Cisco Develops System To Automatically Cut-Off Pirate Video Streams

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Cisco has developed a system that automatically cuts off pirate video streams in real-time called Streaming Piracy Prevention. Get this, the company claims that its system can be used without the need to send takedown notices to hosting companies.

Cisco says it has developed a system to disable live pirate streams . The network equipment company says its Streaming Piracy Prevention platform utilizes third-party forensic watermarking to shut down pirate streams in real-time, without any need to send takedown notices to hosts or receive cooperation from third parties.
 
This is sketchy. Whose to say what is legit and what isn't if they don't to have follow any regulations, file notices, etc? In a roundabout way, I'm not sure it makes them any different than bad guys. How long before the access providers point this toward legit users who are legit streaming services?
 
thesmokingman said:
This is sketchy. Whose to say what is legit and what isn't if they don't to have follow any regulations, file notices, etc? In a roundabout way, I'm not sure it makes them any different than bad guys. How long before the access providers point this toward legit users who are legit streaming services?
Click to expand...

Look at how many takedown notices that Google receives from the RIAA and other entities. They even send requests to takedown their own websites daily! If they can't disseminate their own company website from a pirate website; then how is this going to work?

What people should do is sue Cisco everytime that they get blacked out for a legitimate stream. Don't even bother with the RIAA or whomever. Just start 100,000 Cisco lawsuits. See how long they stay in the policing business.
 
cageymaru said:
Look at how many takedown notices that Google receives from the RIAA and other entities. They even send requests to takedown their own websites daily! If they can't disseminate their own company website from a pirate website; then how is this going to work?

What people should do is sue Cisco everytime that they get blacked out for a legitimate stream. Don't even bother with the RIAA or whomever. Just start 100,000 Cisco lawsuits. See how long they stay in the policing business.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure what Cisco is doing is illegal in principle. I'm not a lawyer, but it sure as hell doesn't smell kosher.
 
What's that you say? Your piracy response time is 4 minutes? Thanks!
 
If you read the article, it says that they'll realtime watermark the video streams so that they can determine who is illegally sharing it. Then shut down the feed to just that person. It actually makes sense and sounds like it could work. There will be a grey market in means to anonymize video that will eventually disable this, so its effectiveness will be in how easily the watermarking is defeated.

P.s. VPN, SSL, most of the other things you guys have been spewing would have no effect on this whatsoever.
 
EODetroit said:
If you read the article, it says that they'll realtime watermark the video streams so that they can determine who is illegally sharing it. Then shut down the feed to just that person. It actually makes sense and sounds like it could work. There will be a grey market in means to anonymize video that will eventually disable this, so its effectiveness will be in how easily the watermarking is defeated.

P.s. VPN, SSL, most of the other things you guys have been spewing would have no effect on this whatsoever.
Click to expand...

You're right, the Thread and the article title are misleading.

It will only work for BIG pirate services that have legit subscriptions and then re-stream the content for profit by cutting the feed to the legit subscriber, it will not work at all like a big spider that monitors all the web that randomly finds copyrighted streams and shuts them down, at least that's how I first thought it was.

This is more like a service that will be sold to the content owners, and it will probably just increase the cost of the online streaming services.
 
This is a fine idea. I don't see how it could possibly go wrong.
 
Master_shake_ said:
isn't injecting things in to internet traffic illegal?

for corps not gumment?
Click to expand...

You ever watch Star Wars: Episode 1?

"I will make it legal!"

They'll sell it as a huge security thing and it'll go right through the clueless lawmakers (that darn cybersecurity server bot zombie is bad!).

Nice technology. Not sure if I'd bet on it, though. The first time it takes down a legitimate stream, people are going to be all over them.
 
cageymaru said:
Guess who won't be buying Cisco consumer or Pro routers again!
Click to expand...

I work in datacenters...we are buying more and more Cisco network equipment and servers...I doubt they will feel your "not buying"...just saying.
A better solution would be if you stopped wacthing pirated content...but I guess that would be too logical?
 
EODetroit said:
If you read the article, it says that they'll realtime watermark the video streams so that they can determine who is illegally sharing it. Then shut down the feed to just that person. It actually makes sense and sounds like it could work. There will be a grey market in means to anonymize video that will eventually disable this, so its effectiveness will be in how easily the watermarking is defeated.

P.s. VPN, SSL, most of the other things you guys have been spewing would have no effect on this whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Yea, not many here RTFA anymore.

This will work but it depends on how much CISCO will charge for the service. I know restreaming is big right now but how much does it really cut into costs?
 
thesmokingman said:
This is sketchy. Whose to say what is legit and what isn't if they don't to have follow any regulations, file notices, etc? In a roundabout way, I'm not sure it makes them any different than bad guys. How long before the access providers point this toward legit users who are legit streaming services?
Click to expand...
Imagine the Hillary administration, God forbid, using this technology to blackout further Wikileaks or Veritas... oh, you video taped us performing massive voter fraud? Yeah, that's stolen video used without permission, yank!
 
Master_shake_ said:
isn't injecting things in to internet traffic illegal?

for corps not gumment?
Click to expand...

