Bad News For Hackers
- Thread starter Juan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 100
- Views 20K
- Status
100% correct....it is the same compression technology. The only point I was originally trying to make is that when everything goes M4, the FTA business will be booming big time. Dish either has to secure their ch's somehow...or start buying stock in the FTA business.digiblur said:
Lots of reading. 
http://www.echostar-int.com/indexie3.htm
http://www.satellite-heaven.de/frameset.htm?jump=Receiver/echostar.htm
http://www.itraque.fr/fiche_produit.php?id=11163
http://sat-receiver-world.com/pd304347503.htm
http://www.parabolic.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21_26&products_id=168&osCsid=2900ead3671e981b63e02d87974d7195
http://www.echostar-int.com/indexie3.htm
http://www.satellite-heaven.de/frameset.htm?jump=Receiver/echostar.htm
http://www.itraque.fr/fiche_produit.php?id=11163
http://sat-receiver-world.com/pd304347503.htm
http://www.parabolic.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21_26&products_id=168&osCsid=2900ead3671e981b63e02d87974d7195
BTW I don't know if I remember this story correctly (and I could be wrong), but many years ago did Dish (Echostar) have a container of VC2 boards seized by the government for being hacked? Then for some reason the case was thrown out and they got the hacked VC boards and sold them all.
Anyone know of this story and can fill in the blanks?
Anyone know of this story and can fill in the blanks?
Dish going to MPEG-4 would make the ones making the FTA receivers (Echostar possibly) more money in that they would have to buy new receivers to get them to work. They know that some people would never purchase all of the stations so this may be another way of them getting the money from those individuals. If they would do certain things that would require an upgrade (box swapout) every so often then they would make money doing this.
Maybe a foreign subsidary of E* is making money selling the hacks to get free Dish. After all it would be easier to make money if you sold the boxes, the customers had to install and take care of them on their own, and you did not have to pay programmers for the programming.
Imagine if they figure out how to hit the boxes to where they would not work anymore so that they would have to buy a new box but not too often so that they do not deter the hackers from wanting to do that anymore.
I believe it is ILLEGAL to send something (ECM) to damage someone else's property. This has been tested in the courts, and the FCC does not allow it. They should still do it and pay the fines.Stargazer said:
Security does not necessarily create sales
Just to address some points, as I find this interesting, here's my 2 cents:
The fact that services like Dish Network and ExpressVu use the DVB standard makes them quite open to hacking, especially by clever software running on other standard DVB hardware that is not their own. One of the biggest problems they face these days with FTA hardware is that they cannot "control" the hardware. Instead they have to find ways to break the software but they must do so within the some constraints of the DVB standard itself. An example of they fight back is using turbo coded 8PSK, however that is no longer safe either and probably just a matter of time before it's a mainstream hack. However, DVB-S2 hardware may not support turbo coding and so that may be planting a seed to avoid some future hacking.
People often wonder why they don't use unhacked systems like DCII, and I believe they often overlook the fact that hacking is factored into the business plan. I don't know enough to give a detailed answer, but I imagine there are all sorts of issues with DCII (or other unhacked systems), perhaps licensing, hardware costs, transmission, content conversion, whatever, that make/made it a less attractive option. Although not necessarily causal, there seems to be a relationship between DCII and subscribers, the DCII providers have the least subscribers. There is of course also the simple fact that it may be too difficult to move after years of running on one system. Remember, it's a business, they have to analyze their true loss to hacking and determine how much security is worth.
I don't know about current numbers, but I know a few years ago DirecTV had way more subscribers than Dish Network. Now in those days, people were easily programming DirecTV cards with a cheap programmer and a cheap subscription to a hacking site, while Dish Network hackers had to deal with much more complex hacks often involving hardware modifications (more "control" of the hardware). So, in those days, simply put, it was harder to hack Dish Network than DirecTV.
However, I'd be willing to bet that the multiple receivers available from different manufacturers on the DirecTV side had something to do with increasing sales. DirecTV receivers offered numerous choices all over the pricing spectrum and were available at numerous retailers.
I don't put this forth as a perfect analysis, but it's sort of common sense how I saw things happenning. For whatever innacuracies I may have stated, the basic point is, more security does not necessarily equal more sales.
Just to address some points, as I find this interesting, here's my 2 cents:
The fact that services like Dish Network and ExpressVu use the DVB standard makes them quite open to hacking, especially by clever software running on other standard DVB hardware that is not their own. One of the biggest problems they face these days with FTA hardware is that they cannot "control" the hardware. Instead they have to find ways to break the software but they must do so within the some constraints of the DVB standard itself. An example of they fight back is using turbo coded 8PSK, however that is no longer safe either and probably just a matter of time before it's a mainstream hack. However, DVB-S2 hardware may not support turbo coding and so that may be planting a seed to avoid some future hacking.
People often wonder why they don't use unhacked systems like DCII, and I believe they often overlook the fact that hacking is factored into the business plan. I don't know enough to give a detailed answer, but I imagine there are all sorts of issues with DCII (or other unhacked systems), perhaps licensing, hardware costs, transmission, content conversion, whatever, that make/made it a less attractive option. Although not necessarily causal, there seems to be a relationship between DCII and subscribers, the DCII providers have the least subscribers
. There is of course also the simple fact that it may be too difficult to move after years of running on one system. Remember, it's a business, they have to analyze their true loss to hacking and determine how much security is worth.I don't know about current numbers, but I know a few years ago DirecTV had way more subscribers than Dish Network. Now in those days, people were easily programming DirecTV cards with a cheap programmer and a cheap subscription to a hacking site, while Dish Network hackers had to deal with much more complex hacks often involving hardware modifications (more "control" of the hardware). So, in those days, simply put, it was harder to hack Dish Network than DirecTV.
However, I'd be willing to bet that the multiple receivers available from different manufacturers on the DirecTV side had something to do with increasing sales. DirecTV receivers offered numerous choices all over the pricing spectrum and were available at numerous retailers.
I don't put this forth as a perfect analysis, but it's sort of common sense how I saw things happenning. For whatever innacuracies I may have stated, the basic point is, more security does not necessarily equal more sales.
how would a hacker explain in court why his property got damaged if he was not stealing the signal when the ecm came down?Dish-Direc said:
Dish Network getting DCII = DCII getting hacked and DCIII coming out and all boxes needing to be swapped in order to do so (unless they can just upgrade a board in the receivers).
Do you think a hacker is going to take Dish to court when they were in the wrong? That is almost like turning themselves in and I do not think any hacker would want to take that sort of risk. He would just have to buy another box (from Dish?)
Do you think a hacker is going to take Dish to court when they were in the wrong? That is almost like turning themselves in and I do not think any hacker would want to take that sort of risk. He would just have to buy another box (from Dish?)
Dulley said:
I would not consider most of the people who are "On The Dark Side" as people who do it for the challange.
There may be a few that do.
But most just pay for hacks or download them from shady places.
Downloading and running a program is not a challange............unless you are a challanged person.
Dish Ecm
I think you need to ask the FCC and the courts why they have made such a countermeasure illegal. Point is, you will NOT see the days, again, when Dish can damage boxes. Best they can do is fire Kudelski, and get a new security company, and cash their insurance bond.pepper rex said:
RVD420 said:
It sounds like you know more then you are saying about the dark side I am a dark sider and give chuckie $104 a month and would say 70 to 80 % of the people on the dark side are subbed to dave , chuck or bev but also beleave that if they own
there equipment and the signal lands on there property just like any other signal it is theres
Last edited:
- Status
