Silicon Dust attempt at a DVR capable of recording protected content?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Apr 8, 2001
32,491
31
106
#26
And let's face it, they are doing this as much for them as anything else. A significant portion of their line has been dedicated to the WMC/CC market and this is a way of guaranteeing that it continues.
 
May 7, 2002
10,378
1
126
#27
They are ~$10K away, looks like they will make it.
 
Nov 27, 2001
28,951
28
126
#28
I'm not a huge fan of one of their stretch goals...

$250,000 stretch goal - expanded client support:
If we hit $250,000 the additional money will go into staff focused on supporting a wider range of clients. The top clients we have been getting asked about are Roku, iOS, Chromcast, XBox One, and Samsung TVs. Each of these present different challenges and will need the right resources for research and possible implementation.
I've been doing a bit of Kickstartin' lately, and the biggest problem with that goal is the complete and utter lack of focus. I mean... it's pretty much saying, "If we get an extra $100,000, we'll look into bringing the viewer to some requested platforms." They need to do the research on platform viability before putting things up as a goal, or else people are going to be unhappy if a mentioned platform ends up being unsupported.
 

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,684
2
126
#29
This product's success seems dependent on whether WMC dies or not.
 
Nov 27, 2001
28,951
28
126
#30
This product's success seems dependent on whether WMC dies or not.
Nah. I think if they can produce a product that gets around some of WMC's biggest issues, then they'll be able to succeed regardless of what Microsoft does. Well, unless Microsoft fixes the issues too. :p

I think they'll find success as long as they can...


  1. ...record to a single device and allow (registered?) devices to watch the content regardless of copy flags. This means that I can record Game of Thrones on my server and watch it on my HTPC in the living room or bedroom.
  2. ...support a good number of successful end devices. A lot of people seem to be pushing away from using full-fledged HTPCs, or they're using systems setup for a specific purpose (e.g. OpenELEC with Kodi). If they can support popular end devices (including mobile) and allow them to play all media, that's a huge gain.
  3. ...avoid the annoying aspects of WMC. The biggest is in the way that WMC records, which tends to be rather inefficient in its tuner assignments and poorly records back-to-back shows.
To my knowledge, they've already got #3; the idea is to have #1; and they're working on #2, which is the stretch goal that I complained about above.
 
Nov 18, 2005
28,497
78
126
#31
I wonder what DRM they'll be using, because it sounds like something that has to be easy to implement on multiple platforms.

Microsoft was able to make their setup fairly cheap thanks to their own native support for their PlayReady solution, they only had to worry about the CableLabs fees. A company like SiliconDust will have to pay up that AND the rights for DRM implementation.

OMA DRM could be a decent front-runner. I wonder if DTCP-IP can get in the mix with this kind of setup.

I admit to have little understanding of all the complications of the arrangements necessary to get access to flagged content.
 
May 7, 2002
10,378
1
126
#32
So it will be DTCP-IP for copy-once channels.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/26-ho...ware-kickstarter-campaign-4.html#post33698921

Looking at http://www.dtcp.com/documents/dtcp/dtcp-overview.pdf it says
8
DTCP Interoperability
z
Protected retransmission over HDCP (HDMI, DVI),
Windows Media DRM* and DTCP over other
protocols
z
Protected storage on
•
D-VHS
•
CPRM (for DVD-R/-RAM/-RW and SD Card)
•
CPS for BD-RE
•
VCPS (for +R/+RW)
•
MG-R(SVR) for Memory Stick PRO / Hi-MD
•
Windows Media DRM*
*
Provisional approval for Windows Media DRM versions 10 and higher
Does that mean that it will use the same container as WMC for the "copy-once" stuff?
Is there another container that supports DRM crap?
 
Apr 8, 2001
32,491
31
106
#33
Believe that's what they used to allow playing a tuner over a PS3.

Since MS is sticking it in our rears, hope whatever program SD runs saves in a better/modern file format so that saved program size isn't as large as with WMC.
 
Nov 18, 2005
28,497
78
126
#34
Believe that's what they used to allow playing a tuner over a PS3.

