342 replies to this topic

[SpaceRat]

That's not the point.

[littlesat]

They need that branding thing to determine which variation of ciplushelper is needed. We already have a ‘fake’ branding emulator inside our image, might be it missed a ‘parameter’. As far I know for vu a special patch is e2 is required as they do not have an io control for the AES key in their drivers. Where is this patch?
All other boxes except for vu are working on openpli when you know how to put an ciplushelper. For vu you need to compile a patched enigma2 binary yourself and maybe also Google might be helpfull here.....

[WanWizard]

That's not the point.

 

It is absolutely the point. OE-A decided to do things differently from us, and then you dare to suggest that we are to blame for that.

[Persian Prince]

The only way to get CI+ working on a VU+ receiver (at least from a consumer's point of view) is to install VTi 9.03 >. At least the Neotion Chipset based CI+ modules will work. As stated many times, these certificates are obtained illegally hence absolutely no warranty that it will work 'forever' as the manufacturer may alter these certificated. CI+ works FOR NOW.. If you want to use a softcam as well you MUST use Common Interface Assignment for the channels you wish to decode via CI+.

 

Is it possible for you to test Open Vision?

 

Our Russian friends confirmed CI+ works in Open Vision months ago ...

Edited by Persian Prince, 16 December 2019 - 18:20.

[mrvica]

I don´t have CI+, another question, can you offer for multiboot boxes (H7S, HD51...) multiboot image (kernel.bin, rootfs.tar.bz2) as well not just usb (disk.img), I have 4 partitions and would like to test it in one partition, thanks

[WanWizard]

Is it possible for you to test Open Vision?

 

Our Russian friends confirmed CI+ works in Open Vision months ago ...

 

Why does everyone keep reinventing wheels, and keep those wheels to themselfs?

 

If CI+ had been implemented the same way as a softcam (with a generic E2 interface, and an optional external binary), every image would have CI+ support a long time ago...

[littlesat]

+1

[nick61]

Hi everyone, for me, the ciplushelper is working now on openatv (vu+ uno 4k dvb-c).

 

VTi also works native (without the need to add ciplushelper), but with VTi I'm missing hrtunerproxy plex client emulator (I did not find it in downloadable plugins list).

 

Thanks guys,

[littlesat]

And vti is violating gpl... their sources are closed source. That does totally not help. In addition around fhe atv solution there is also some magic... they removed it from the sources but it seems they have a secret feed.

Edited by littlesat, 17 December 2019 - 07:57.

[Persian Prince]

 

Is it possible for you to test Open Vision?

 

Our Russian friends confirmed CI+ works in Open Vision months ago ...

 

Why does everyone keep reinventing wheels, and keep those wheels to themselfs?

 

If CI+ had been implemented the same way as a softcam (with a generic E2 interface, and an optional external binary), every image would have CI+ support a long time ago...

 

 

I sent the patches via PM to PLi members months ago and our git is public, nothing to hide.

Edited by Persian Prince, 17 December 2019 - 10:44.

[littlesat]

Nothing to hide? Please note we were 'politely' asked to revert CI+ commits we had a few years ago. Please be aware that supporting this is somehow a sensitive subject. Which is maybe also the reason why on OpenATV you manually need to add a 'secret' feed.

 

As far I can see here https://github.com/O...f815b71cbae1eb3 some code is still included for CI+helpers... it should work for ioctrl boxes but it seems for VU+ also an if VU then do something special enigma2 patch is required. And this is something we do not like. When VU adapt also to an ioctrl method it should also work with CI+helpers that include a stolen CI+ license you can find elsewhere on the WWW.

Edited by littlesat, 17 December 2019 - 11:15.

[Persian Prince]

Nothing to hide? Please note we were 'politely' asked to revert CI+ commits we had a few years ago. Please be aware that supporting this is somehow a sensitive subject. Which is maybe also the reason why on OpenATV you manually need to add a 'secret' feed.

