HDCP master-key leaks

[Evil_Attorney]

Didn't see this posted yet. The master HDCP key has apparently been leaked. Is recording via HDMI far behind?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/14/h...-copy-protect/

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/09/13...g+(Boing+Boing)

[madpoet]

*waits eagerly for evil Chinese HDMI ripping hardware*

[stanger89]

It's not like HDCP was secure anyway, there have been ways around it almost since it came out (and I don't mean using Component).

Still not sure I get the fuss about HDMI recording.

[Evil_Attorney]

Well, I believe that my Directv boxes will only output 1080p movies through hdmi, not that I have a device capable of recording that.

I see this mostly as providing an insurance policy or warning to content providers if they attempt to close the analog hole on set top boxes. As more and more new-release movies are being added to these devices before rentals, I can see analog becoming restricted.

[stanger89]

As someone in an AVS thread pointed out, this really isn't going to make a bit of difference for the average person.

As far as "1080p movies" goes, I assume you mean the VOD type stuff, IMO if it's worth paying for, it's worth getting the Blu-ray and not having an overcompressed copy, and having lossless audio. And even if that's not an option, there's really no benefit to 1080p over 1080i for movies anyway.

[Evil_Attorney]

I agree that this won't make much difference for most people. At best it removes incentive to further close down the analog hole.

I also agree about VOD 1080P movies (I prefer renting from Netflix). However, channels won't be 720p/1080i forever. I can see an eventual, gradual switchover to some higher res channels, especially by Directv (probably not for a while though). I highly doubt Directv would ever make any 1080p channels available via component.

[Taddeusz]

I don't see this as a huge deal. Nobody is going to come out with a public product that utilizes the compromised master key. The only real uses are in the grey market and even then the scope is fairly limited. Since HDMI is uncompressed you still need a way to re-compress that video after it's been captured whether it be in hardware or software. While a step closer it's still going to be an imperfect copy compared to the original signal. You're just adding more lossy compression onto an already lossy compressed source. In the end you're really not much better than capturing from component.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Evil_Attorney

I also agree about VOD 1080P movies (I prefer renting from Netflix). However, channels won't be 720p/1080i forever. I can see an eventual, gradual switchover to some higher res channels, especially by Directv (probably not for a while though). I highly doubt Directv would ever make any 1080p channels available via component.

The problem is as far as transmission goes there's really very little point in 1080"p" over 1080i. For it to be valuable, there would have to be content in 1080p60, today almost everything is 1080p24 (which is generally telecined into 1080i60 for broadcast), with some live stuff being 1080i30 or 720p60. 1080p60 is a huge deal in terms of bandwidth requirements, requiring 2-2.5x the bandwidth of even the best content today.

And on top of that I think most SOCs can't even handle 1080p60. I'm pretty sure the HD200 can't deal with it, not sure about the HD300.

"1080p" as a broadcast format is far more a marketing device than any real advance.

It should be noted that I'm not saying there's no value in 1080p, 1080p for Blu-ray and movies are great for communication to TVs allowing judder-fre playback, but 1080i30 is identical with the right video processing.

[Evil_Attorney]

Fair enough on the 1080p/24 point.

[Taddeusz]

Assuming the video is flagged properly or you have a good enough decoder or video processor that can de-telecine the video properly.

[lobosrul]

I wonder if this will affect DTCP encryption over firewire? Ironically that might get me to sign up as a cable subscriber again.


And on 1080i versus 1080p:

Its true that proper IVTC's 24p would be the same on 1080i30 versus 1080p. However, 1080i even if the source is 24p is less compressible then 1080p24. And I wouldn't agree that "almost everything" seen in 1080i broadcasts is really 24p. Sports, news, talk shows, almost anything thats broadcast daily is not going to be 24p. 1080p60 would be awesome for sports. The problem is, 1080p60 is not supported on ATSC or even on BD's. 1080p60 would not require anything like double the bitrate as 1080i30. It would be something like 30-50% probably, interlaced encoding with h.264 is much much less efficient that progressive.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by lobosrul

I wonder if this will affect DTCP encryption over firewire?