Since MS is sticking it in our rears, hope whatever program SD runs saves in a better/modern file format so that saved program size isn't as large as with WMC.
It'll naturally save in that same file size, because cable streams are MPEG-2. IF you wish to transcode you can, but the native setup is almost assuredly going to spit out MPEG-2 files. In what file container, who knows, but the size is what it is, basically.
 
Nov 18, 2005
28,497
78
126
#35
So it will be DTCP-IP for copy-once channels.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/26-ho...ware-kickstarter-campaign-4.html#post33698921

Looking at http://www.dtcp.com/documents/dtcp/dtcp-overview.pdf it says

Does that mean that it will use the same container as WMC for the "copy-once" stuff?
Is there another container that supports DRM crap?
I've been trying to get some details at the silicondust forum, but haven't received any official input just yet. I have had some good knowledge provided.

DTCP-IP is really just the transmission DRM, as you see, it supports WMDRM/PlayReady. That is the recording/file encryption that Microsoft used, which it would seem the DTCP-IP creator or CableLabs blessed off on. Another DRM could still be used, provided it is approved I think, or at least demonstrates security from start to finish (which is why open applications like Kodi won't be able to receive copy-once content, even with a plugin, because the chain must be fully secure through DTCP-IP).

How Microsoft implemented it, the original recorder created the encryption keys, and to play that encrypted file, it could only be played on the original device. You could not use another WMC client, the only option were Extenders which worked off of the client they were tied to.

How SD is implementing their tech, they can record it on one machine, and play it back on any other machine. I'm curious how the DRM keys are being handled, and if they are using PlayReady or a more readily multi-platform DRM option. I suspect the keys might be based on your subscription account, and not by a machine-specific identifier. I haven't gotten an answer to that part yet.

Something that may be true is that PlayReady CAN handle multiple authorized devices and/or utilize a key server, and something in this route is what SD may be utilizing. Microsoft simply did not utilize those aspects of PlayReady, which seems stupid, but, this is Microsoft, they have been known to make those kinds of decisions. :\
 
Last edited:
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
2
126
#36
We need a Slysoft for copy protection flags. The Linux community could give cablecard usage a huge boost if the DRM was defeated.
 
Last edited:
Nov 27, 2001
28,951
28
126
#37
How SD is implementing their tech, they can record it on one machine, and play it back on any other machine. I'm curious how the DRM keys are being handled, and if they are using PlayReady or a more readily multi-platform DRM option. I suspect the keys might be based on your subscription account, and not by a machine-specific identifier. I haven't gotten an answer to that part yet.
Probably some sort of public/private key setup where the DVR service contains the private key and the public key is given to any viewing program that logs in. They did state that you can have as many viewers as you want per subscription. So, I'm assuming that there will be some sort of login.

So, right now I'm only at the $5 level, but I've been debating upgrading to $30 or maybe the $60 beta level so I can try it out early.
 

Raincity

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2000
4,463
4
81
#38
We need a Slysoft for copy protection flags. The Linux community could give cablecard usage a huge boost if the DRM was defeated.
Somebody needs to simplify the process of setting up PVR in Linux. Setting up Myth for the experienced is a half of day affair and a whole weekend for those new to Linux.
 
May 7, 2002
10,378
1
126
#39
We need a Slysoft for copy protection flags. The Linux community could give cablecard usage a huge boost if the DRM was defeated.
Linux isn't that huge, we are talking maybe 1-3% of the total HTPC crowd.

For the DRM, don't think it is possible with cablecards, since they operate on a "trusted" system, so, you need some kind of hardware to decode.

However, since 'copy-once' content has been posted (torrents, or whatever) as copy-freely, I am guessing that hardware already exists someplace.
 
Nov 27, 2001
28,951
28
126
#40
However, since 'copy-once' content has been posted (torrents, or whatever) as copy-freely, I am guessing that hardware already exists someplace.
You can "break" Copy-Once/Never by recording your desktop, which is probably what they do.
 

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,684
2
126
#41
They say that they're going to simplify the experience by running on a NAS instead of a PC. That complicates things for me. I need it to run on a PC.
 
