Clampdown on TV 'Dodgy Boxes'

No need to resort to insults.

As I said let's see who is right.

Have my Android box set up on a guest network from Router.

Same with my micro Pc for downloading from torrent sites connected to TV.

ill probably buy a physical VPN device sometime soon instead of a software one.

Yes, so my setup is I have an oldish laptop running a VPN with two Ethernet ports on a guest network from Router. I share the internet connection to a five port switch which my android box is connected to and PC connected to TV to get around the geo blocks.

Anything else is just on main connection.

😂

.

What's the advantage of this over just running the VPN on your Android device?

Unless you are using something that hangs of f THOR, and even with that, you don't have any guarantee that logs or partial logs aren't being kept at points in the chain. However the network forensics and time required to do something of value with them make it almost impossible with so many more pressing matters.

Agreed. Go with one of the established mainstream providers.

Plus there are loads of Guards using IPTV, I know 3 who have the same setup as mine & they ain't using VPNs

Yip. The threat of some examples being made out of a few end users (which I dont believe will happen anyway) isn't going to deter anyone. Its nowhere near whats needed to stop subs selling. Thats a good point about the savings adding up to any fine. Bottom line is the juice is worth the squeeze at the moment. Until such times that actually changes any scaremongering isnt going to make any difference.

Lads a watermark or anything similar can't really work as it's a legitimate sub being broadcast for IPTV. The broadcaster have no idea who is using a legitimate sub for IPTV and they have no idea who is connecting to the iPTV server. Thus they can't pick 1 legitimate sub with 200 people connecting to the server and hit them all with a watermark. They don't control the server rebroadcasting the legitimate sub.

It's in no way similar to card sharing either which was easy enough for them to tackle once the problem became widespread. That was based around encryption. How many people were prosecuted for card sharing?

As for prosecuting end users? I don't know. Again not a simple thing to do. Once VPNs are involved it's nigh on impossible to see where the traffic goes when it hits the VPN server. Even without a VPN they still have to prove that the users is accessing copyright material over the internet connection. They have to prove that the IP being hit is indeed being used to host coyright material. In a house of multiple people? Makes it even more difficult.

Plus I know for a fact my provider uses a VPN on their end too.

Posters on here getting excited about IPTV being blocked are way off the mark if they think it's going to happen anytime soon or if the technology exists to do it. I think Sky are only interested in commercial premises who use IPTV. They are easier to catch and prosecute. They also cost Sky more in terms of lost revenue.

IPTV is here to stay. Sky putting their prices up again just confirms that they really don't have the appetite to tackle it. As someone said they could try a media campaign and play on peoples moral conscience but only the most naive of users will be phased by that. I'm yet to meet anyone who gives a shite about Skys profits.

On the prosecuting end users I don't think it will happen, as we saw from the music industry days it was a bad look.

Better off making the illegal streaming services difficult to use and untrustworthy.

On the watermark thing, consider the following.

Most illegal streams have to start with a legal sub, a legal Sky Sports subscription for example.

Sky Sports insert a watermark on each sub that only they know where to find.

Sky then sign up to a multitude of illegal streaming services.

They watch the service and as soon as they detect the watermark they cancel the subscription.

Bang anyone connected to that illegal streaming service using that Sky Sports sub is now gone dark.

Obviously all of this is automated.

I would not be surprised if it was being used in some shape or form or that the tech to do it efficiently is still in the works.

They would have to be signing up to a lot of subs to catch illegal streaming.

Plus it's only useful for paid subscriptions.

For example if an EPL game is free on NBC in the US, and NBC find it on an illegal streaming services via the method I suggested there is nothing they can do about it, NBC is not a subscription service, it's free to air.

...efforts always 'seem' to pick up before new football seasons, but the 'problem' seems to also grow exponentially, the sheer numbers of illegal connections is astonishing now, id love to know whats preventing broadcasters from stopping this, as it seems out of control now.....

I've seen sky try watermarks before and the seller just blurs it out

It's like the shoplifters using foil lining to defeat scanners. Criminals will always find a way.