AFAIK HDCP and DTCP are different technologies, groups, and licensing schemes....

Its true that proper IVTC's 24p would be the same on 1080i30 versus 1080p. However, 1080i even if the source is 24p is less compressible then 1080p24.

FWIW, I'm speaking more to theoretical 1080p24 content that would have to be output and recorded at 1080i. But yeah, recordings would be a bit bigger, but so what? If you're going to archive it you're probably going to want to chop commercials and do some offline compression to save space anyway, so you could IVTC it there.

And I wouldn't agree that "almost everything" seen in 1080i broadcasts is really 24p. Sports, news, talk shows, almost anything thats broadcast daily is not going to be 24p.

I think more TV shows are 24p than people think. Reason I say that is often times "video" sticks out like a sore thumb to me, and I just don't see a lot of that. But I don't watch really any sports, nor much news.

1080p60 would be awesome for sports. The problem is, 1080p60 is not supported on ATSC or even on BD's. 1080p60 would not require anything like double the bitrate as 1080i30. It would be something like 30-50% probably, interlaced encoding with h.264 is much much less efficient that progressive.

Right but I was comparing to 1080p24. 1080p60 is 2.5x the bandwidth but probably wouldn't require that much extra space, but it would be a lot bigger. The bigger issue (since bandwidth and capacities will not be a problem forever/for long) is that I'd bet (based on my experience with the HD200) that most SOCs/decoders out there can't decode 1080p60 today, so it would require new STBs and we know how rarely those get rolled out.

[uberpixel]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

I don't see this as a huge deal. Nobody is going to come out with a public product that utilizes the compromised master key.

Why not? I would think this is exactly what could happen. If software products like AnyDVD can exist...

Is it illegal to create the hardware to do this or is it only illegal to use the hardware to remove the protection so it can be more easily viewed by the subscriber or is it only illegal to duplicate the content after the protection has been removed or is it only illegal to sell the content that has been duplicated after the protection has been removed?

I'm not saying I condone it, but couldn't a "black box" be placed between your cable box and a DVR program that would eliminate the need for a cablecard (and cablecard support)?

If anything I could see this blowing up the DRM world (in a legitimate fashion) and help loosen the restrictions we currently have in place when it comes to acquiring content for SageTV.

Sure they can just come up with a DRM scheme that is even more strict, but you'd think they'd learn that they will always be cracked.

[Taddeusz]

At least in the US it would be illegal to create a product based on keys generated from the leaked master key. Due to the fact that HDMI requires a licence to use not only would the company be in violation of the unlicensed usage the technology but they would be in violation of the DMCA by circumventing the protections of the technology.

AnyDVD actually falls into the same DMCA category but I think it gets away with it due to laws in the country from which it is sold.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by uberpixel

Why not? I would think this is exactly what could happen. If software products like AnyDVD can exist...

The biggest difference is AnyDVD doesn't require any manufacturing capability, where an HDCP thing would need silicon to be fabbed, and a box to be manufactured.

Is it illegal to create the hardware to do this or is it only illegal to use the hardware to remove the protection so it can be more easily viewed by the subscriber or is it only illegal to duplicate the content after the protection has been removed or is it only illegal to sell the content that has been duplicated after the protection has been removed?

In the US at least it's illegal to make or sell such devices.

I'm not saying I condone it, but couldn't a "black box" be placed between your cable box and a DVR program that would eliminate the need for a cablecard (and cablecard support)?

If you're using a cable box, you already don't need a cable card. That's what the HD PVR does. All a device made from these keys would do is allow recording of HDCP HDMI instead of component.

Oh, but we can already do that with the HD Fury.

If anything I could see this blowing up the DRM world (in a legitimate fashion) and help loosen the restrictions we currently have in place when it comes to acquiring content for SageTV.

Logic would dictate that they would realize DRM is futile, but apparently logic doesn't come into the equation.

Sure they can just come up with a DRM scheme that is even more strict, but you'd think they'd learn that they will always be cracked.

exactly.