That’s one of the major concerns of US pilots (see rec.aviation.soaring): that
the Powerflarm will show the climb rates of nearby gliders, and thus somehow
will be used for leeching. They seem to miss the point that just by looking at
a nearby glider you can see if they are climbing better than you...
Cheers
Derek
人生は短いです：一日をつかむ
From: Luke O'Donnell [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 March 2011 5:54 PM
To: Hannu Niemi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Xcsoar-user] XCSoar OK for contest?
Do current builds of XCSoar still have the lift-rate via flarm sensing
capability? I was under the impression it was no longer in the build as of
5.2.x or something. At least i recall a conversation between altair owners who
mentioned you had to use an older build to get the functionality.
The sportsmanship of using the functionality in competitions seems dubious at
best, has it been specifically ruled against by FAI or other gliding bodies?
Luke
On 29 March 2011 16:29, Hannu Niemi <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Actually I see that the airspace control is the "main point" why the software
loggers are not approved because the restricting altitudes are mostly defined
in standard pressure. The gps altitude is not pressure altitude neither the
accuracy on vertical component of GPS coordinates isn't as good as lateral.
About the OLC flights it depends quite a lot WHERE you are flying. Here in
Finland it is quite possible to fly long flights without ever being close to
another glider, if you fly somewhere else than southern Finland ;)
hannu
On 29.3.2011 9:20, [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
If loggers would cooperate more tightly with EG Flarms, they could also log
meeting other aircraft during the flight. These events would be hardly
predictable by anyone interested in tampering with the flight data. During
scoring, flight data of all pilots could then automatically be checked against
each other. I can imagine that his would make even a software logger tamper
proof up to an extent that practically makes data manipulation impossible in
comps, especially if collected flights are not published before all the
IGC-Files have been turned in.
AFAIK the standard Flarm box does already collect this data as a means for a
range check analysis.
It could well be that one could spoof a flight for decentralised competitions
such as OLC, because one could argue that there was no other glider close
enough all flight long, but even that is quite unlikely.
Viele Grüße,
Martin Kopplow
---
Am 29.03.2011 um 07:34 schrieb "Luke O'Donnell"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Ahh, that's right, i forgot they had internal altitude sensors.
I don't think for one second that trying to cheat by tampering with a log would
be easy - spoofing tens of thousands of datapoints in such a way that it looks
like a valid flight would be incredibly difficult and time consuming - time
that would be much better spent practicing :P. Having said that, much the same
would apply to attempting to tamper with a non-IGC approved logger, you would
still need to spoof the datapoints in such a way that it looks like a valid
flight.
From what i've seen, it's common practice for competition pilots (especially at
the higher levels) to look at the top few pilots traces for the day to see what
better decisions they made, so it's not as though people wouldn't notice the
trace behaving significantly different to what they are used to seeing. I guess
i'm just saying that trying to successfully spoof a trace even with a non-igc
approved logger would be very difficult to get away with in real life, and
would likely see you never competing again (rightly so). I'm not convinced the
biggest hurdle would be trying to overcome the protections put in place by the
IGC certification, but rather the sort of problems mentioned above.
Luke
On 29 March 2011 15:23, Hannu Niemi <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
There actually two things that make a logger IGC approved
1. The anti-tampering methods which both signs the code against changes in the
file (easy) and against opening the device (electronic seal). Quite many of
loggers have integral antenna to make your approach a bit difficult.
2. The approved loggers have also internal pressure metering to have reliable
altitude reference (flight levels are based on normal pressure). It also makes
faking the gps signal more difficult as gps height should follow the altitude
trace.
I believe that tampering with results is quite difficult in practice during the
competition because you can't know much earlier where one should fly and at
what time. Normally we are so many that being missed and still
"as-of-been-there" is quite difficult an equation. At least here (and in most
comps I know) the IGC files are made available and some peer-control would
quite surely - at least in long run - show this forgery off. Also the time
restraints give quite a little time for tampering.
hannu (I have been scoring maybe 50-60 comps since '91)
On 29.3.2011 8:10, Luke O'Donnell wrote:
I was under the impression it was the same in Australia - generally
XCSoar/SeeYou etc traces are accepted in smaller reigonal comp's, but not at
the national level. If i recall correctly, the Australian National's rules (Jan
2011) were that you could submit a non-IGC approved trace only once during the
competition - intended to be a failsafe in the event of a logger failure.
I havn't found much solid documentation on the web RE the anti-tamper
requirements for IGC-approved loggers, are these really all that tamper-proof?
I imagine that anyone who was really dedicated to cheating could probably plug
a device into the external GPS antenna connector of an approved logger and
spoof the gps signals. This would remove the need for such a cheater to
actually tamper with the .igc file, which would presumably be detectable with
reference to some sort of hashing algorithm.
Luke
On 29 March 2011 14:50, Max Kellermann
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2011/03/29 06:30, Hannu Niemi <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
> Only thing you are missing without declaration is the "accelerated
> rate of fixes" near turnpoint (though I am not sure if GPS-NAV even
> supports this). In Volkslogger et al the logger logs fixes every
> second below 0.5 km before the turning point cylinder
XCSoar does that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
