Copying HD file from neighbour's Humax

Black Hole said:
I recommend you do not operate on your primary copy, just in case you get the parameters wrong (which would scramble the recording file beyond recovery). There are safeguards built into the WebIF, but nonetheless...

If you find it difficult, and presuming you have a fast Internet connection, I'm sure somebody can help you by uploading to a file sharing site (Dropbox, Google Drive, etc). Not me, not while I'm at home anyway (broadband too slow).
Click to expand...
That's good advice - I'll back it up onto my PC first! And that's a kind offer which I may take up if I do mess up first time round! I'll put up a plea if necessary 🥺. This started because my own HDRFox failed to record the particular program. The neighbour doesn't have nearby trees in the line if sight to the Wrekin so I suppose my failure to receive the trigger might have something to do with signal strength being compromised at the critical moment.
 
inspiredron said:
That's good advice - I'll back it up onto my PC first! And that's a kind offer which I may take up if I do mess up first time round! I'll put up a plea if necessary 🥺. This started because my own HDRFox failed to record the particular program. The neighbour doesn't have nearby trees in the line if sight to the Wrekin so I suppose my failure to receive the trigger might have something to do with signal strength being compromised at the critical moment.
Click to expand...
The trigger is not transmitted for just a moment. What is used as "the trigger" is normally broadcast for the the whole length of the programme.
 
prpr said:
Not "normally" but "always". Roughly every 2 seconds.
Click to expand...
It has occasionally been know to go wrong. I think their was a credible sounding report earlier this year,.
I almost posted without inlcuing the word "normally" but decided to include it. If I had omitted it someone was bound to state that once in a blue moon it does not happen.
 
alanofcleeves said:
Both are available here: https://wiki.hummy.tv/wiki/Customised_Firmware_-_Features_Available , tucked away near the bottom of the page, but BEWARE .....

If I attempt to download it Bitdefender reports that stripts.exe is infected with "Cloud.Icebreaker.t8Y@dK51reaab".
Click to expand...

virustotal.com is a very useful on-line tool, providing the facility to submit a download URL and scan the payload without actually downloading it first (it does files as well). It then runs the payload past a long list of different scanners. No problem was found (including by BitDefender). Run it yourself and you'll see the list of scanners it has (or purports to have) run it against.

1683534865391.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Black Hole said:
No problem was found (including by BitDefender). Run it yourself and you'll see the list of scanners it has (or purports to have) run it against.
Click to expand...
That's comforting, but puzzling for me.

After my exploratory attempt to download stripts.exe (post #16) Bitdefender quarantined the copy I had used for c.3 years and repeated that when I tried to use my back-up copy.
Bizarrely a full scan of all drives said the PC was clean but it still wouldn't allow me to run stripts.exe.

A bit of mostly frustrating research led me to finding how to exclude stripts from (almost) all checks and it now runs exactly as before.

I can imagine that a PC security program might be suspicious of a program like stripts, the process could look a bit like ransomware in action.
I'm pleased it is working again but does anyone have a better insight?
 
alanofcleeves said:
I'm pleased it is working again but does anyone have a better insight?
Click to expand...
The software that I write for a small community of users sometimes gets flagged as containing a virus. Complaining to the Company providing the anti-virus software usually gets an acknowledgement that there is no virus.
 
I can understand that false positives are an occasional consequence of trying to prevent viruses etc.
On the whole it seems a price worth paying.

What puzzles me about this episode is that Bitdefender had allowed me to run an existing copy of stripts.exe without protest until I tried to download a new copy to a different location.
After that it blocked all attempts to run it by quarantining a program it had previously checked as OK.

I won't lose sleep over it but it does seem odd!
 
Thanks for all the help folks. When I finally got to my neighbour yesterday I discovered that his Humax was an 1800T but the particular file was SD and not HD so there was no encryption on the copy to a USB stick and the process was far easier than I had feared.
 
inspiredron said:
My Humax has custom firmware (Thanks for that) but it missed an important recording last week. My neighbour also has a Humax and DID capture the recording....
Click to expand...

inspiredron said:
Thanks for all the help folks. When I finally got to my neighbour yesterday I discovered that his Humax was an 1800T but the particular file was SD and not HD so there was no encryption on the copy to a USB stick and the process was far easier than I had feared.
Click to expand...
Erm..it's taken 9 days and over 30 replies for this clarification. I think a lot of the replies assumed your neighbours Humax was also a HD/HDR Fox T2, because the stripts suggestions and derivatives would only work on recordings originating from those 2 models.
I wonder if your copy to USB worked because it was a SD recording. It may not work for HD recordings.
 
bottletop said:
I think a lot of the replies assumed your neighbours Humax was also a HD/HDR Fox T2
Click to expand...
He never even said his was, only by implication of having CF...
"My Humax has custom firmware... My neighbour also has a Humax"​
so it wasn't an unreasonable assumption.
As always, if only people would be precise rather than vague. A "Humax" covers a multitude of sins. You can't even put it down to age, as much younger people also do this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top