EU Cyber Resilience Act: Consequences for Broadcast Equipment

If you look at the broadcast industry today, it’s clear we’ve crossed a point of no return. What used to be a tightly controlled, purpose-built ecosystem—SDI routers, hardware switchers, isolated control rooms—is now a sprawling network of IP-based devices. Cameras, encoders, gateways, multiviewers, replay servers, contribution rigs, even tally boxes… everything talks to everything.

This wasn’t a problem when security meant locking a machine room door. But now that broadcast infrastructure behaves like an IT network, it inherits IT risks. And the EU’s Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) makes one thing absolutely clear: those risks are now the manufacturer’s responsibility, not something a broadcaster can quietly ignore or “air-gap away.”

The CRA is not aimed at broadcast specifically, but if you make or deploy broadcast gear, it’s impossible to avoid. The regulation treats connected equipment the same way, whether it sits in a consumer’s living room or a tier-1 live-production facility.

This article breaks down the CRA from a practical, engineering-level point of view:
what it requires, why broadcast gear definitely falls under it, and what changes manufacturers and broadcasters actually need to make—not in theory, but in real workflows.

1. Why Broadcast Equipment Undeniably Falls Under CRA

Some vendors are still asking:
“Does this really apply to professional equipment? We’re not shipping routers to consumers.”

Unfortunately, that argument doesn’t hold.

Under CRA, a “product with digital elements” is basically anything that:

runs software, and
communicates with another device or network.

That description fits 95% of modern broadcast gear. CRA also introduces product risk categories.

Many professional broadcast devices — such as ST 2110 encoders/decoders, IP gateways, cloud-managed control tools, and monitoring systems — are likely to be treated as important products under the CRA. Depending on their exact functionality and risk profile, some devices may fall into higher-risk classes (for example, Class I or Class II), which triggers stricter requirements for documentation, vulnerability handling, secure-by-design evidence, and long-term update commitments. Even devices that look simple from the outside usually run embedded Linux or a firmware stack, offer a REST API, expose some control surface, or rely on cloud dashboards.

A few examples of equipment that clearly fall in scope:

ST 2110 encoders/decoders
SRT/RIST contribution units
OB-truck camera chains
Replay servers and multiviewers
IP switches, tally/controllers, orchestration panels
Cloud-managed control and monitoring tools
Transcoders, playout engines, automation servers

Whether it sits on the public internet or only inside a facility doesn’t matter. CRA’s definition includes internal networks as well.

In other words, unless your product has absolutely no firmware, no ports, no wireless, and no control interface, it’s in scope. And broadcast almost never builds such devices anymore.

2. CRA Timelines: Why Broadcast Vendors Don’t Have Three Years—They Have One

The CRA entered into force in December 2024.

The first major milestone is 11 September 2026, when mandatory reporting of actively exploited vulnerabilities and severe incidents starts to apply.

The main cybersecurity requirements — the ones that determine whether a product can be placed on the EU market — apply from 11 December 2027. From that point, new connected broadcast devices must be CRA-compliant to be sold in the EU.

But here is the catch:
Broadcast engineering cycles are long.
A camera platform can take three years to mature. A new encoder ASIC design may take five. Control software evolves continuously.

So if a vendor is releasing a new product in 2026 or 2027, work on it is already happening now. If CRA requirements aren’t baked in today, the product will fail compliance at launch.

The biggest mistake manufacturers can make is treating CRA as a documentation exercise. It’s not. It touches firmware architectures, update systems, secure boot chains, and dependency management.

A common, very realistic engineering question is:
“Can we retrofit CRA compliance onto an existing platform?”
The honest answer: sometimes, but rarely without significant redesign.

3. Secure-by-Design: What It Actually Means in Broadcast Devices

CRA expects products to be “secure-by-design” and “secure-by-default.” These phrases get thrown around a lot, but in broadcast hardware and embedded media systems, they translate into very specific engineering requirements.

