|
|
How is this done?
Michael Chare
|
|
|
|
Packet sniffing.
|
|
|
The question is, do they? 
Kindness isn't going to cure the world of all its awfulness but it's a good place to begin. Daisy Ridley.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 57825/13835kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.
|
|
|
Packet sniffing.
But since pretty much everyone uses WPA/WPA2, they are not going to be able to sniff any packets.
Oliver.
|
|
|
Well... they can try. 
|
|
|
It's nonsense. Any WiFi system using WA-2 encrypts traffic and it simply isn't possible to "sniff" packets for iPlayer activity.
In any event, there is a much better approach. Replay and streaming services are increasingly using apps and plugins which are downloaded (it doesn't matter if it's a tablet, phone, laptop, smart TV or any other device). It's possible for the replay/streaming service to gather the public IP address and geo-location data via APIs. Even if GPS is not available on the device, there are other methods of establish location information to various levels of accuracy using a range of methods. On my non-GPS enabled laptop, the location information is accurate to about 10 metres (provided I don't move it around much). There is also device profiling information available too.
Combine the geographic location, time/date, access patterns and public IP address along with licencing records an there could well be enough information for a court to order and ISP to hand over the IP address allocation to customer name information. That's already done for pirating cases of course.
The following gives information on how it's done using HTML5, but the techniques are, of course, general.
http://www.andygup.net/html5-geolocation-api-%E2%80%...
I'm not saying this has all been done yet, but it appears to be perfectly feasible. Of course it might (and I do emphasis might) be the case that the user has to give permission for location information to be passed over (as happens with, say, Google Maps), but that might not apply to apps an, even if it does, it's easy enough for the app/plug-in to be disabled if it is refused permission.
Edited by deleted (Sat 06-Aug-16 23:00:14)
|
|
|
|
Probably just a scare tactic like the old detector van adverts that made folk rush out and buy a license. Not one prosecution from a detector van.
|
|
|
Apparently now that I have read a bit more, they could see the size of the packets which could be an iplayer peculiarity.
Michael Chare
|
|
|
All discussed at length in the other thread .
Kindness isn't going to cure the world of all its awfulness but it's a good place to begin. Daisy Ridley.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 57825/13835kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
Re 'All discussed at length in the other thread' Link ?
Edited by APTMAN (Sun 07-Aug-16 01:23:41)
|
|
|
Link is in the third post of this thread..
Kindness isn't going to cure the world of all its awfulness but it's a good place to begin. Daisy Ridley.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 57825/13835kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
|
I have a number of expat friends who use my VPN server to view BBC iPlayer from Greece, Spain and elsewhere. I pay my license, so it matters not to me that I may be detected using iPlayer, even when I am not.
The BBC could avoid all this 'policing' if it were given permission to make iPlayer a subscription catch-up service. This need not affect the license system, which should be retained at all costs. It is essential that we avoid the dumbing down that would occur if commerce became the most important influence on programming decisions and programme making.
|
|
|
|
Rather than being concerned about the 'smoke and mirrors' detection methods - easily defeated by a simple and minor MTU change, personally I find it worrying that the legislation that permits Capita (a private contractor) to monitor private communications is RIPA.
|
|
|
You seem to be suggesting we should then pay both the licence fee and a BBC catchup fee. That's a daft idea.
Kindness isn't going to cure the world of all its awfulness but it's a good place to begin. Daisy Ridley.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 57825/13835kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
|
And if one were to set one's WLAN MTU to an oddly small size... say for argument's sake 400 bytes, how would that work? Add up the fragment sizes?
It's just bluff and bluster as an excuse for the door knocker's they employ to use as a ruse to get inside the premises of the tiny percentage of premises (I think I read it's less than 2% of households now) that do not have a licence.
|
|
|
RIPA is the key here.
Even for someone who pays the licence fee, I find this worrying.
I don't often use iPlayer on a mobile, but say I was using a hotspot and watching the Olympics whilst sitting in the park on my PAYG phone, paid with a voucher in cash - how can the detector van know I have a TV Licence?
Steve
|
|
|
|
They can't, but as there's pretty well zero chance of them identifying you in the first place, I can't see it happening unless they have people out there looking over shoulders.
Eventually this can only work if iPlayer has to be registered. In principle it ought to be possible for individual iPlayer apps/plug-ins to be authorised on a per-device basis against a particular TV licence. There could be a limit on the number of devices per licence. It would require legislative changes, but it's surely possible.
The only problem would be if there are legacy devices out there that don't have the technical ability to be updated to a player app/plug-in that can store the authorisation,
Of course this is a bit of a pain, but hardly different to any other content paying authentication system.
|
|
|
|
It would be perfectly feasible for a TV licence to allow for the authorisation of iPlayer on a number of mobile devices, perhaps with an ability to extend that number on payment of a per-device fee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The BBC have now issued a press releases which explicitly states that any detection of the unlicenced use of iPlayer will not work by eavesdropping WiFi packets (although they do not discuss details on how they might detect unlicenced use).
