Downloadable Conditional Access System: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:31, 14 January 2007

Revision as of 20:04, 3 February 2007

Line 14:

It is asserted by proponents that DCAS provides greater security for the cable industry because it allows them to change their entire security structure by downloading new software into host devices. If a particular encryption algorithm is cracked, it can be replaced by another one. Detractors note that if the physical circuitry is compromised, that it may not be replaced as is the case with CableCARDs. Some DCAS scenarios do use removable cards: OCAP-based devices may incorporate internal support for a kind of "[[smart card]]" (similar to the current [[Subscriber Identity Module|SIM]] chip in a [[Global System for Mobile Communications|GSM]] cell-phone) to identify the subscriber and provide further protection. Proponents assert that DCAS is more supportable since DCAS devices would not require a qualified technician to install the card. Detractors assert that the final version of DCAS may require a physical card insertion, and that technicians are not required to insert CableCARDs anyway, since they are merely the same kind of cards that consumers routinely insert in their laptops. It is asserted that if Cable companies are finally forced to agree on a standard for two way communication that Cablecards will be able to be remotely configured as would be the case with DCAS devices.

The appearance of DCAS as a possible future technology has been used as a reason that the FCC should release cable companies from obligations regarding CableCards. [[Verizon FiOS]] wishes to be released from having to support cablecards at all on its network. Cable companies point to DCAS as a reason that they should not be released from their obligation to use Cablecards in their devices, as the FCC directed in 1998. The [[Consumer Electronics Association]] representing major Consumer electronics manufacturers disagrees with these applications for waivers pointing to the insubstantiality of the proposal and that Cable companies are notoriously late and half hearted in their support of their own standards, as evidenced by their behavior with their earlier CableCARD proposal. Detractors of DCAS point out the proposal is being used to sow [[fear, uncertainty, and doubt]] in the minds of consumers, CE companies, and the FCC. Consumers are motivated to hold off buying Cablecard devices, CE companies are wondering whether their cablecard technology investments will soon be obsolete, and causes doubt amongst FCC regulators whether they should enforce deadlines and restrictions placed on cable companies regarding CableCARDs. Detractors point to this as the latest in a decade long set of delaying tactics that the cable company has used to avoid compliance with the [[Telecommunications Act of 1996]]. Cable companies counter that CableCARD devices have failed in the marketplace and that it would be foolish for them to be forced to use CableCARDs when the superior technology of DCAS will soon be available.

== See also ==