Let’s break down what secure-by-design really looks like in this industry.

Secure defaults—not “install and immediately lock down”

Many broadcast devices still ship with open management interfaces, default passwords, or wide-open service stacks. Under CRA, that’s no longer acceptable.

Secure-by-default means:

no default credentials,
no unnecessary protocols enabled,
management ports separated from media traffic,
isolation between internal modules,
hardened startup configuration.

Strong access control

Remote production depends on multiple operators accessing the same systems from different networks—sometimes even across organizations. CRA now expects:

real authentication systems,
RBAC instead of one global “admin”,
proper session handling,
secure credential storage.

Secure communication

Media traffic may or may not need encryption, but control channels definitely do.
Any device with a web UI, API, or cloud management link must justify how confidentiality and integrity are protected.

Integrity checks and secure boot

Most modern broadcast devices run embedded OS stacks. CRA essentially forces vendors to implement:

signed firmware images,
secure boot chains,
protection against downgrades,
verification of update authenticity.

This leaves many engineers asking:
“Can we implement secure boot without breaking field-deployable recovery workflows?”
Yes, but it requires proper planning. Many legacy workflows won't survive unchanged.

4. Vulnerability Management: The Hardest Part for Broadcast Vendors

Broadcast gear lasts a long time. A facility might keep a vision mixer or router for 10–15 years. CRA requires vendors to:

track vulnerabilities across the entire software stack,
assess their impact on every supported product,
ship security updates promptly,
communicate advisories to customers.

The challenge?
Broadcast devices include huge dependency trees—SoCs, FPGA logic, OS kernels, codecs, web servers, network stacks, libraries. Any one of these can introduce a vulnerability.

If you’re a vendor, this part of CRA is both unavoidable and resource-heavy.
It forces changes such as:

adopting SBOMs across the product line,
setting up continuous dependency scanning,
establishing formal vulnerability triage processes,
building OTA update pipelines,
maintaining long-term support plans.

And here’s the operational pain point:
broadcast clients cannot afford downtime.

Updating firmware on 50 encoders while a regional sports network is on air is not an option.
So manufacturers must implement:

staging environments,
rollback support,
safe update windows,
clear versioning policies.

5. Documentation and Traceability: CRA’s Most Underestimated Requirement

Many vendors think of CRA as a cybersecurity regulation. It is—but it’s also a documentation regulation.

Manufacturers must maintain a technical file that shows, in detail:

how security was considered at every stage,
what threats were identified,
what mitigations were chosen and why,
how testing was conducted,
how updates are delivered securely,
how vulnerabilities are managed over time.

In practice, this means:

tribal engineering knowledge is no longer enough;
“this is how we’ve always done it” is no longer acceptable;
every meaningful decision must be traceable.

If your engineering team can’t explain why a particular interface is exposed, or why an old library is still in use, CRA auditors will notice.

6. Incident Reporting: This Will Change Broadcasters’ Operations, Too

Starting in 2026, manufacturers must report exploited vulnerabilities and severe incidents within a strict timeframe.
This obligation sits on the manufacturer, but broadcasters become part of the equation because incidents happen in their facilities.

So broadcasters will need:

better telemetry,
consistent logging,
coordinated escalation paths,
communication procedures with vendors.

Historically, many broadcast teams didn’t treat device logs as operationally critical. CRA changes that culture.

One practical question broadcasters should ask now is:
“Do we have the monitoring infrastructure needed to support CRA incident workflows?”
For many, the answer is “not yet.”

7. Supply Chain Transparency and SBOMs: No Longer Optional

Broadcast devices rely on dozens (sometimes hundreds) of third-party components:

chipsets,
kernels,
middleware,
codecs,
hardware acceleration blocks,
networking libraries,
FPGA firmware.

A single vulnerable library buried deep inside a dependency chain can compromise an entire production system.

