dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
3528
share rss forum feed


antdude
A Matrix Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 edit

FCC Votes to Lift Ban On Digital Basic Tier Encryption

»www.broadcastingcable.com/articl ··· tion.php from »www.avsforum.com/t/306411/los-an ··· 22495318

Buh bye to "Clear-QAM".


motorola870

join:2008-12-07
Arlington, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
only applies to all digital systems and the last ones to go all digital will probably be LA and Dallas.


txirving

@rr.com
said by motorola870:

only applies to all digital systems and the last ones to go all digital will probably be LA and Dallas.

are you sure? i think i read somewhere that they can encrypt analog channels as well

i sure hope they don't... right now i'm paying $30/m for "standard" cable (channels 1-99) and i have about 6 tv's hooked up

i can live with them encrypting the qam channels, but not the analog ones

here's the article:

quote:
NEW YORK (AP) — Federal regulators are letting cable companies scramble all their TV signals, closing a loophole that lets many households watch basic cable channels for free.

The Federal Communications Commission voted Friday to lift a ban on encryption of basic cable signals, saying it will reduce the number of visits by cable technicians to disconnect service and reduce cable theft.

The change will also affect households that pay for TV but have some sets hooked up directly to cable, without set-top boxes. They will need to get boxes for those sets.
»news.yahoo.com/fcc-lets-cable-co ··· nce.html

hitmehhh

join:2007-07-25
Syracuse, NY
Just one more reason for them to keep gouging US.

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to antdude
I'm sick of people complaining about this. What other providers are going to give you anything without a device to break through the encryption? Exactly.

A lot of the people complaining about this are people stealing cable anyway, paying for only internet access or people who have multiple TV's. Maybe you don't need 8 TV's in your house....?


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
reply to txirving
said by txirving :

are you sure? i think i read somewhere that they can encrypt analog channels as well

They have no interest in encrypting analog signals. They are trying to get rid of analog signals altogether in order to free up space for more digital channels and internet bandwidth. Besides, the majority of the cable boxes they have in their inventory only have digital tuners and can't even tune in a analog signal (they use an encrypted digital simulcast of all the basic cable channels to be able to show those channels), so analog encryption would be pointless without a new investment to purchase a bunch of equipment to decrypt it.

hitmehhh

join:2007-07-25
Syracuse, NY
reply to txirving
Just one more reason for them to keep gouging US.


Elyria

join:2011-10-12
Elyria, OH
reply to Os
said by Os:

Maybe you don't need 8 TV's in your house....?

BUT...... I DO need 6.

That OK ??


juilinsandar
Texas Gooner
Premium
join:2000-07-17
San Benito, TX
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
reply to motorola870
Looks like TWC RGV knew ahead of time what the verdict was gonna be. I wonder how much longer analog channels will be around.
--
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. - Sir Winston Churchill


motorola870

join:2008-12-07
Arlington, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
said by juilinsandar:

Looks like TWC RGV knew ahead of time what the verdict was gonna be. I wonder how much longer analog channels will be around.

no that is not encryption that is repacking the QAMs. Read the bottom "may need to rescan to resume viewing these channels".

TWC is not going to be encrypting for at least 6 months or until the E-DTAs are out in the wild as they are not allowed to encrypt digital signals without them also that is for 100% percent digital systems and only 1 TWC system is 100% digital and that is Augusta Maine.


kilrathi
Premium
join:2005-04-22
Rockaway Park, NY
reply to antdude
I am all for this. For example in my area there are people who illegally hook any device or tv they have on remaining lines left over at their address to have basic cable and often at same time their bad devices cause noise in the system that affects entire node/hub. With this change there will be less people trying to hook up their devices as there will be nothing to really gain from it for free.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
said by kilrathi:

...at same time their bad devices cause noise in the system that affects entire node/hub. With this change there will be less people trying to hook up their devices...

This change will probably introduce more noise than what few bad devices are connected, because there will just be more houses connected to the node since they now have no reason to disconnect them; And those houses without service will probably all have open ends bleeding back interference. It's not like the people without service are going to install coax terminators on every outlet in their house...


DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:20

1 recommendation

Click for full size
This SINGLE illegal wiped out hundereds of modems on 4 nodes for a few hours

Upstream SNR drop while clip was connected
 
"open" ends aren't particularly a problem as long as the center conductor doesn't extend past the nut of the connector more than a millimeter or two. They really don't let in any problematic amount of noise. The additional attenuation of the cable and splitters in the home also lessens the effect.

Termination is a larger concern with high downstream signal levels right after amps and at the end of main distribution lines. The termination is needed more to absorb signal and prevent signal reflections than it is to prevent ingress. Without the termination in those cases the forward signals reflect, cause signal beats (signal peaks and valleys) on the downstream, and raise the noise floor of the upstream signal.

