multiple (2-3) projectors in the projection booth for exactly this kind of issue, a bulb goes out, etc. They also play the previews and ads before the movie on a different, cheaper projector. Having 2 Sony projectors wouldn't help here though...
  - vlovich123 3y ago
    It would if Sony staggered software releases to sibling projectors.
- layer8 3y ago
  > updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware Arguably the hardware still functions perfectly, it’s the software that’s broken.
- Xenoamorphous 3y ago
  Daikin semi-bricked my 3 aircon units in the middle of the summer with a firmware upgrade.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
lancesells 3y ago
Is there something where a projector needs to be connected to the internet? This seems as silly as bluetooth speakers like Sonos needing an internet connection. Perhaps someone can share what is needed here and why it's connected.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- buro9 3y ago
  IIUC, movies are delivered to local storage via the internet, and those files are heavily DRMd, the DRM is checked synchronously when films are played.
  - joezydeco 3y ago
    So maybe this was a key rotation issue instead of what we think of as a software update (e.g. bugfixes)?
  - 542458 3y ago
    That sounds roughly correct based on when I worked at a theatre, although back then they mailed you drives. Worth noting that the movies are encrypted and you only get decryption keys at release. But Sony hasn’t made projectors in a while. I suspect this was something like an expired certificate rather than an actual software update.
    - joseph8th 3y ago
      It hasn't changed much. Most features are still delivered on drives. They're just too damn BIG otherwise. Keys are sent separately, and are valid only for a certain date-range, and for a specific cinema server. In this case, Sony servers only work with Sony projectors, and vice-versa. Each device has its own certs, but for encrypted feature encoding, the standard is Key Delivery Messages, which unlock the feature Digital Cinema Package (DCP). DCPs are a general purpose cinema package, and is also used to deliver unencrypted clips like ads and trailers. But the key is the Key. It's only valid for the specific cinema server, and the cinema server is "married" to the projector by encryption. This protects against on-site MITM attacks. If there's a server update that doesn't update the certs on either the server itself, or the projector (in Sony's case), then the marriage breaks, and the silver screen stays dark. Nothing anyone else can do about it, either, since any valid certs would have to be issued by Sony, and nobody has the private keys except Sony.
imperialdrive 3y ago
That's terrible. Very curious who pushed that button and why. Just confirmed they're closing all locations.
rcdemski 3y ago
Down in Denver too. My money is on a date rollover issue related to DRM.
sprocket35 3y ago
Digital cinema tech here. Sony hasn’t been releasing updates since they exited the business in 2020. This is likely an expired certificate related to the encryption on the movie files.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  Are certificates usually/often issued to expire at the end of a given calendar year? On the one hand, that would explain this happening on Dec 31. But it's slightly weird because it's not yet the new year in UTC. This was posted several hours before that happening, and we've still got over 2 hours to go... (And the cinema is in New York, with almost 8 hours to go in local time, so it's not a local timezone issue either.)
  - userbinator 3y ago
    This is Sony, and it is the new year in Japan.
    - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
      Sony is a Japanese company but it's also a multinational company consisting of hundreds of companies they aquired over the years all over the globe. It's therefore a relatively small chance is has something to do with Japan specifically.
      - swells34 3y ago
        It likely depends on where the programmer who has the original cert issued was... so quite likely Japan, given the evidence
        joseph8th 3y ago
        This is the most likely, yup. The certs are unlikely to have a precise end-of-year expiration. It will be whatever the expiration is for the last certs loaded. 10 years in cinema IoT, here. Features are encrypted by Key Delivery Messages (KDM), and those are per cinema server/projector "marriage". No KDM will be considered valid if the server certs are expired. This should make 2024 interesting for me.
rladd 3y ago
They recently released an update for my 2021 vintage OLED TV, and after applying it it now doesn’t work properly at all. It’s still usable, but only barely.
sschueller 3y ago
I wonder how much longer until we have a military or medical device that doesn't work killing people because a DRM certificate expired...
- mixmastamyk 3y ago
  Probably already happened but the witnesses have expired.
- throwawaymedic 3y ago
  Ohh this has already started. Happened to me the other day: machine for rectal air insufflation under x-ray guidance to allow reduction of an intussusception (a condition where the bowel folds in on itself). It primarily affects young children and if the procedure fails they require an open operation. Failure to treat the intussusception eventually results in bowel perforation, peritonitis and potentially death. Went to start the procedure, machine reports it’s ready to work, all set up, assistant presses start, cryptic error messages. No way to fix. Turns out our license has improperly expired for reasons unknown. No way to override. It’s past 5 pm Friday of the New Year’s weekend. No one on call for the company has any idea how to fix. Took three hours repeatedly phoning the company to finally get put through to an engineer who gave us magic series of button presses and codes to get the machine working. We used to have a purely mechanical machine, maintained in house by an on site engineer. Now we have to deal with this. There is only one company making these machines, so no competition. Progress.
  - userbinator 3y ago
    It was (and probably still is) quite common to hire a cracker to remove the DRM from industrial equipment software to prevent any downtime it causes; of course that's not a life-support application, and the motive was that downtime for such machinery is often very costly. Of course with the recent Polish train debacle (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38788360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38788360) stories of DRM schemes where incomplete defeat causes subtly worse behaviour (rather common in games), and the ability to engineer a system with plausible deniability in mind, like some of Apple's hardware-locking attempts, one does wonder whether medical devices may have such logic bombs too.
aaron695 3y ago
Lots more info here on the Y2K24 bug - http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum Expired cert. Some players refuse, some ignore it. Affected - Sony (XCT-M10) / GDC SR-1000 - "15-08-2011 18:10:59 UTC 31-12-2023 00:00:00 UTC (expired)" There was a known Y2K24 bug that needed software updates to fix around certs, unsure how/if related - http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum/26517-dolby-doremi-legacy-products-cert-expiration-and-year-2024-issue http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum/26517-dolby-do...
- trebligdivad 3y ago
  Nice! So that was identified a year ago and it's people who haven't updated since who hit it?
- idlephysicist 3y ago
  I love that the forum where that discussion is taking place doesn't even use HTTPS.
  - joseph8th 3y ago
    The cinema industry in general is woefully way behind the curve in some respects... Cutting edge in others (like security).
stephenhandley 3y ago
please tell me there's pictures
sjfjsjdjwvwvc 3y ago
Copyright is holding us all back and needs to be reformed, if not abolished entirely.