Which part are you trying to call illegal? The content streamer (Netflix, Hulu, ABC, your IPTV company....) puts a content id inside their data. Which that is their data they can do whatever they want. Inside of the video payload you will have something like subscriber 42157981938376250918345 provider 451348527 and that will just keep looping along with the video data, but will be meaningless to the player so it would ignore it. It is no different than how metadata was sent back in the days of analog tv. they made use of the fact that the image is over scanned and would pass data at the top or bottom of the screen in the form of small bars that would be read by the tv for closed captioning or other things.

Factum said:
I work in datacenters...we are buying more and more Cisco network equipment and servers...I doubt they will feel your "not buying"...just saying.
A better solution would be if you stopped wacthing pirated content...but I guess that would be too logical?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they got out of the consumer grade (Linksys) years ago to focus on large business. Don't think they are going to be butt hurt if somebody doesn't buy a single cheap cisco product when so many are buying $150,000+ pieces of equipment. Especially since this is probably going to be at the end of the large data center anyway and not at your home to stop you. Makes little sense to stop you from sending out the data if what they want to do is stop your streaming period.
 
Exavior said:
Yeah, they got out of the consumer grade (Linksys) years ago to focus on large business. Don't think they are going to be butt hurt if somebody doesn't buy a single cheap cisco product when so many are buying $150,000+ pieces of equipment. Especially since this is probably going to be at the end of the large data center anyway and not at your home to stop you. Makes little sense to stop you from sending out the data if what they want to do is stop your streaming period.
Click to expand...

Most people don't know what happpens to the data efter they leave their NTP...this is not directed at consumers, but ISP's/datacenters
I might have to talk to our Cisco AM and see if I can get to play with this....we currently run 2 datacenters with +5000 servers and the board just approved the construction of a new datacenter (nothing like job-security ;) ) and Cisco is very eager to get us to buy more from them...that might work in my favour ;)
 
Factum said:
Most people don't know what happpens to the data efter they leave their NTP...this is not directed at consumers, but ISP's/datacenters
I might have to talk to our Cisco AM and see if I can get to play with this....we currently run 2 datacenters with +5000 servers and the board just approved the construction of a new datacenter (nothing like job-security ;) ) and Cisco is very eager to get us to buy more from them...that might work in my favour ;)
Click to expand...

exactly, most people understand their network at best then beyond that the ISP and datacenters on the other side are magic or horribly over simplified in their heads.
 
It seems that most people are complaining from a "consumer" standpoint & not a "corporate network with employees" standpoint.

I can see this being more valuable that way as that is stuff the company wants blocked anyways, most likely has a policy that states all traffic is inspected, does MITM for SSL and/or VPN, does proxying for other services, etc. This fits right in line with that and would be an additional tool to sell corps.
 
So am watching the NASA mar rover landing on the moon for the first time and someone ciso router is used at a university between me and the NASA feed and some files a take down notice because they have a picture of the rover on one of their ads... does this kill the feed without anyone saying hey that feed does not even belong to the person claiming it is a pirate feed? I say this remembering that the mars rover up on utube that NASA posted from it's own feed from the antenna on the mars rover to their satellite in orbit down to their ground facility that no one actually could have gotten first...
 
drakken said:
So am watching the NASA mar rover landing on the moon for the first time and someone ciso router is used at a university between me and the NASA feed and some files a take down notice because they have a picture of the rover on one of their ads... does this kill the feed without anyone saying hey that feed does not even belong to the person claiming it is a pirate feed? I say this remembering that the mars rover up on utube that NASA posted from it's own feed from the antenna on the mars rover to their satellite in orbit down to their ground facility that no one actually could have gotten first...
Click to expand...

Did you even bother to read the link, before posting?

Nice fail...this is what I mean...ignorance making noise...over it's own ignorance...
 
This whole piracy fight thing is hitting new heights on the retard scale.
 
drakken said:
So am watching the NASA mar rover landing on the moon for the first time and someone ciso router is used at a university between me and the NASA feed and some files a take down notice because they have a picture of the rover on one of their ads... does this kill the feed without anyone saying hey that feed does not even belong to the person claiming it is a pirate feed? I say this remembering that the mars rover up on utube that NASA posted from it's own feed from the antenna on the mars rover to their satellite in orbit down to their ground facility that no one actually could have gotten first...
Click to expand...

No, that isn't how this works and that wouldn't happen. They even say this happens without a takedown notice. First off this requires the content creator to flag the content as they sent it out. So for your example to happen, NASA would have to offer a paid service where you can watch stuff. So lets say that tomorrow they make the announcement that for $15 a month you can watch all the behind the scene at NASA and raw feeds that you want. Then from how it sounds they would put a special flag into every person's stream. So if you pay for the stream inside of the video being sent to you is a value that states this stream is belong to you. Kind of like how beta copies of games now which are not meant to be shown to public have your gamer tag plastered all over the screen in a always changing location so that this was the copy they sent you. Then cisco equipment all over the world would be watching for these values hidden inside the video. Lets say you decide that you want to share your stream and rebroadcast that to others. As soon as multiple locations started seeing that your ID was going to many different end points it would then itself notify the main cisco device at NASA that your ID is all over the place and it would then shut down your stream.

Hornet said:
This whole piracy fight thing is hitting new heights on the retard scale.
Click to expand...

How so? I would say that out of all ways to deal with stuff this one actually sounds the most thought out. It isn't perfect, but I also see little in the way that can be abused or incorrectly flagged. If anything there will be things missed not things incorrectly flagged as pirated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top