Saving HiDef (and other Enc) files - does this work?

Brian said:
I was able to FTP a SD and HD file group (TS, NTS, HJM, HJTSM) to my pc, where I did as you suggested, but was unable to return them to their previous location in the 'Recordings' folder, as I got the all to familiar 'Operation not permitted'. I was permitted to FTP them to the 'Downloads' folder, then found that I could move it to the 'Videos' folder, but this only moved the TS file, the NTS, HJM, & HJTSM files remained in the 'Downloads' folder.
Click to expand...
HJTSM? I missed that one!
Sounds like the whole idea is completely busted!
Sorry for wasting everyones time!
 
EEPhil said:
HJTSM? I missed that one!
Sounds like the whole idea is completely busted!
Sorry for wasting everyones time!
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that the file system has been changed with the recent firmware upgrade, as I certainly don't remember previously having HJTSM files.
I also understand that if you revert to an earlier firmware, any recordings made with the current version will no longer be playable.
 
Does the team think, that Humax has changed the way recordings are stored / played back in order to increase file security, i.e. make it less likely that files can be decrypted / extracted?
 
Ezra Pound said:
Does the team think, that Humax has changed the way recordings are stored / played back in order to increase file security, i.e. make it less likely that files can be decrypted / extracted?
Click to expand...
The short answer - yes.
You only have to look at the way the 2000T is locked down a bit more than the Fox-T2. Now the 4000T is locked down more - and possibly locked even further by the recent update. I just hope they don't update the 2000T in the same way.
I suppose the argument might be that Humax has been a bit lax with the standards for HiDef content so far?
Now that Humaxes are being locked down to this extent - what now distinguishes a Humax from another manufacturer's box? (I am probably wrong - but I don't recall any other manufacturers allowing extraction of content - or if they do, not HiDef content).
 
I wouldn't say Humax was lax - they just didn't anticipate what the hacker community would get up to. Protected export of HiDef recordings is a commercial agreement the manufacturers make with the content providers for licence to use the EPG data.
 
EEPhil said:
I don't recall any other manufacturers allowing extraction of content - or if they do, not HiDef content).
Click to expand...
I take your point that security is being enhanced, but Humax didn't exactly 'allow' Hi-Def extraction on the HDR-Fox T2, there was quite a lot of work involved in getting around the security measures in place
 
Not really, the original basic crack was to manipulate the .hmt file - an obvious ploy that Humax failed to consider.
 
And finding out a. That it could be done, and b. Finding out how to do it was trivial was it?:eek:
 
Sorry... but yes.

I'm not trying to trivialise the contribution raydon made with his Foxy utility as the person who actually pursued it and found the solution, but I am certain that if he hadn't somebody else would have. It "only" involved the use of the facilities Humax provided in a way that Humax had not anticipated: looking at the files in binary to see what the essential difference is between a HiDef recording that couldn't be decrypted-on-copy and a StDef recording that could, and to tweak the flag that was stopping it. This really isn't on the same level as cracking Enigma or, for that matter, figuring out how to use the firmware update process to inject "our" own code. Frankly, I think even I could have done that (the equivalent of Foxy, that is), and possibly would have done had the solution not been available.

Again, I repeat: this is not an attempt to minimise raydon's or anyone else's contribution. However obvious it might look in hindsight, they did it first. But there are some things that are just waiting to be discovered, and there are others that are a real leap in intellectual activity.
 
Last edited:
Ezra Pound said:
I take your point that security is being enhanced, but Humax didn't exactly 'allow' Hi-Def extraction on the HDR-Fox T2, there was quite a lot of work involved in getting around the security measures in place
Click to expand...
OK I'll take the hit for that one. It was lazy shorthand, added when I thought other manufacturer's may have allowed StdDef extraction (I still am unaware of that) but not HiDef.

Personally, I wouldn't say the work involved in getting around the security measures was trivial. I certainly wouldn't have been able to make sense of (most of) the .hmt file without raydon et. al.'s notes. Whether I would have been inspired enough to compare the hmt files for on-the-humax and saved StdDef and HiDef recordings to see what has changed - maybe. I take my hat off to those who 'cracked' the rest of the hmt contents (I would, if I wore a hat).

If I came at this problem fresh, without the knowledge built up here, I probably would have ended up with the method described at the start of this thread - and look how complicated that is!
 
There's a thread that discusses the FVP-4000T hjm files briefly somewhere. These files are probably encoded (if not encrypted). I would wager though that the underlying format has not been changed significantly. If I had access to an FVP-4000T, I would set up the same recordings on both this and an HDR-FOX and then compare the hjm and hmt files. If the hjm files are not encrypted, comparison of a hjm file to the corresponding hmt file might help to decode it.
 
EEPhil said:
I wouldn't say the work involved in getting around the security measures was trivial. I certainly wouldn't have been able to make sense of (most of) the .hmt file without raydon et. al.'s notes.
Click to expand...
Exactly, It's easy to pontificate about what steps to take after someone has done it. There are very few individuals who have the knowledge, ability and desire to this kind of thing which is why only a couple of Humax products have been cracked. Talking as a very minor contributor to the HDR-Fox T2 Custom Firmware packages, I can say I would not have been able to do it from scratch and despite BH's claims, neither could he
 
MontysEvilTwin said:
These files are probably encoded (if not encrypted).
Click to expand...
They are certainly encoded and appear to be encrypted although we don't know how.
I would wager though that the underlying format has not been changed significantly.
Click to expand...
Possibly not, but we don't have an 'unencrypted' version.
If I had access to an FVP-4000T, I would set up the same recordings on both this and an HDR-FOX and then compare the hjm and hmt files.
Click to expand...
Well yes, but they are nothing like each other. There was a short exchange between me and af123 around decoding but that's as far as we got.
If the hjm files are not encrypted, comparison of a hjm file to the corresponding hmt file might help to decode it.
Click to expand...
You must have seen this, but here's a reminder.
 
prpr said:
You must have seen this, but here's a reminder.
Click to expand...
That was the thread I was thinking of. It is a long shot, but has anyone compared a hmt and hjm file from the same programme and channel? Didn't your analysis compare two hjm files for standard def. and high def. recordings?
Reading this thread, there is also a hjtsm file (whatever that is) and in any case it might not be possible to return a modified file back to the necessary location.
 
Last edited:
A further "spanner in the works" - Curiosity got the better of me and I downloaded the FVP-4000T update hdf file (and I don't even have a 4000T!). I have done this with the 2000T (and Fox-T2) updates and managed to extract useful information using humidify and unsquashfs (or even 7zip). With the 4000T update I could extract .raw files but couldn't do anything with them - no recognisable header. Is it possible Humax have clamped down on the updates and used a proprietary compression or other obfuscation?
 
The original TV adverts appeared to link choosing Freeview Play with breaking away from the crowd and becoming free. It is a shame that this freedom doesn't extend to watching your high definition content on anything other than the original PVR it was recorded on. You have the 'freedom' to lose your recordings if your unit ever needs to be replaced, or the hard drive fails.
 
It's only TV. Not a history of your whole life in photos that some peeps lose when an HDD fails and they haven't got it backed up.
 
I remain baffled... given that the material (even HD) is transmitted in the clear, and is trivial to record given a DVB PCI or USB tuner, and a PC, what exactly is the point of all this?

It's not even as though they can argue that only a few people can do that, but the masses can't: isn't it true that you can buy pre-configured OpenElec/XMBC boxes now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top