243 points by donohoe 3y ago

Super curious if there's any kind of contractual recourse where theaters can recoup the lost income from Sony. It's one thing if a projector breaks mechanically or due to a pre-existing bug; it's another thing when an update breaks it. In an age where updates are increasingly the norm, I wonder if there's legislation needed to hold manufacturers accountable for updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware?

csdvrx 3y ago
> updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware? "Every update is a downgrade": http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000606.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000606.h...
- m463 3y ago
  I liked this: > Notice, I'm no Luddite. I don't reject technology. I depend on it.
- donmcronald 3y ago
  This is my experience with Roku TVs. They used to be ok, but they can't resist updating them and I have 3 that run noticeably slower than they did originally. It's probably a combination of the OS and apps. Even worse, something got updated that broke CEC integration with my sound bar on one of them, so now I can't use the built in volume control and need to use 2 remotes instead. I know it's a real first world problem, but it infuriates me that they can slowly ruin a TV that I own and I have no recourse. I'm so sick of the tech industry I hope the whole thing collapses. We need major legislation updates to make tech companies liable for all awful they're doing to the world.
  - transcriptase 3y ago
    Roku and smart TV manufacturers are infuriating. They choose a processor that’s barely sufficient to run the software it releases with, and proceed release a constant stream of updates with nothing of value to the user. Meanwhile every update has the device running 5% slower, making it noticeably sluggish after a couple years. It almost feels intentional, but I’m sure no bean counter is going to permit spending a few dollars extra per unit for something they probably see as reason for people to upgrade.
mikequinlan 3y ago
>hold manufacturers accountable for updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware Wouldn't the license agreement that you agreed to when you installed the software specify any responsibilities of the vendor and define what recourse you might have? Why would government action be needed?
- delecti 3y ago
  Precisely for that reason. Most license agreements require the end-user to waive any recourse. That's what customer protection laws are for.
- ncallaway 3y ago
  Because the government has put constraints on what kind of agreements are valid (especially in the domain of sales to consumers). It happens all the time across many domains (look up the Uniform Commercial Code, for more general examples, or laws around vehicle sales). I have less inclination to be involved in business to business transactions, but there’s absolutely a societal debate to be had around what laws and regulations we have on transactions of software. Society runs smoother, with more transactions, and this economic wealth, when consumers can assume a reasonable baseline of behavior that is being regulated by the government. If every purchase and every transaction requires deep due diligence there will be far fewer transactions.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  Because I have no negotiating power. Every license agreement says there's no recourse, so I can't pick one that does have it. There's a major free-market failure because there's no negotiation over the agreement. There's no representative for consumers pushing back. So that representative needs to be the government. This is the entire reason for consumer protection laws.
  - 4death4 3y ago
    There is a negotiation over the agreement. If you don’t agree with an agreement, then buy a different product. Thats how all agreements work. It’s just not very fun to negotiate when there’s a large power imbalance.
hypeatei 3y ago
Meh, shit happens and maybe software rollback should be codified. Let the compensation be between the two parties involved (Sony and the customer) - similar to SLAs in the cloud.
- malux85 3y ago
  There is an enormous power imbalance between Sony and the customer which will lead to abuse. They will filibuster and or beaurocrat-ize away any will to pursue lawsuits, or they will offer token trivial compensation (which doesn’t nearly reflect the actual lost income) Your “meh” apathy is what leads to the abuse of power by the larger parties
  - AniseAbyss 3y ago
    [dead]
  - hypeatei 3y ago
    I just don't see the need for a law which turns a civil issue into a criminal one. There are already existing frameworks for this - contracts. If someone isn't comfortable with the terms, then they don't use Sony products. If your argument is that Sony is too big and has a monopoly on projectors - then antitrust laws exist.
    - handoflixue 3y ago
      As a society, we've already concluded that contracts are insufficient to cover a huge class of situations (minimum wages, banning non-competes, etc.). Why would you think they're sufficient to handle this one? We already have simple systems that handle "you broke my stuff" fairly well - why would we want to lean on something as slow and complex as antitrust laws to resolve this? The Epic vs Google lawsuit started in 2020. 3 years is a long time to wait to collect damages for broken projectors.