CRA forces vendors to know what’s inside their binaries.
The only scalable way to do that is generating and maintaining SBOMs. Manual SBOMs (Excel or PDF) will not scale for CRA compliance. Vendors will need automated SBOM generation and continuous dependency scanning integrated into CI/CD pipelines.

This is a cultural shift.
But once vendors embrace SBOM practices, risk assessments, updates, and audits become faster and more reliable.
A typical ST 2110 encoder, for example, may rely on 15–30 third-party components — from FFmpeg and OpenSSL to kernel modules and FPGA bitstreams.

Under CRA, every dependency must be documented, monitored for CVEs, and covered by a long-term update policy.

8. Procurement and Market Shifts: CRA Will Change How Broadcasters Buy Equipment

Broadcast procurement has traditionally focused on:

signal quality,
interoperability,
latency,
form factor,
cost.

Starting in 2027, these will be secondary to one fundamental question:

“Is this device CRA-compliant?”

Broadcasters and integrators will need:

security architecture summaries,
lifecycle support guarantees,
vulnerability handling policies,
detailed product classification,
long-term update commitments.

Vendors who can’t meet these expectations simply won’t sell in the EU. CRA also formalizes supply-chain risk management.

Vendors must assess the security of component suppliers, firmware sources, toolchains, and external libraries — an area where many broadcast manufacturers traditionally had limited visibility.

And there is an economic angle:
CRA compliance increases development costs.
That cost will be reflected in pricing and market positioning.

Broadcasters may eventually see a split:

vendors who embrace CRA and gain trust,
vendors who lag and lose relevance.

9. Practical Roadmap: What Vendors and Broadcasters Should Do Now

For manufacturers:

Define security baselines for all new platforms.
Implement secure boot and signed updates.
Introduce SBOM generation and dependency scanning.
Strengthen authentication and authorization mechanisms.
Build internal vulnerability response processes.
Train engineering teams on secure development practices.
Start preparing documentation early.

For broadcasters:

Update procurement criteria.
Integrate broadcast gear into central monitoring/SOC systems.
Establish escalation workflows for security events.
Conduct inventory and risk assessments for legacy equipment.
Work closely with vendors on update and mitigation planning.

The right question for both sides is:
“Can compliance become a competitive advantage rather than a burden?”
Absolutely—if addressed proactively instead of reactively.

10. Conclusion: CRA Will Push Broadcast Engineering Into a More Mature Era

The transition to IP workflows has been exciting—but also chaotic. Security often lagged behind innovation. The EU Cyber Resilience Act forces the industry to mature. It demands engineering discipline, transparent processes, and long-term responsibility for product security.

For vendors, this means rethinking product architecture, tooling, and support.
For broadcasters, it means adopting new operational practices and raising expectations for vendors.
For the industry as a whole, it’s a much-needed alignment with modern cybersecurity standards.

Handled well, CRA compliance won’t just satisfy regulators—it will make broadcast infrastructure more stable, predictable, and resilient for years to come.

Promwad helps broadcast and media vendors redesign product architectures, implement secure boot, automate SBOM pipelines, and prepare CRA documentation.

If you are assessing CRA readiness, our engineering team can provide a 48h technical review or architecture audit.

AI Overview — EU Cyber Resilience Act and Broadcast Equipment

Key Applications
Security requirements for connected broadcast devices: cameras, encoders, gateways, orchestration tools, playout and monitoring systems.

Benefits
Stronger device security, clearer lifecycle support, predictable updates, better collaboration between broadcasters and vendors, reduced operational risk.

Challenges
Long device lifetimes, complex dependency stacks, update constraints in live environments, higher compliance costs, strict reporting timelines.

Outlook
From 2027 onward, CRA compliance will define which vendors can operate in the EU market. Broadcasters will increasingly treat cybersecurity maturity as a core purchasing criterion, not a secondary concern.

Related Terms
Secure-by-design, lifecycle security, SBOM, vulnerability disclosure, incident reporting, broadcast IP workflows, remote production cybersecurity.