The big problem is when theives snip the connector off the end of the drop, strip the shield an inch or more back, break off the tap port, and shove the center conductor in the tap. It's a huge leak and ingress source with no attenuation hooked straight to the main distribution system. The unshielded center conductor of that length makes a great antenna and cable techs can pick up the signal blocks away with leakage meters.

I did System Maintenance for several years with ingress tracking, illegal disconnects, and fixing odd upstream problems a large part of that job.

I got the pics above from a tech friend for a problem he tracked last week. Those 4 nodes probably have hundreds of "open" connectors among all the homes connected and the SNR is usually 30dB or above.
--
If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes.


kilrathi
Premium
join:2005-04-22
Rockaway Park, NY
Yes but at same time people will not be adding splitters and devices on a line left over on apt building because there is nothing in it for them.

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Elyria
If you want more TV's and you want all the extra channels, why shouldn't you have to pay for it with boxes? I don't feel any sympathy for the people who have more TV's than people in their house.

You would with any satellite provider or u-Verse.

catbrat90

join:2007-08-10
Cincinnati, OH
reply to antdude
I am glad they are finally are allowed to encrypt all of their signals. This will deter cable theft. By the way Suit Up Time Warner Cable will disconnect the lines when their is no active service at that address, that will not change anytime soon in the future because there are regulations that they are not allowed to have any signal leakage and if it is not disconnected when their is no active service it can cause problems for their paying customers. In order to make sure their is no signal leakage they would have to disconnect non active customers and make sure that the line and the service port are capped.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
said by catbrat90:

By the way Suit Up Time Warner Cable will disconnect the lines when their is no active service at that address...

Part of the reason this was allowed is to reduce the number of truck rolls. If they still disconnect lines, then this would do nothing to prevent truck rolls. Which would be sad as it's the only part of this with any actual merit to it.


DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:20
said by Suit Up:

said by catbrat90:

By the way Suit Up Time Warner Cable will disconnect the lines when their is no active service at that address...

Part of the reason this was allowed is to reduce the number of truck rolls. If they still disconnect lines, then this would do nothing to prevent truck rolls. Which would be sad as it's the only part of this with any actual merit to it.

It'll reduce the truck rolls due to the drop in cable system hacking causing ingress. Both service calls to other subscribers with problems caused by it and direct damage related calls.
--
If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

1 edit
I ignored your previous post because what you mentioned was not what I was talking about (bad devices in the home on illegally attached lines vs open ends in all the homes combined). But I'll address it now since you bring it up again, if you think that encrypting basic cable will completely stop people tampering with external lines, congrats on being an optimist... but that seems a bit too idealistic to me. Sure it may reduce the tampering, but there will always be those who just want to be malicious and disrupt service. Heck, even competing cablecos do it to the other side sometimes...

I thought I read a while back that part of the reason for this is so a customer can pick up a box or have it shipped to them, hook it up to the coax in their house, and immediately have service and not be dependent on a truck roll. You know... something that would actually improve customer service. Which is why I had no problem with implementing this (I only have a problem with weak reasons such as this reducing the number of bad devices in the house). But if I was mistaken and rather they still are going to require a truck roll to provide that service than this change really does nothing for the customer. Cable theft is nothing new, cablecos have managed to make tons of money and provide very reliable service throughout all the years of cable theft. And despite what cablecos try to claim, clear QAM is not any easier to steal than clear NTSC. So if the only valid reason for implementing this is to reduce people hacking into external lines... well that's pretty sad.


chamberc
Premium
join:2008-08-05
Irving, TX
reply to hitmehhh
said by hitmehhh:

Just one more reason for them to keep gouging US.

Or they're just running a business, whose purpose is to make money. No one is holding a gun to your head to have cable.

JasonBKs

join:2012-10-25
reply to antdude
As a side note, they are definitely starting to do this now. See a thread I created regarding TW - Kansas City. Apparently they stopped broadcasting the network channels in the clear earlier this week.

I understand the business reasons and theft deterrence. Just sucks that it affects legitimate customers like myself who want to record ClearQAM channels via Windows Media Center.

Please come out my way Google Fiber!


hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
kudos:11

1 recommendation

"Just sucks that it affects legitimate customers like myself who want to record ClearQAM channels via Windows Media Center."

Most clear Qam channels are available over the air, in fact all of them in this area. Hook up an antenna.

Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson


JasonBKs2

@rr.com
I would except I'm far enough awaay from the towers without a huge antenna investment I can't receive enough of the OTA signal.

catbrat90

join:2007-08-10
Cincinnati, OH
reply to Suit Up
Suit Up by the way. encrypting service will deter cable theft because they are no longer able to receive free service's. It would cost a lot of money to try to circumvent their encryption. To say that people will just tamper to be malicious and disrupt service I have yet to see a case for someone to do it just to disrupt service or to be malicious. Outages that occur that way are people trying to get free cable. That will end when they plug in their tv and it does not work anymore. To respond to your comment that they will just hook it up so they can have service sooner. Time Warner Cable will not activate their box if their system will show that their line has not been reconnected. If they do this and cause damage Time Warner Cable can seek restitution and have them criminally charged for the damages. Not to mention most people will wait since Time Warner cable still offers next day installations and sometimes they have an all day installation as well the same day if they are offering it.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
said by catbrat90:

Suit Up by the way. encrypting service will deter cable theft because they are no longer able to receive free service's.

Of course it will, I never argued against that. I just said it won't completely stop people from trying it. Think about how many people still weren't prepared for the digital transition even after it was delayed and you'll understand that not everybody is going to get the message right away. Especially as the date when this happens is going to vary in different markets, which will make it more confusing for people.

said by catbrat90:

To say that people will just tamper to be malicious and disrupt service I have yet to see a case for someone to do it just to disrupt service or to be malicious.

I guess you have a much higher opinion of humanity than I do if you don't think people will do it just for kicks. As I said, there are even reports of guys from competing cablecos (in the limited regions where they coexist) cutting the other cableco's wires. It's unrealistic to think that there will not be anymore intentional man made disruptions to external cable wires just because the TV signal for the lowest tier is now encrypted.

said by catbrat90:

Outages that occur that way are people trying to get free cable. That will end when they plug in their tv and it does not work anymore.

You do know people will still try get illegal cable internet too? This does nothing to change that.

said by catbrat90:

Not to mention most people will wait since Time Warner cable still offers next day installations and sometimes they have an all day installation as well the same day if they are offering it.

I'm sorry, but even if you offer next day or same day installations that's still no better than having to wait 2 weeks for an appointment. Either way you lose a day having to be present for some installation. It provides no real customer benefit or cost savings to the cableco like allowing self-installation does.


DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:20
I find that the thefts that cause the most ingress/leakage problems are the blatant repeat offenders. They just get in by what ever it takes and plug in. They don't care what they damage, they just want their TV.

After techs come in and fix it, they go right back out to the tap and break in. That's what happened in the pictures above. I have others pictures and examples from when I was doing system maintenance.

They do it because the risk of getting caught and prosecuted is low in comparison to the value of the "free" TV they get.

Remove the "free" TV and the repeat offenders go away. Their word of mouth to other thieves (they do brag to others and tell them how) will slow down the other attempts as well.

Malicious damage to the cable system is relatively rare.... theft and damage in the attempt to get copper and batteries to recycle have much higher occurrences, but those normally causes outright outages not ingress. Also, that sort of thing still happens WAY less then damage by cable TV thieves.
--
If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
said by DrDrew:

They don't care what they damage, they just want their TV.

And you think someone with that attitude is just gonna happily sit around doing nothing after everything is encrypted?

But yes, I think outside damage, although rare, is a worse problem than ingress from cable thieves because "those normally causes outright outages not ingress." And when pissed off cable thieves can no longer get free cable, I expect that malicious damage will go up, because "they don't care what they damage, they just want their TV" and "the risk of getting caught and prosecuted is low."

Anyway, as I said earlier "Cable theft is nothing new, cablecos have managed to make tons of money and provide very reliable service throughout all the years of cable theft. And despite what cablecos try to claim, clear QAM is not any easier to steal than clear NTSC." So what exactly is the reason why this should happen now when it was never able to happen before (since you guys have, without even trying, convinced me that the reason why I originally supported it is incorrect)?

catbrat90

join:2007-08-10
Cincinnati, OH
reply to antdude
Suit up to respond that they can still steal internet is laughable at best. It would take a hacker to hack the modem then they would have to clone an active mac address to the modem he hacked. To be able to get free internet. It would be easier to uncap the modem than to get free internet. Then the cable company's computer system should flag any duplicate mac address which is used to identify and activate internet service. It would immediately lock it out of the system meaning no more free internet for that mac address.


DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:20
reply to Suit Up
Malicious damage gets the police involved for reports and insurance purposes.

Cable theft normally doesn't.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

1 recommendation

said by catbrat90:

Suit up to respond that they can still steal internet is laughable at best. It would take a hacker to hack the modem then they would have to clone an active mac address to the modem he hacked. To be able to get free internet. It would be easier to uncap the modem than to get free internet. Then the cable company's computer system should flag any duplicate mac address which is used to identify and activate internet service. It would immediately lock it out of the system meaning no more free internet for that mac address.

Did you not hear about the guy that got arrested recently for selling modems that did just that?

said by DrDrew:

Malicious damage gets the police involved for reports and insurance purposes.

Cable theft normally doesn't.

Ah. That's good to know. That'll be a better deterrent then encrypting all the tv channels. They should start prosecuting for cable theft too though.