      - hypeatei 3y ago
        > Why would you think they're sufficient to handle this one? It's a business transaction where contracts are the norm. Sony may not be very flexible on terms, but no one is forced to buy their projectors and agree to the terms. > why would we want to lean on something as slow and complex as antitrust laws We would if consumers had no other choice but to buy Sony projectors only - that doesn't seem to be the case, though.
amelius 3y ago
> In an age where updates are increasingly the norm, I wonder if there's legislation needed to hold manufacturers accountable for updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware? Maybe there should be a law that says: 1. Upgrades may be performed but never behind the user's back. 2. In particular, the user determines exactly when an upgrade is performed. 3. The user may roll back any update at any time. 4. Any services which the software depends on should be compatible with all versions of the updated software. EDIT: 5. Security backports should be made available. However, the user should always be in control over whether they are installed. Sometimes working code is more important than 100% secure code. Also this rule will prevent companies from quickly forcing an update and sweeping security breaches under the rug.
- BizarroLand 3y ago
  I would say that if a manufacturer releases something with software attached then they should also have to release the source code with a time lock so that people would be empowered to dig through the waste bins of electronic history and be able to find/make/learn/do more with it.
- tantalor 3y ago
  Not gonna happen in a million years
  - vlovich123 3y ago
    Some of those suggestions are things that sound good at first glance but are simply not great ideas. For example, support for downgrades means you a security vulnerability can be reintroduced by a malicious user which may not be desirable. Writing software that’s backwards and forwards compatible across all releases can be extremely expensive to impossible (eg a feature in your application that requires a new OS or you need to use a now removed API when running on older releases). There are difficult technical issues involved and trying to legislate specifics may not be the best idea vs other approaches that improve real freedom (eg you have to release sufficient details to your customers that they can write their own software for your hardware).
iancmceachern 3y ago
In my experience in this industry they often have multiple (2-3) projectors in the projection booth for exactly this kind of issue, a bulb goes out, etc. They also play the previews and ads before the movie on a different, cheaper projector. Having 2 Sony projectors wouldn't help here though...
- vlovich123 3y ago
  It would if Sony staggered software releases to sibling projectors.
layer8 3y ago
> updates that break otherwise perfectly-functioning hardware Arguably the hardware still functions perfectly, it’s the software that’s broken.
Xenoamorphous 3y ago
Daikin semi-bricked my 3 aircon units in the middle of the summer with a firmware upgrade.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

lancesells 3y ago

Is there something where a projector needs to be connected to the internet? This seems as silly as bluetooth speakers like Sonos needing an internet connection. Perhaps someone can share what is needed here and why it's connected.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
buro9 3y ago
IIUC, movies are delivered to local storage via the internet, and those files are heavily DRMd, the DRM is checked synchronously when films are played.
- joezydeco 3y ago
  So maybe this was a key rotation issue instead of what we think of as a software update (e.g. bugfixes)?
- 542458 3y ago
  That sounds roughly correct based on when I worked at a theatre, although back then they mailed you drives. Worth noting that the movies are encrypted and you only get decryption keys at release. But Sony hasn’t made projectors in a while. I suspect this was something like an expired certificate rather than an actual software update.
  - joseph8th 3y ago
    It hasn't changed much. Most features are still delivered on drives. They're just too damn BIG otherwise. Keys are sent separately, and are valid only for a certain date-range, and for a specific cinema server. In this case, Sony servers only work with Sony projectors, and vice-versa. Each device has its own certs, but for encrypted feature encoding, the standard is Key Delivery Messages, which unlock the feature Digital Cinema Package (DCP). DCPs are a general purpose cinema package, and is also used to deliver unencrypted clips like ads and trailers. But the key is the Key. It's only valid for the specific cinema server, and the cinema server is "married" to the projector by encryption. This protects against on-site MITM attacks. If there's a server update that doesn't update the certs on either the server itself, or the projector (in Sony's case), then the marriage breaks, and the silver screen stays dark. Nothing anyone else can do about it, either, since any valid certs would have to be issued by Sony, and nobody has the private keys except Sony.

