I'm confused why it's encrypted as a JPEG image per frame instead of one AES encrypted video file. Since the same AES key is used for each frame it wouldn't add any additional security imo
I think JPEG 2000 is simply the chosen format for distribution of the video, not for security.
JPEG 2000 has some interesting properties for very high quality video storage and transport where bandwidth is not a concern. The traditional encoded video formats we know are less preferred at this scale.
JPEG 2000 is resource intensive, though. The decoding hardware is probably either GPU based or using an FPGA implantation from one of the providers who makes hardware for this.
Aurornis|10 months ago
JPEG 2000 has some interesting properties for very high quality video storage and transport where bandwidth is not a concern. The traditional encoded video formats we know are less preferred at this scale.
JPEG 2000 is resource intensive, though. The decoding hardware is probably either GPU based or using an FPGA implantation from one of the providers who makes hardware for this.
userbinator|10 months ago
KaiserPro|10 months ago
The idea was that they wanted up to 16bit colour (per channel) lossless imagery. The encryption was (or so I recall) was an extra feature.
perryflynn|10 months ago
01HNNWZ0MV43FF|10 months ago
Biganon|10 months ago
> Frame-by-frame encipherment, rather than whole stream, better supports random access and the famous tobacco intermissions popular in the EU.