Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday August 08 2016, @05:05AM   Printer-friendly
from the watching-you-watching-them dept.

The BBC is to spy on internet users in their homes by deploying a new generation of Wi-Fi detection vans to identify those illicitly watching its programmes online.

The corporation has been given legal dispensation to use the new technology, which is typically only available to crime-fighting agencies, to enforce the new requirement that people watching BBC programmes via the iPlayer must have a TV licence.

Researchers at University College London disclosed that they had used a laptop running freely available software to identify Skype internet phone calls passing over encrypted Wi-Fi, without needing to crack the network password. They actually don't need to decrypt traffic, because they can already see the packets. They have control over the iPlayer, so they could ensure that it sends packets at a specific size, and match them up.

Source: The Telegraph [paywall]
Also covered by The Register.

n1: The existing TV detector van 'technology' has been in use in the UK since the 1950's, there has never been an explanation as to how they work. I am unaware of any occasions where evidence obtained by one was used to prosecute anyone.

A leaked internal document from the BBC gives a detailed breakdown of the state of licence fee payments and the number of people who evade the charge – but fails to make any mention of the detector vans.

While documenting the number of officers to collect the £145.50 fee increased to 334 this summer, an 18 page memo from the TV Licensing's Executive Management Forum obtained by the Radio Times makes no mention of the vans finding those who don't pay.

Source: The Telegraph (2013)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @06:00AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @06:00AM (#385190)

    Back in the 50s, TV sets generated ridiculous amounts of radio interference, there wasn't Wi-Fi everywhere, and an active TV would be easily detectable as a distinctive RF noise generator.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by janrinok on Monday August 08 2016, @07:49AM

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 08 2016, @07:49AM (#385220) Journal

    I am unaware of any occasions where evidence obtained by one was used to prosecute anyone.

    The original detector vans (i.e. pre around 1990) were easily able to detect the frame rate and other oscillators in a TV and thus identify that a television was being used. In the early days of only 2 or 3 channels, they could often identify which of those channels was being watched. I am personally aware of successful convictions as a result of TV detection during the 1970's - 1990s approximately, including one of a member of my extended family. He was fined £60 which was a significant sum at the time of the conviction. Convictions were not uncommon.

    Things began to change in the 1990s. Firstly, the electronics themselves improved. Instead of oscillators being based on valves and large coils (essentially using much higher voltages to drive the valves and cathode ray displays) there was a move firstly to semiconductors and later to ICs. These operated at much lower voltages and power levels and thus the emissions became significantly harder to detect.

    With the arrival of home computers and gaming devices - which could interface to TV's but which did not require a TV licence to be held - the problem of detecting unlicensed TV use became increasingly difficult. It was no longer sufficient to detect a TV oscillator: a successful conviction required the proof that TV programmes were being received. In those days many families only had the one TV and if a warrant was obtained to enter a home they would find that the television was connected to a computer and/or gaming device and thus they were not be able to say with any degree of certainty what the true usage was. The only successful convictions that I am aware of during the 1990's (other than by chance discovery e.g during eviction, police executing a warrant for a different reason etc) were from homes that were found to have no additional devices and the TV was connected to a TV aerial/antenna. It was no longer cost-effective to pursue illegal usage by simple detection means.

    Nowadays, as another commentor has already mentioned, the RF spectrum is far noisier. The switch to semiconductor displays coupled with the fact that such displays are found in a very wide variety of devices (TVs, gaming devices, tablets, computers, cell phones etc) meant that the detection task has become more difficult still. The detector van has the ability to actually display what is on a remote semiconductor display in precisely the same way that TEMPEST [wikipedia.org] is carried out on government or military systems. However, the environment makes such detection very difficult. The detector vehicle has to be parked relatively close to the target device and takes quite a bit of time to find and locate the device sufficiently accurately to ensure a successful conviction. Watching 'catch-up' TV also does not require a licence [tvlicensing.co.uk] in the UK - the requirement for a licence is for watching 'live' TV i.e. programmes being watched or recorded at the time of transmission.

    I speculate that the new 'detector' vans actually have a phone link to various ISPs and it is they that can confirm that TV programmes are currently being streamed to a user, or they are able to access local cable connections and inspect the data itself. The detection team will have a current list of licence holders/addresses and have the power to enter your home (i.e. a warrant) for the purposes of inspecting the reception devices. They will also have an updated capability based on the explanation above i.e. they will be able to detect individual displays and view the content in a favourable environment. However, I have no specific information regarding the latest capability.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by Nuke on Monday August 08 2016, @08:46AM

      by Nuke (3162) on Monday August 08 2016, @08:46AM (#385226)

      Watching 'catch-up' TV also does not require a licence in the UK - the requirement for a licence is for watching 'live' TV

      I think you missed the bit about watching catch-up will also require the licence, from September. That is why this issue has blown up now.

      • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday August 08 2016, @01:05PM

        by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 08 2016, @01:05PM (#385274) Journal

        The new regulation, as I understand it, only applies to IPlayer i.e. the device most associated with BBC transmissions. The existing regulations cover any TV broadcast, either originating in the UK or overseas, intended for public reception. Amateur TV transmissions are not covered by existing law if I understand correctly. Catch-up TV can employ a multitude of devices and is not limited to BBC transmissions. The only reporting that I have found is vague on this matter. The link in TFA only states that:

        The corporation has been given legal dispensation to use the new technology, which is typically only available to crime-fighting agencies, to enforce the new requirement that people watching BBC programmes via the iPlayer must have a TV licence.