imperialdrive 3y ago

That's terrible. Very curious who pushed that button and why. Just confirmed they're closing all locations.

rcdemski 3y ago

Down in Denver too. My money is on a date rollover issue related to DRM.

sprocket35 3y ago

Digital cinema tech here. Sony hasn’t been releasing updates since they exited the business in 2020. This is likely an expired certificate related to the encryption on the movie files.

crazygringo 3y ago
Are certificates usually/often issued to expire at the end of a given calendar year? On the one hand, that would explain this happening on Dec 31. But it's slightly weird because it's not yet the new year in UTC. This was posted several hours before that happening, and we've still got over 2 hours to go... (And the cinema is in New York, with almost 8 hours to go in local time, so it's not a local timezone issue either.)
- userbinator 3y ago
  This is Sony, and it is the new year in Japan.
  - FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    Sony is a Japanese company but it's also a multinational company consisting of hundreds of companies they aquired over the years all over the globe. It's therefore a relatively small chance is has something to do with Japan specifically.
    - swells34 3y ago
      It likely depends on where the programmer who has the original cert issued was... so quite likely Japan, given the evidence
      - joseph8th 3y ago
        This is the most likely, yup. The certs are unlikely to have a precise end-of-year expiration. It will be whatever the expiration is for the last certs loaded. 10 years in cinema IoT, here. Features are encrypted by Key Delivery Messages (KDM), and those are per cinema server/projector "marriage". No KDM will be considered valid if the server certs are expired. This should make 2024 interesting for me.

rladd 3y ago

They recently released an update for my 2021 vintage OLED TV, and after applying it it now doesn’t work properly at all. It’s still usable, but only barely.

sschueller 3y ago

I wonder how much longer until we have a military or medical device that doesn't work killing people because a DRM certificate expired...

mixmastamyk 3y ago
Probably already happened but the witnesses have expired.
throwawaymedic 3y ago
Ohh this has already started. Happened to me the other day: machine for rectal air insufflation under x-ray guidance to allow reduction of an intussusception (a condition where the bowel folds in on itself). It primarily affects young children and if the procedure fails they require an open operation. Failure to treat the intussusception eventually results in bowel perforation, peritonitis and potentially death. Went to start the procedure, machine reports it’s ready to work, all set up, assistant presses start, cryptic error messages. No way to fix. Turns out our license has improperly expired for reasons unknown. No way to override. It’s past 5 pm Friday of the New Year’s weekend. No one on call for the company has any idea how to fix. Took three hours repeatedly phoning the company to finally get put through to an engineer who gave us magic series of button presses and codes to get the machine working. We used to have a purely mechanical machine, maintained in house by an on site engineer. Now we have to deal with this. There is only one company making these machines, so no competition. Progress.
- userbinator 3y ago
  It was (and probably still is) quite common to hire a cracker to remove the DRM from industrial equipment software to prevent any downtime it causes; of course that's not a life-support application, and the motive was that downtime for such machinery is often very costly. Of course with the recent Polish train debacle (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38788360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38788360) stories of DRM schemes where incomplete defeat causes subtly worse behaviour (rather common in games), and the ability to engineer a system with plausible deniability in mind, like some of Apple's hardware-locking attempts, one does wonder whether medical devices may have such logic bombs too.

aaron695 3y ago

Lots more info here on the Y2K24 bug - http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum Expired cert. Some players refuse, some ignore it. Affected - Sony (XCT-M10) / GDC SR-1000 - "15-08-2011 18:10:59 UTC 31-12-2023 00:00:00 UTC (expired)" There was a known Y2K24 bug that needed software updates to fix around certs, unsure how/if related - http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum/26517-dolby-doremi-legacy-products-cert-expiration-and-year-2024-issue http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum/26517-dolby-do...

trebligdivad 3y ago
Nice! So that was identified a year ago and it's people who haven't updated since who hit it?
idlephysicist 3y ago
I love that the forum where that discussion is taking place doesn't even use HTTPS.
- joseph8th 3y ago
  The cinema industry in general is woefully way behind the curve in some respects... Cutting edge in others (like security).

stephenhandley 3y ago

please tell me there's pictures

sjfjsjdjwvwvc 3y ago