 

As far I can see here https://github.com/O...f815b71cbae1eb3 some code is still included for CI+helpers... it should work for ioctrl boxes but it seems for VU+ also an if VU then do something special enigma2 patch is required. And this is something we do not like. When VU adapt also to an ioctrl method it should also work with CI+helpers that include a stolen CI+ license you can find elsewhere on the WWW.

 

I was referring ot Open Vision, we didn't hide anything and we don't have the ciplushelper sources but I think ATV has (not sure).

[WanWizard]

By providing an API we don't do anything illegal, so I don't see that as a problem. Like they say, selling an ax isn't illegal, killing someone with it is.

 

The issue a few years back was because that vendor also supplied the helper, which is the illegal bit.

 

So if code exists that allows CI+ helpers to work, in a generic way, it should be added.

[Pr2]

Just my return of experience, I need also CI+ support on a Linux 4k with OpenPli and what you can find for OpenPli by some Google search doesn't work for me.

So I install OpenATV on the Lunix 4k install the cihelper 4.7 that I found ok another forum and it was not working. Then going into the menu I can force the CI slot to be ci+ 1.3 and then my module is working.

So I think that the plugin that change the CI+ version is missing for OpenPli and that with it my module can also potentially work in OpenPli.

[WanWizard]

The contents of the helper ipk clearly shows what's wrong with the current approach: lots of different binaries.

 

If we all could get to an agreement of a single enigma API, like is done for the softcam, only a single helper binary would be needed.

 

I personally doubt providers have much of an issue with this, as using a helper means the user has a CI+ module and a subscription, i.e. she/he is a paying customer.

 

Blocking those probably means a large percentage will switch to IPTV, meaning a loss of revenue.

[nick61]

I personally doubt providers have much of an issue with this, as using a helper means the user has a CI+ module and a subscription, i.e. she/he is a paying customer.

 

Blocking those probably means a large percentage will switch to IPTV, meaning a loss of revenue.

 

Thank you, I was wondering why no one mentions this very important detail: I'm a legal subscriber, I pay for every receiver (TV, box etc) I own with CI, so it's somehow stupid to forbid one of my devices, doesn't matter the reason...

Edited by nick61, 17 December 2019 - 21:27.

[SpaceRat]

You forgot one aspect of CI+, the "+", which has to be read as "minus".
E2 receivers all support CI modules (As long as they happen to have a CI slot). So every provider could just use plain CI modules to keep E2 in.

CI+ however adds a big minus for the viewer:
A huge set of restrictions, like time-bombed recordings, enforce "same box only recordings", timeshift-disabling during ads, and so on and so on.

Now the point:
If a provider decided that he wants to add hassle for the customer, he will not want them to be able to avoid it.
So yes, the provider will care if the customer uses an E2 box and thus a CI+ module uncrippled to CI mode, avoiding all the "nice" restrictions the provider wanted the customer to suffer from.

Edited by SpaceRat, 18 December 2019 - 14:31.

[WanWizard]

Name me one provider tthat actually uses the + ? I have never come across one.

[SpaceRat]

SES Astra HD+

 

You only wanted one ... else I would add Unitymedia and Vodafone to the list.

 

The services affected are:

RTL HD, RTL II HD, RTL NITRO HD, Vox HD, Super RTL HD

... can not be recorded at all, timeshift is restricted.

Pro7, Sat.1, Kabel1, SIXX HD ....

... can be recorded but the recordings become unusable after 90 minutes.

 

To my knowledge, no truely certified device/device combo creates recordings that are actually usable outside the certified device/device combo:

They get encrypted again so that they can only be played (or playing them can be denied, see above) on the device that created the recordings.

Edited by SpaceRat, 18 December 2019 - 17:56.

[WanWizard]

Amazing that providers like that still exist. Having said that, SKY is as bad, their hardware is crap, and virtually unusable.

 

I wonder how long this model will remain to exist, now that alternatives pop up right, left and center...