Marc Ramsey wrote:

This particular story comes up sooner or later when we get one of these
threads going, but no one has ever made the .igc files available, identified
the equipment used, or named the people who accomplished it. As far as I
can figure out, generating a convincing flight log would require an 8 to 12
channel programmable simulator, a fast programmable pressure device, and a
bunch of software development. This does not strike me as something cheap
and easy to do. If it is easy, then some verifiable information, along with
suggestions as to how we can improve the system, would benefit everyone.
Otherwise, this is just so much blowing of smoke...

No, Marc, you miss the point and so does the guy you're replying to.
It's not about geek's skills and technical crap. In fact, a good case
could be made that since the IGC believes nobody has been able to defeat
the system, It is probably excessively complex for the task required and
the level of security could be safely lowered.

THIS is the point. All security is only as good as the people involved.
A trusted person - the OO - is already a fundamental part of YOUR
system, what is YOUR objection to the COTS GPS in a lunchbox, placed,
sealed and retrieved by that same OO?

By the way, that "YOUR system" slipped out quite unconciously. I think
the vast majority of glider pilots see it that way though. The IGC and
its committees are unfriendly outsiders to most of us. Domination by
bureaucratically minded Europeans (including the UK reps I read here)
doesn't endear it.

Here's a suggestion for the next GFAC meeting: subvert the dominant
paradigm!

Graeme Cant