What is this Sky TV hack?
 

It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

Decoder boxes are mentiioned which rule out streamimg.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-24559449/

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Arnie" wrote in message
...
It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

Decoder boxes are mentiioned which rule out streamimg.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-24559449/

The assumption is that the person had a valid $ky card and found a way to
use it to effectively create a "web enabled $ky card". A "web enabled card"
in a "customer" $ky box contacted the real card for the required
information. Presumably the $ky decoders were also cloned so that they all
appeared to be the same box as the one the real $ky card was programmed for.

It's quite a sophisticated scam and we discussed it a few weeks ago. I
conjecturered on a few ways it might be possible to thwart it but it's
certainly very clever, if highly illegal!

Paul DS.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

Arnie wrote:
: It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

From what I read it was a "card sharing" sort of scam where the perpetrator
had legitimate smartcards connected to some sort of server. The "clients"
had some sort adapter which obtained the expected smartcard responses to
their (bog-standard) STBs from his server (over the internet?) and fed
these in through the normal card slot.

One article said that he was charging something like £15/month and could
cut clients off if they failed to pay!

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Brian Mc" wrote in message
...
Arnie wrote:
: It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

From what I read it was a "card sharing" sort of scam where the
perpetrator
had legitimate smartcards connected to some sort of server. The "clients"
had some sort adapter which obtained the expected smartcard responses to
their (bog-standard) STBs from his server (over the internet?) and fed
these in through the normal card slot.

One article said that he was charging something like £15/month and could
cut clients off if they failed to pay!




Cut off what???!!!

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

JonC wrote:
: One article said that he was charging something like ?15/month and could
: cut clients off if they failed to pay!

: Cut off what???!!!

Their Sky TV obviously! The server was at his place. No Payment = no
codes to work that clients STB!

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Arnie" wrote in message
...
It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

Decoder boxes are mentiioned which rule out streamimg.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-24559449/

It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when people
commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community service. It's
about time the safety of the individual and the property of ordinary people
were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of great big firms like
Sky.

Bill

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

Cloning cards maybe?
Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Arnie" wrote in message
...
It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

Decoder boxes are mentiioned which rule out streamimg.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-24559449/

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the first
letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Paul D.Smith" wrote in message
...
"Arnie" wrote in message
...
It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

Decoder boxes are mentiioned which rule out streamimg.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-24559449/

The assumption is that the person had a valid $ky card and found a way to
use it to effectively create a "web enabled $ky card". A "web enabled
card" in a "customer" $ky box contacted the real card for the required
information. Presumably the $ky decoders were also cloned so that they
all appeared to be the same box as the one the real $ky card was
programmed for.

It's quite a sophisticated scam and we discussed it a few weeks ago. I
conjecturered on a few ways it might be possible to thwart it but it's
certainly very clever, if highly illegal!

Paul DS.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On 6 Oct, 16:17, Arnie wrote:
It must be correct if the guy is banged up. How is it done?

Decoder boxes are mentiioned which rule out streamimg.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...s/2009/08/29/l...

"Mr Bennett said it was estimated that over six months Cairns had made
up to £5,000 in sales and subscriptions."

So less than the minimum wage then?

Sounds like this guy was just a re-seller. No hint that the organisers
were caught.

Cheers,
David.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when
people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community
service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of
ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of
great big firms like Sky.


Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe they
are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right?

As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the purpose of
the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth.

Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting
individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on
commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a
few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this
governments mantra.

Roger R

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the first
letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here.

But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended
to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead
of MS for Microsoft.

Z

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

Zimmy wrote:
: But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended
: to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead
: of MS for Microsoft.

It is infantile and never was funny! I immediately ignore any posts from
anyone using it!

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

In message , Zimmy
writes

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
.. .
Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the
first letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here.

But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is
intended to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money
like M$ instead of MS for Microsoft.

Z

Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted
for rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret
is it?
--
Ian

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Ian" wrote in message
...
In message , Zimmy writes

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. ..
Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the first
letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here.

But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended
to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$
instead of MS for Microsoft.

Z

Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted for
rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret is it?

My only point is that conveys a slightly different meaning. I don't care
whether using the statement is right or wrong.

Z

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On 2009-10-07, Zimmy wrote:
"Ian" wrote in message
...
In message , Zimmy writes

But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended
to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$
instead of MS for Microsoft.

Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted for
rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret is it?

My only point is that conveys a slightly different meaning. I don't care
whether using the statement is right or wrong.

I don't think Brian is saying it is right or wrong either, merely that
it's hard to understand through a screen reader...

--
David Taylor

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

Roger R wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when
people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community
service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of
ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of
great big firms like Sky.


Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe they
are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right?

As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the purpose of
the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth.

Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting
individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on
commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a
few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this
governments mantra.


Its the same short sighted attitude that led to the dilution of the Sale
of Goods act and that leads to poor quality products and services.

