Clampdown on TV 'Dodgy Boxes'

The decent providers will also use a VPN on their end too.

But there are ways to detect such traffic based on its characteristics. That would require the cooperation of the ISPs though.

Regards...jmcc

It is difficult for a broadcaster to identify a subscription being used to provide a dodgy box feed as it would require identifying the dodgy box feed. Card sharing was a solution from the early 1990s (it predated pirate smartcards and was even mentioned in Wired magazine when it was cool) and it wasn't until the advent of always on Internet access that it became a major problem. In bandwidth terms, it was more efficient. The latest generation of dodgy boxes depend on high bandwidth Internet access for the uplink and for the users.

The problem for the broadcasters is an economic one. The dodgy boxes are providing a cheaper service than a legiitimate subscription and the ease of use (always critical in monetising any hack on a broadcast service) is high and there is little requirement for much extra equipment. Ideally, a broadcaster would want to convert didgy box users into paid subscribers. Using the media to push that kind of a narrative would be counter-productive.

Regards...jmcc

A broadcaster is never going to have 100% security on a system where the settop boxes are outside its control and do not have a viable feedback loop to ensure that they are being properly used. I don't consider the technology journalists in the Irish media to be expert on the subject. Few, if any of them, are technologists and they don't seem to understand the problems that the broadcasters and dodgy box providers face.

The characteristics of a video stream are quite different to that of browsing in that the bandwidth usage in a video stream is relative constant. Browsiing is very bursty by comparison. It would require monitoring at an ISP level and false positives (Netflix/Prime/etc) would have to be ruled out. The lack of access to ISP trafffic data is a problem for the broadcasters. The broadcasters rely on FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) to convince a lot of people not to use dodgy boxes but the problem is that they cannot compete on an ecnomic basis (subscription fees) with dodgy boxes so they are left with the current situation. Targeting distributors or resellers is more effective than targeting users.

Regards...jmcc

Not exactly. In very basic terms, the VPNs would be between the user and the service (user - VPN - service). The others would more likely be user - service. The broadcaster would require access to the traffic data from an ISP and that's what most do not have at the moment. VPNs can easily be identified (not the content) and there are providers who publish lists of VPN IP addresses. IP addresses are also be used to block on a geographical basis.

The lack of access to the traffic data is one problem that most broadcasters cannot overcome yet. With access to the traffic data, a user IP that repeatedly goes active with a VPN when a soccer matches are on could be a possible dodgy box user. However, proving (in legal terms) that the user is a dodgy box user is completely different.

Regards...jmcc

I listened to this Why Do You Hate Me episode on BBC Radio. It mentioned that as well as hunting trolls, the Premier League hunt down the thieves who steal their TV coverage. I'd say they are picking up some useful information from social media threads like this one.

Released On: 21 Feb 2024 Available for over a year.

The Premier League has told the BBC it’s fighting a rise in social media threats against both its players and their families, with a team dedicated to hunting down online trolls. The BBC’s Disinformation and social media correspondent Marianna Spring goes inside the team for the first time, talks to striker Neal Maupay about social media abuse - and tracks down the man they helped convict for threatening him.

The apps themselves are legal as well. They don't provide the content themselves, merely allow access to it via various links/connection methods.

Bertie???

Segment on it on the lunchtime news just now. Not exactly what you might call an "in depth" interview with a spokesperson from FACT. Lots of references to the sellers of dodgy boxes as CRIMINALS.

Guy from FACT telling consumers to cancel their subscriptions. Cue lots of innocent people cancelling NetFlix because they think he is referring to that. 🤣

Or any android box. Even using smarters app or any of the other apps are perfectly legal in themselves. What is illegal is the use of them to connect to illegal streams.

The argument could be that you were using the IPTV sub for FTA channels.

Prove that I was viewing a PL match on the sub.

It would be an extremely difficult case to prove.

End users won't get done at all. What are they going to do? Drag 100,000's people through the courts for not paying to watch the Liverpool game?

There is massive criminal enterprises supplying these streams, its not some fella in his shed. This is a PR campaign, try to scare people, convict a few mid level resellers, to scare off anyone else from thinking they can do the same.

Me: What are you in for?

Prisoner: Murder, you?

Me: Watched the Liverpool vs burnley game.

There is nothing dodgy about most of these boxes at all.

The opposite in fact.

I have Sky stream.....rubbish.

Sky q and Virgin Horizon are two of the dodgiest boxes around in my opening

...