This only confirms what made sense to anybody who actually cared to think about it. Any attempt to use mass WiFi "packet sniffing" to detect use of iPlayer was technically hugely challenging (due to WiFi encryption, sheer volumes of information and that mobile devices are licenced by the owner's premises, not place of use).
I would maintain, however, that there is scope for controlling licencing or, maybe, location detection using iPlayer apps & plugins as there are geolocation APIs which, of course, work best with GPS enabled devices but are not wholly dependent on them. However, an iPlayer authorisation system linked in to a TV licence would surely be the better option.
Edited by deleted (Mon 08-Aug-16 09:25:57)
|
|
|
Paying the existing licence will allow any number of devices. I repeat, a subscription service on top of the licence fee is a daft, in fact unacceptable idea.
Kindness isn't going to cure the world of all its awfulness but it's a good place to begin. Daisy Ridley.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 57825/13835kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
|
I know it will currently allow any number of devices, but I feel a reasonable limit sufficient to cover a family's use would be appropriate. The problem with unlimited numbers is that it could be easily abused. If large numbers of people consume content off the same licence than I think it's not unreasonable that (beyond a reasonable limit) that there should be an incremental charge albeit nothing like the full cost of a licence.
|
|
|
|
They can do what they like, but everything will be available for free on certain sites as it is now!
|
|
|
|
It may be that it is available free, but the game here is to maximise revenues and keep costs of enforcement under control. The vast majority of people will find it too much trouble to evade the enforcement processes and won't bother to go through the effort. The civil enforcement of breach of copyright is a rather different issue to the one of TV licence enforcement as the former is a civil matter (unless done on an industrial scale), whilst the latter is a criminal law matter.
Youtube is stuffed full of copyright BBC programming material which the BBC show little sign of clamping down on, so I doubt they are much bothered with that at the moment. It's the recently broadcast material that's at issue.
|
|
|
They can do what they like, but everything will be available for free on certain sites as it is now!
But you still need to have a TV licence to do so unless you wish to break the law.
Oliver.
|
|
|
|
License or not, it will avoid subscription fees which is the way things will go. Many are refusing to pay the license tax as the BBC and their bias refuse to adhere to their remit of impartiality !
|
|
|
The BBC have always been biased. To the side opposite to each individual's standpoint .
Kindness isn't going to cure the world of all its awfulness but it's a good place to begin. Daisy Ridley.
My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk. Domains, site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - AAISP Home::1 80/20. Sync 57825/13835kbps @ 600m. - BQM
|
|
|
|
Totally agree with you. Anyone who hasn't got a licence at present and has been using iPlayer for free TV is hardly going to now pay a subscription. The only ones that would be penalised would be us licence payers. All this requiring a licence for iPlayer is a complete waste of time as those non payers will now just migrate to torrent downloads. Virtually everything is available, Insultingly many BBC programs are shown in the US well before the UK, The Musketeers being a recent example having been shown in the US some three months earlier. Paying for a VPN service is far cheaper than paying for the TV licence.
|
|
|
If using a device using the 3 or 4g network then they use iirc CGN carrier grade nat or most mobile carriers use it, so an ip to one person ain't that easy
and in any event an IP address don't identify the person's watching the content, only the subscriber, that isn't enough evidence to convict someone, besides court orders to compel ISP's coms providers to supply subscribers details for ip's is going to cost them,
then there is the issue of where the content is downloaded from ie which CDN and which server ect, but if those with wi fi buy a cat5/6 cable then their blag is foiled
They don't have any equipment to detect someone watching i player via wifi they , of course just as always won't go into details about their non existent /evidential tv detection equipment have recently themselves admitted this to dispel the misinformation scare stories by own woeful media BBC press office
Edited by tommy45 (Tue 09-Aug-16 02:58:07)
|
|
|
|
I don't think people using mobile & 4G are primary targets for this. It's an expensive way to watch a lot of TV coverage compared to using mainstream BB links via WiFi.
Hard wired links are irrelevant to any system which relies on detection via an iPlayer app or plugin. There was never any possibility that WiFi snooping was feasible. I also doubt that detecting a few uses of iPlayer from any give locality would trigger anything. What the BBC would be looking for is a persistent pattern consistent with residential use. Also things like what sort of device would be useful as access via a smart TV or set top box would be more indicative of residential use than an occasional access from a mobile user who might be covered by a licence from a different property. I would think this would only be used to start a real investigation (or, more likely, send out warning letters to frighten people into buying a licence).