Gov't want to make it easy to run a business, give more credit etc.
when actually I believe the opposite is the right thing to do. What we
need is good products and services not lots a crap businesses. Making
it easy to run a business is what is making them weak, it needs to be
made harder, less credit and more regulation.

They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the
other way round. They have very simplistic view of things, easy
credit/less regulation = economic expansion.

--
Tony

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

In message , Tony
writes
Roger R wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail
when
people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community
service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of
ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of
great big firms like Sky.

Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe
they
are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right?
As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the
purpose of
the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth.
Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting
individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on
commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a
few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this
governments mantra.


Its the same short sighted attitude that led to the dilution of the
Sale of Goods act and that leads to poor quality products and services.

Gov't want to make it easy to run a business, give more credit etc.
when actually I believe the opposite is the right thing to do. What we
need is good products and services not lots a crap businesses. Making
it easy to run a business is what is making them weak, it needs to be
made harder, less credit and more regulation.

They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the
other way round. They have very simplistic view of things, easy
credit/less regulation = economic expansion.

--
Tony

Unfortunately, since manufacturing diminished, there's been a surge in
business ownership.

We now have too many businesses competing for the public's expendable
income.

Too many snouts in the trough, many of them parasitic.

DTV is a good example.

--
Ian

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:08:15 +0100, Tony wrote:

They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the
other way round.

Not in capitalist societies.

The purpose of a business is to increase the wealth of those who have
invested capital in the business.

Anything else that the business produces is just a bi-product of that
fundamental purpose.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 02:23:32 -0700, 2Bdecided wrote:

"Mr Bennett said it was estimated that over six months Cairns had made
up to £5,000 in sales and subscriptions."

So less than the minimum wage then?

And how much is it costing the tax payers to keep Mr Cairs confined and
fed for the duration of his sentence.

Furthermore, is not his time within a correctional institution likely to
lead to him becoming even more associated with the business models of
the wrong type of people?

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Roger R" wrote in message
...

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when
people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community
service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of
ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of
great big firms like Sky.


Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe they
are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right?

As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the purpose of
the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth.

Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting
individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on
commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a
few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this
governments mantra.

Roger R


critcher said.........................
it's every governments mantra, no more so int his government as any other.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"David Taylor" wrote in message
...
On 2009-10-07, Zimmy wrote:
"Ian" wrote in message
...
In message , Zimmy
writes

But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is
intended
to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$
instead of MS for Microsoft.

Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted
for
rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret is
it?

My only point is that conveys a slightly different meaning. I don't care
whether using the statement is right or wrong.

I don't think Brian is saying it is right or wrong either, merely that
it's hard to understand through a screen reader...

Quite. I don't think he was seriously asking for favours, I for
one would have to change my name to a more phonetic Grayam

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

J G Miller wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:08:15 +0100, Tony wrote:

They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the
other way round.

Not in capitalist societies.

The purpose of a business is to increase the wealth of those who have
invested capital in the business.

Anything else that the business produces is just a bi-product of that
fundamental purpose.

yes, but is not the point of capitalism to provide for society, or can
it survive without the poor?

--
Tony

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:37:14 +0100, Tony wrote:

yes, but is not the point of capitalism to provide for society

No the point of capitalism is to acquire as much capital as possible
in order to control society in order to acquire further capital.

or can it survive without the poor?

No, capitalism needs the poor. Why do you think that capitalists close
down their production lines in countries where people have more wealth
and move them to countries where people are much poorer?

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

I don't think Brian is saying it is right or wrong either, merely that
it's hard to understand through a screen reader...

Quite. I don't think he was seriously asking for favours, I for
one would have to change my name to a more phonetic Grayam

--
Graham.

No need. Screen readers are quite sophisticated and have large
dictionaries - it's just that Sky with a dollar is not in them.

Out if interest, how is voice to speech software these days? I tried some a
long time ago but improvements in processing power should have
revolutionized this area of software. Also, I wonder what sort of
microphones Brian and friends would use because the typical ones for
computers are rubbish.

Paul DS

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:50:23 +0100, "Paul D.Smith"
wrote:

I don't think Brian is saying it is right or wrong either, merely that
it's hard to understand through a screen reader...

Quite. I don't think he was seriously asking for favours, I for
one would have to change my name to a more phonetic Grayam

--
Graham.

No need. Screen readers are quite sophisticated and have large
dictionaries - it's just that Sky with a dollar is not in them.

Out if interest, how is voice to speech software these days? I tried some a
long time ago but improvements in processing power should have
revolutionized this area of software. Also, I wonder what sort of
microphones Brian and friends would use because the typical ones for
computers are rubbish.

Some may be using keyboards rather than microphones.

