[iptv-users] Open source IPTV bits

[Alex Moen]

On Jun 12, 2009, at 1:28 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> But to the best of my understanding, that doesn’t negate the  
> requirement for encryption all the way to the STB.  If that’s how  
> you’re operating, then you either signed a contract some time ago  
> that didn’t specify that requirement (things were looser in some  
> things a few years ago), or you’re operating outside how you’re  
> expected to run it.  I know of no one in the state of Iowa that’s  
> taken the approach I think you’re taking.

And on June 11, 2009, at 9:25 PM Charles Wyble wrote:
>
> There is no encryption required when the data/video/whatever is on  
> your network.

And, finally, on June 12, 2009 at 12:00:53 PM CDT Ryan Spott wrote:
> Encryption is not required once the content is at your premises.



I will argue that *in the US* it is required to be encrypted all the  
way to the display device, when dealing with a digital signal (ie:  
HDMI), so even past the STB encryption may be required.  This is what  
the content provider's worst nightmare is: a purely digital signal  
intercepted by a recording device, *that they don't get paid for*.   
So, not only does the content need to be protected in the head end,  
out the distribution network, through the access network, and on the  
home network, but also on the digital outputs of the set top box  
(HDCP).  This is what Telcordia spent a week determining: whether or  
not the stb that we use was completely "safe", in that there wasn't a  
way to get the unencrypted digital signal off of the box, even at the  
mainboard component level.

This is critical in a purely digital world, at least in the content  
owner's eyes.

Alex