        So I'm still not sure if the new detection capability is directly linked to the IPlayer (e.g. is the IPlayer phoning home?) or whether they are relying on deep packet inspection to find out what is being viewed.

        Nevertheless, the new law will still be contentious. Should UK residents be required to pay the BBC for programmes that are streamed to their homes by an independent provider, for example Sky? Or, if the above statement is true, and it is only IPlayer that is being licensed, what about those who argue that they do not watch the BBC at all? Are they still free to view catch-up from independent providers? Futhermore, the BBC once argued that it was to help pay for the management of a limited RF spectrum which is not something that applies to internet streaming. I do not own a mobile device (nor do I currently live in the UK) but can catch-up TV be viewed on a tablet? If yes, how will they enforce the licensing requirement for such devices?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @08:53AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 08 2016, @08:53AM (#385227)

      That last bit about no license for catch up is interesting, since they still country block overseas viewers.

      • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday August 08 2016, @01:16PM

        by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 08 2016, @01:16PM (#385278) Journal
        That is a requirement 'requested' of them by the overseas broadcasters, which they are happy to comply with because it gives them a wider market in which they can sell their own programmes. I regularly watch BBC-produced nature programmes in France. Technically, it is also 'illegal' for anyone to receive Sky satellite transmissions if they are outside the UK although that cannot be enforced - as millions of expats and others will quickly testify! And as BBC broadcasts are also transmitted on FreeView satellite channels, they are still widely viewed by non-licence payers who live outside the UK. ... or so I have been told, you understand :-)
      • (Score: 2) by kazzie on Monday August 08 2016, @01:30PM

        by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 08 2016, @01:30PM (#385282)

        That comes under the legal category of broadcast rights ("XYZBC has exclusive rights to broadcast this show in the Republic of Such-and-such"), and the political category of funding issues ("UK population pays for programmes that everyone else gets to watch for free? I'm writing to my MP.")

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by anubi on Monday August 08 2016, @11:21AM

      by anubi (2828) on Monday August 08 2016, @11:21AM (#385250) Journal

      The old-style TV's put out two signals during operation...

      1) Horizontal Output Oscillator. Right at 15,750Hz. It drives the horizontal deflection yoke and also drove the transformer that developed the high voltage for the picture tube. This signal is phase-locked to the horizontal rate of the TV station currently tuned to. If it was not synchronized perfectly, the picture would "tear". Every vacuum tube TV I ever worked on had a little control in the front or back labeled "Horizontal Hold", that adjusted this frequency if it did not lock in properly.

      You could tell what station the TV was tuned to by which station it had synchronized its oscillator to. There is so much power running around at the set at this frequency it was damn near impossible to shield it to keep it from leaving the set. No real harm if it did leave. So, it was quite easy to pick up this emitted electronic noise miles away with a suitable receiver. I am sure many of you have already experienced receiving a very similar signal .... the SMPS (SwitchMode Power Supply ) in your own computer. Many times, it was damn near impossible to receive an OTA analog TV signal on rabbit ears if you had a computer in the room switched on. The TV had one helluva time trying to figure out what to sync to... the TV signal or your computer's SMPS.

      2) You had a local oscillator in your TV tuner that was 45 MHz higher than the signal you were receiving. When the two frequencies were multiplied, the sum and difference frequencies were produced, so that meant 45 MHz was one of them, and the other was way too high. The 45 MHz signal, known as the IF (Intermediate Frequency) was amplified, then the AM part of it went to vary the brightness of the scanning dot on the screen, the sync frequencies were picked out as well, and there was your audio riding on a 4.5 MHz FM carrier at the upper end of the video bandwidth. ( If you want to know more, look up "superheterodyne receiver" ).

      So, in the old days, if you wanted to see if someone had a TV, just look for one or both of these signals. #1 was a *lot* stronger, but #2 was sometimes used, detected with spectrum analyzers, to get rough estimations of how many TV's were tuned to which channels by overhead aerial surveillance by plane. Sometimes networks wanted to get rough quickie indications if anyone was watching their new shows, or how many ads could they run before, say 50 percent of their viewers, abandoned the channel.

      I honestly do not know if the modern digital TV's leak any identifying info on what is going through them. I used to be a radio-TV serviceman when I was a kid, and knew the old vacuum tube circuits well, but to be dead honest, I have never fixed a modern TV. I threw in the towel when replacing them was cheaper than fixing them. Besides, the new technologies very rarely ever break there.... all the malfunctions seem to be centered around the power supply - and line surges - and cheap switches.

      My somewhat educated guess about a TV even being detectable these days is exactly what you say - based on fear and the belief that they *can* still see them.

      These modern digital sets seem to emit the same signal no matter what they are doing - basically the processor clock. Anyone done any snooping on a modern system with a spectrum analyzer to see if it radiates anything specific to what it is doing? I have a hard time imagining how it would do so.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by pe1rxq on Monday August 08 2016, @12:17PM

        by pe1rxq (844) on Monday August 08 2016, @12:17PM (#385256) Homepage

        You probably worked with NTSC sets?
        Your frequencies are slightly of. Horizontal frequency for PAL is 15.625KHz

        • (Score: 1) by anubi on Tuesday August 09 2016, @07:23AM

          by anubi (2828) on Tuesday August 09 2016, @07:23AM (#385670) Journal

          Yup. NTSC. Long time ago in the age of the Vacuum Tube.

          --
          "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]