I think that, ultimately, the issue will be resolved by requiring iPlayer apps/plugins to be authenticated against a TV licence. No doubt there will be workarounds, but this is a numbers game. If it just becomes too much trouble to get round iPlayer protection and it still carries the risk of prosecution (not just a breach-of-copyright civil case), then I suspect that enough will be deterred for it not to be financially significant to the BBC.
|
|
|
|
Post deleted by MrSaffron
|
|
|
|
Until the goverment make them ineffective - better to use IPTV and then all they can see is connection to an unknown server. OR use ethernet and then they can't sniff [censored].
|
|
|
Until the goverment make them ineffective - better to use IPTV and then all they can see is connection to an unknown server. OR use ethernet and then they can't sniff [censored]. They ain't going to be even packet sniffing ,
|
|
|
Until the goverment make them ineffective - better to use IPTV and then all they can see is connection to an unknown server. OR use ethernet and then they can't sniff [censored]. They ain't going to be even packet sniffing ,
|
|
|
|
Just noticed Alexey's post is spam - resurrected an old thread just to advertise a VPN service. The thread itself had died 4 months ago.
|
|
|
How is this done?
It isn't done, they lie to try to frighten people, detector vans are the same thing.
http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Detector%20vans.htm
|
|
|
|
Old post that has only risen to the top due to spam. See the rest of the thread as it was already discussed at length.
|
|
|
Just noticed Alexey's post is spam - resurrected an old thread just to advertise a VPN service. The thread itself had died 4 months ago.
I got it confused with a licence conversation me and Tommy were having, Elsewhere it seems - oops!
|
|
|
I hadn't noticed it myself until I saw the previous post was from August - resurrecting old threads generally identifies a spammer - and the link to the VPN service confirms it. I have reported it as spam and suspect it will say bye-bye before very long.
EDIT : 31 seconds from my posting this - MrS is like the Flash
Edited by ian72 (Fri 16-Dec-16 14:03:52)
|
|
|
|
|
|
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
|
|
|
How is this done?
It isn't done, they lie to try to frighten people, detector vans are the same thing.
http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Detector%20vans.htm
Back in the old 4 / 5 channel TV's you could detect what channel / frequency you was watching, this was due to there wasn't really that much in the actual receiver.
Receivers in general require oscillators to generate the required offset frequencies so that they can tune to the required frequency / channel, these oscillators can be picked up if close enough to the TV and due to back then hardly any TV was screened which made it more easier to pick up when using directional antennas, modern TV's now days are all screened reducing the chances of picking up the oscillator in the TV in question.
So if "there was" such a thing as a detector van back then it probably would be useless now days.
But since nearly every TV now days is a Smart TV or has an external device turning it into a Smart TV, it would probably be easier for them to just get the required information from the ISP's when or if the require it.
Paul
BTBroadband - Infinity 4 - 310Mbps (down), 31Mbps (up)
TBB Speedtest
Edited by PaulKirby (Sat 17-Dec-16 00:47:18)
|
|
|
Never did work, just had a few to scare people into buying a licence. Not one prosecution due to a so called detector van.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2445153/Are-...
|
|
|
Never did work, just had a few to scare people into buying a licence. Not one prosecution due to a so called detector van.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2445153/Are-...
I never said there was detector vans now or back then.
I was saying the engineering side of it was there, by saying that the old TV's back then radiated a lot noise out of the set including the oscillator used in them, this was due to them being made ion the cheap and not much of the cables was screened if any was.
I could even pick them up using a Spectrum Analyser with a preamp and directional antenna, it wasn't perfect but you could see the carrier about 20 feet away from it, so this part was correct, that's was I was getting at.
Even some TV's was worse and you was able to pick up the offset carrier and one of its harmonic frequencies.
*** update ***
And that ad always cracks me up, that Monty Python sketch in the ad had me in fits.
"What has the BBC actually given to us ?, Well ..." 
Paul
BTBroadband - Infinity 4 - 310Mbps (down), 31Mbps (up)
TBB Speedtest
Edited by PaulKirby (Sat 17-Dec-16 04:22:57)
|
|
|
Yes, technically it seems possibly feasible that someone could have used a device to detect the intermediate frequency leakage from a superheterodyne receiver, but firstly most TVs were double superhet making it harder, and there was nothing saying all TVs had to use the same IF, so it would have been a crapshoot.
Getting reliable triangulation data would also be very hard, you'd be detecting the antenna not the TV, so where you have flats with a shared aerial or semis with aerials on the shared chimeny stack, it would always have been useless.
And anyway, I was more focusing on the evidence that it isn't done
|
|
|
|
I did once see a blue Leyland daf van with a Logo on - I took a photo of it I am trying to find and if I do I will put it here.
|
Pages in this thread: 
Print Thread
Michael_Chare