When typewriters were invented one of the first uses was to enable blind
people to write letters to sighted friends.
http://site.xavier.edu/polt/typewriters/tw-history.html

begin quote
The concept of a typewriter dates back at least to 1714, when Englishman
Henry Mill filed a vaguely-worded patent for "an artificial machine or
method for the impressing or transcribing of letters singly or
progressively one after another." But the first typewriter proven to
have worked was built by the Italian Pellegrino Turri in 1808 for his
blind friend Countess Carolina Fantoni da Fivizzono (as established by
Michael Adler in his excellent 1973 book The Writing Machine);
unfortunately, we do not know what the machine looked like, but we do
have specimens of letters written by the Countess on it.
end quote


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"Graham." wrote in message
...

Quite. I don't think he was seriously asking for favours, I for
one would have to change my name to a more phonetic Grayam

I used to know a chap called Graham at school. Attempts at conversation with
him would be thwarted by the sheer tedium of his answers, which were always
insipid and uninteresting, and were delivered in a monotonal drone. It
wasn't long before he became known as Grey Man. I believe he committed
suicide in his twenties.

Bill

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:06:12 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Attempts at conversation with him would be thwarted by the sheer tedium of
his answers, which were always insipid and uninteresting, and were
delivered in a monotonal drone.

Would you ascribe this behavior to genetic origins or environmental factors?

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

"J G Miller" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:06:12 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Attempts at conversation with him would be thwarted by the sheer tedium
of
his answers, which were always insipid and uninteresting, and were
delivered in a monotonal drone.

Would you ascribe this behavior to genetic origins or environmental
factors?

I don't know.

Bill

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when
people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community
service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property
of ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes
of great big firms like Sky.

Don't be silly. Who do you think runs this country? It's big business
regardless of the party in power - and always has been. Hence bankrupting
the country to bail out a few banks who couldn't organise a **** up in a
brewery. As if there weren't more than enough of them still trading.

--
*The most common name in the world is Mohammed *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when
people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community
service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property
of ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes
of great big firms like Sky.

Don't be silly. Who do you think runs this country? It's big business
regardless of the party in power - and always has been. Hence bankrupting
the country to bail out a few banks who couldn't organise a **** up in a
brewery. As if there weren't more than enough of them still trading.

It was notable that the UK Government had no meaningful talks with the
IRA until they blew up money ( Canary Wharf, Manchester retail centre)
in 1996.
--
Ian

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

J G Miller wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:37:14 +0100, Tony wrote:

yes, but is not the point of capitalism to provide for society

No the point of capitalism is to acquire as much capital as possible
in order to control society in order to acquire further capital.

or can it survive without the poor?

No, capitalism needs the poor. Why do you think that capitalists close
down their production lines in countries where people have more wealth
and move them to countries where people are much poorer?


Its hard to argue with that but I think you are viewing things a bit too
black and white. I am talking about short sighted views. Making crap
products and services will just use up the money in the economy for less
useful purposes creating less good quality capital. ie it won't survive
competition or downturns. Banks for instance have increased their
capital mostly by increasing the perceived value of their assets, by
lending out money the borrowers could not afford to repay based on loans
secured on overvalued assets, this devalues the assets (after its
discovered) and they return to more sustainable market values and the
banks go bankrupt, except for gov't bailouts buying the useless assets.
Not very capitalist is it?

Anyway manufacturers move manufacturing to cheaper countries because the
alternative is to go out of business. There are very few manufacturers
increasing their capital these days, the west can't compete with the Far
east who are prepared to sell at a loss (its a myth that the labour cost
makes all the difference). Its only through the non capitalist action
of the Chinese gov't that allow it to continue. However I suspect their
business model will cease to function in the next 5 years or so.

Of course anything that has tight regulation like heath products or
Aviation are in a much better position because noone trusts companies
that don't make a profit to make anything important.

--
Tony

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:48:11 +0100, Tony wrote:

I am talking about short sighted views.

No disagreement over that point.

Making crap products and services will just use up the money
in the economy for less useful purposes creating less good
quality capital. ie it won't survive competition or downturns.

Unless the competition is doing the same thing. Consider consumer
goods -- it is now vital that consumer goods are manufactured with
built in obsolescence because once most people have bought them
thanks to mass manufacturing making them available to almost all,
the market is saturated.

So the corporation cuts costs, and makes a cheaper product which
wears out more quickly or becomes technologically obsolete
(2k boxes, split-NIT etc) or makes a more technologically
advanced product to replace the older one (DVD-audio over
CD-audio, BluRay over DVD-HD over DVD).

Anyway manufacturers move manufacturing to cheaper countries
because the alternative is to go out of business.

By this statement you have just proved that manufacturers
need the poor. Cheaper countries is a euphemism for poor people.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

In article ,
Tony wrote:
Anyway manufacturers move manufacturing to cheaper countries because the
alternative is to go out of business.

The actual cost of manufacture can be a small percent of the retail cost
with many things.

--
*Cleaned by Stevie Wonder, checked by David Blunkett*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

What is this Sky TV hack?
 

J G Miller wrote:

By this statement you have just proved that manufacturers
need the poor. Cheaper countries is a euphemism for poor people.

I think that was 'my' point :-)

--
Tony