• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
  • The forum software that supports hummy.tv has been upgraded to XenForo 2.0!

    This is a major upgrade which changes the look and feel of the forum somewhat but brings a host of improvements too. Please bear with us as we continue to tweak things and report any issues or suggestions in Site/Forum Issues.

Windows version of offline decryption (HFODU)

OP
OP
EEPhil

EEPhil

Number 28
#21
I don't recall this having been explained previously, it was just assumed the reader would spot how they correspond. I would like to know too.
af123's reply to this is correct. But to put it into words -
The MAC address is already in hexadecimal representation. A digit from the serial number is not - you need to find the ASCII code for the number ("3" in af123's example) and then, for our purposes, show it in hex form - "33". ("Our purposes" being show the contents of the whole key in hexadecimal form.)
 
#22
Brilliant, thanks very much EEPhil for the "special case" option.
Yes, I now see that the issue is that each character of the serial number would have to be entered as whatever character is ASCII 0 in order to create a 00h encryption key. Not easy!
You're right that there is no actual need for an offline decryption tool if CF is running on the 'Fox, since it can decrypt everything itself. But there is some merit in reducing the load on the 'Fox (processor + disc) by leaving everything encrypted on the box and just decrypting offline when necessary.
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
#23
#24
... As in - you have CF why would you be decrypting off the box in Windows?
I can think of at least a couple of cases. One might be where someone had copied off encrypted recordings by mistake, it would be a lot easier to decrypt in place than copy back to the Humax and then back again! Another one might be that users who regularly archive recordings might now actually prefer to leave recordings encrypted and only decrypt them once they have been moved off the Humax, reducing the load on the STB. A high end Windows box should be able to decrypt files significantly faster than the STB too...
 

Luke

Well-Knwοn Мember
#26
I can think of at least a couple of cases. One might be where someone had copied off encrypted recordings by mistake, it would be a lot easier to decrypt in place than copy back to the Humax and then back again! Another one might be that users who regularly archive recordings might now actually prefer to leave recordings encrypted and only decrypt them once they have been moved off the Humax, reducing the load on the STB. A high end Windows box should be able to decrypt files significantly faster than the STB too...
...and should the box die and the disk is okay then the recordings can be decrypted and viewed
EEPhil was describing his initial thoughts not his current thoughts. You're preaching to the converted.
 
OP
OP
EEPhil

EEPhil

Number 28
#30
EEPhil was describing his initial thoughts not his current thoughts. You're preaching to the converted.
Correct. (And I'd forgotten that af123 had allowed everyone to change the key to whatever you like. Plus I tried to idiot-proof the entry of MAC and serial number - forgetting that the biggest idiot was trying to predict what the user wanted!)