Nov 18, 2005
28,497
78
126
#42
They say that they're going to simplify the experience by running on a NAS instead of a PC. That complicates things for me. I need it to run on a PC.
It doesn't require a NAS. That's a new bonus feature that helps make a sort of headless scenario - run from NAS to light consumer devices like an Android TV device, Fire TV, etc.

The DVR engine can run and record to Windows, Mac, and Linux. Playback of protected content won't be possible on Linux, but they do make it sound like they can record it and encrypt it in Linux, which I find interesting with the idea of them using PlayReady DRM.

By the way, I saw an official response that unencrypted content will be stored in .ts files with included meta data. They haven't addressed container format for encrypted content.
 

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,684
2
126
#43
It doesn't require a NAS. That's a new bonus feature that helps make a sort of headless scenario - run from NAS to light consumer devices like an Android TV device, Fire TV, etc.

The DVR engine can run and record to Windows, Mac, and Linux. Playback of protected content won't be possible on Linux, but they do make it sound like they can record it and encrypt it in Linux, which I find interesting with the idea of them using PlayReady DRM.

By the way, I saw an official response that unencrypted content will be stored in .ts files with included meta data. They haven't addressed container format for encrypted content.
Thanks, I didn't delve that deep, they just kept mentioning NAS. I hope this takes off before MS stops updating the guide.
 
Nov 18, 2005
28,497
78
126
#44
Thanks, I didn't delve that deep, they just kept mentioning NAS. I hope this takes off before MS stops updating the guide.
I don't see them cutting the guide data any time soon, at least not without notification. I suspect they'll give at least a year notice prior to shutting that service down.
 

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,684
2
126
#45
I don't see them cutting the guide data any time soon, at least not without notification. I suspect they'll give at least a year notice prior to shutting that service down.
That sounds reasonable...oh wait... :)
 
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
2
126
#46
Somebody needs to simplify the process of setting up PVR in Linux. Setting up Myth for the experienced is a half of day affair and a whole weekend for those new to Linux.
Agreed. Cablecard killed high end recording development on Linux years ago. That is the issue.

When the will is there the Linux community figures it out. There is no easier way to build a local playback HTPC that is completely remote driven than Openelec. I can get that setup in less than 15 minutes. Heck I can setup sickbeard way faster than Mythtv. That is a problem.
 
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
2
126
#47
Linux isn't that huge, we are talking maybe 1-3% of the total HTPC crowd.
Where are you getting that number from? I know Openelec alone has tens of thousands of installs total.

Plus the some of the smartest people in this hobby are on the Linux side. It would be nice to leverage that talent.

However, since 'copy-once' content has been posted (torrents, or whatever) as copy-freely, I am guessing that hardware already exists someplace.
Its called the analog hole and a HD PVR hooked up via component or HDMI to a cable box. Its sad that is the more flexible method to record content.
 
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
2
126
#48
You can "break" Copy-Once/Never by recording your desktop, which is probably what they do.
Nah, then you lose the 5.1 audio. Its easier to just get what you want from a cable box.
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,341
0
0
#49
By the way, I saw an official response that unencrypted content will be stored in .ts files with included meta data. They haven't addressed container format for encrypted content.
Is there a .wtv to .ts converter that doesn't lose any metadata (and preferably even keeps closed captions?) Actually according to Wikipedia, .ts doesn't support metadata tags, so I guess those are in a separate XML file or something?
 
Nov 18, 2005
28,497
78
126
#50
Is there a .wtv to .ts converter that doesn't lose any metadata (and preferably even keeps closed captions?) Actually according to Wikipedia, .ts doesn't support metadata tags, so I guess those are in a separate XML file or something?
I believe the metadata is stored in the .ts file directly; from the sounds of it, attached to the first few frames.

Quote from Nick Kelsey, co-founder of SiliconDust:
"Meta data is stored inside TS frames near the start of the file. The format won't affect playback on a third party player but allows us to keep everything together.

We will publish the metadata format information closer to release.

Nick"

So it appears to be a proprietary metadata storage technique.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS