IGC-approval levels for some types of Flight Recorders

IGC FLIGHT RECORDER APPROVAL LEVELS

A decision was made on 5 March by the IGC Plenary meeting in Lausanne,
Switzerland, that will affect the Cambridge models 10, 20 & 25, Print
Technik GR1000 series and the Zander 940 types of GPS Flight Recorder.
The annual Plenary meeting is the highest decision-taking body within
the IGC structure. This was the final stage in the process of reviewing
World Record (WR) procedures that was carried out by a working group led
by the IGC Bureau during 2004.

A discussion was held on electronic security systems for flight
recorders that may be used for WR flight evidence. It was decided by a
two thirds majority vote that flight recorders not having public/private
key systems such as RSA or equivalent as part of the system by which
manufacturer's Validation program files are available through the IGC
GNSS web pages, will not be permitted for WR evidence. In accordance
with Annex B of the Sporting Code for Gliding (SC3B), para 1.1.4.2, this
will take effect on 15 March 2006 and over-rides any "Grandfather
Rights" for the recorders concerned.

The manufacturers have already been notified and the period of a year
allows them to consider the possibility of an upgrade for these recorder
models.

Otherwise, the new IGC-approval level for these recorder models will be
at the "all IGC/FAI badge and diplomas" level (SC3B para 1.1.3.3.2) with
effect from 15 March 2006.

Finally, please note that this decision does not affect the use of such
recorders in gliding competitions (SC3B para 1.1.3.3.6 refers).

Bernald S Smith, Chairman IGC ANDS Committee
Ian W Strachan, Chairman IGC GFA Committee

--
Ian Strachan
Chairman IGC GFA Committee

Hi,

I understand that "old" technology must be made obsolete at some point, but
I think this is premature. The GPS-NAV is a very reliable and secure
system. It is a shame to make the units less valuable to thousands of
owners. I must respectfully disagree with the decision of the IGC.
There... I've said my piece.

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde
____________________________________

"Ian Strachan" wrote in message
...
IGC FLIGHT RECORDER APPROVAL LEVELS

A decision was made on 5 March by the IGC Plenary meeting in Lausanne,
Switzerland, that will affect the Cambridge models 10, 20 & 25, Print
Technik GR1000 series and the Zander 940 types of GPS Flight Recorder. The
annual Plenary meeting is the highest decision-taking body within the IGC
structure. This was the final stage in the process of reviewing World
Record (WR) procedures that was carried out by a working group led by the
IGC Bureau during 2004.

A discussion was held on electronic security systems for flight recorders
that may be used for WR flight evidence. It was decided by a two thirds
majority vote that flight recorders not having public/private key systems
such as RSA or equivalent as part of the system by which manufacturer's
Validation program files are available through the IGC GNSS web pages,
will not be permitted for WR evidence. In accordance with Annex B of the
Sporting Code for Gliding (SC3B), para 1.1.4.2, this will take effect on
15 March 2006 and over-rides any "Grandfather Rights" for the recorders
concerned.

The manufacturers have already been notified and the period of a year
allows them to consider the possibility of an upgrade for these recorder
models.

Otherwise, the new IGC-approval level for these recorder models will be at
the "all IGC/FAI badge and diplomas" level (SC3B para 1.1.3.3.2) with
effect from 15 March 2006.

Finally, please note that this decision does not affect the use of such
recorders in gliding competitions (SC3B para 1.1.3.3.6 refers).

Bernald S Smith, Chairman IGC ANDS Committee
Ian W Strachan, Chairman IGC GFA Committee

--
Ian Strachan
Chairman IGC GFA Committee

Have all world records that were set with these devices been retrospectively
cancelled??

If not, why not if the security flaw is enough to cause the revoking of the
approval?

Nick.


"Paul Remde" wrote in message
news:qI7_d.75945$Ze3.65870@attbi_s51...
Hi,

I understand that "old" technology must be made obsolete at some point,
but I think this is premature. The GPS-NAV is a very reliable and secure
system. It is a shame to make the units less valuable to thousands of
owners. I must respectfully disagree with the decision of the IGC.
There... I've said my piece.

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde
____________________________________

"Ian Strachan" wrote in message
...
IGC FLIGHT RECORDER APPROVAL LEVELS

A decision was made on 5 March by the IGC Plenary meeting in Lausanne,
Switzerland, that will affect the Cambridge models 10, 20 & 25, Print
Technik GR1000 series and the Zander 940 types of GPS Flight Recorder.
The annual Plenary meeting is the highest decision-taking body within the
IGC structure. This was the final stage in the process of reviewing
World Record (WR) procedures that was carried out by a working group led
by the IGC Bureau during 2004.

A discussion was held on electronic security systems for flight recorders
that may be used for WR flight evidence. It was decided by a two thirds
majority vote that flight recorders not having public/private key systems
such as RSA or equivalent as part of the system by which manufacturer's
Validation program files are available through the IGC GNSS web pages,
will not be permitted for WR evidence. In accordance with Annex B of the
Sporting Code for Gliding (SC3B), para 1.1.4.2, this will take effect on
15 March 2006 and over-rides any "Grandfather Rights" for the recorders
concerned.

The manufacturers have already been notified and the period of a year
allows them to consider the possibility of an upgrade for these recorder
models.

Otherwise, the new IGC-approval level for these recorder models will be
at the "all IGC/FAI badge and diplomas" level (SC3B para 1.1.3.3.2) with
effect from 15 March 2006.

Finally, please note that this decision does not affect the use of such
recorders in gliding competitions (SC3B para 1.1.3.3.6 refers).

Bernald S Smith, Chairman IGC ANDS Committee
Ian W Strachan, Chairman IGC GFA Committee

--
Ian Strachan
Chairman IGC GFA Committee

Nick Gilbert wrote:
Have all world records that were set with these devices been retrospectively
cancelled??

If not, why not if the security flaw is enough to cause the revoking of the
approval?

There is this little thing called "technological progress". The
computer I have at home, right now, is around 500 times faster and has
2000 times the memory that my computer had in 1996, when the original
specs were written for approved flight recorders. If you know anything,
at all, about computer-based cryptography, you'll recognize that
security ultimately depends upon certain kinds of calculations taking
10s to 100s of years to complete. A calculation that would take 100
years on a fast workstation in 1996, may be completed in a few weeks on
a typical 2005 home PC. Now, extrapolate forward to 2010.

We can argue up, down, and sideways whether there is any need for
digital signatures and other security mechanisms in approved flight
recorders. I'm fairly agnostic about that, myself. But, given that the
IGC has decided it wants at least some security, it is necessary to
disallow older devices with questionable security for world record
purposes, before technological advances render them completely insecure.

Marc

In article ,
Marc Ramsey wrote:

There is this little thing called "technological progress". The
computer I have at home, right now, is around 500 times faster and has
2000 times the memory that my computer had in 1996, when the original
specs were written for approved flight recorders. If you know anything,
at all, about computer-based cryptography, you'll recognize that
security ultimately depends upon certain kinds of calculations taking
10s to 100s of years to complete. A calculation that would take 100
years on a fast workstation in 1996, may be completed in a few weeks on
a typical 2005 home PC. Now, extrapolate forward to 2010.

I'm not sure what *you* had in 1996, but at that time my fastest
computer was a 120 MHz PowerPC while my fastest now is a 2200 MHz Athlon
XP3200+ (and is as fast as 3.x GHz Pentium 4's so let's not count those
abberant marketing exercises). That's only a factor of about 20 faster.
RAM size then was 64 MB, now it is 768 MB, a factor of 12. Disk size
was 2 GB and is now 80 GB, a factor of 40.

All rather smaller than your numbers.


We can argue up, down, and sideways whether there is any need for
digital signatures and other security mechanisms in approved flight
recorders. I'm fairly agnostic about that, myself. But, given that the
IGC has decided it wants at least some security, it is necessary to
disallow older devices with questionable security for world record
purposes, before technological advances render them completely insecure.

Actually, those recorders were completely insecure *then*. I argued the
need for RSA (or something like it) with both Dave Ellis of CAI and
Bernald Smith at either or both of the 1995 Worlds and the 1994
pre-worlds, when GPS recorders were first used.

The IGC having (wrongly, in my opinion) decided that "security through
obscurity" was sufficient deterrent to cheating back then, why have they
changed their minds now?

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

Marc,

Not sure if the patronising reply was necessary. Also, it was presumptuous
of you to assume I know nothing about this topic, whether I do or not.

I am simply questioning the seriousness of the security flaw. If it has been
proven that flight traces with the redundant devices can be falsified (one
can only assume they have, otherwise we wouldn't be going through this at
all), then why not ask the question?

Nick.

"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message
. com...
Nick Gilbert wrote:
Have all world records that were set with these devices been
retrospectively cancelled??

If not, why not if the security flaw is enough to cause the revoking of
the approval?

There is this little thing called "technological progress". The computer
I have at home, right now, is around 500 times faster and has 2000 times
the memory that my computer had in 1996, when the original specs were
written for approved flight recorders. If you know anything, at all,
about computer-based cryptography, you'll recognize that security
ultimately depends upon certain kinds of calculations taking 10s to 100s
of years to complete. A calculation that would take 100 years on a fast
workstation in 1996, may be completed in a few weeks on a typical 2005
home PC. Now, extrapolate forward to 2010.

We can argue up, down, and sideways whether there is any need for digital
signatures and other security mechanisms in approved flight recorders.
I'm fairly agnostic about that, myself. But, given that the IGC has
decided it wants at least some security, it is necessary to disallow older
devices with questionable security for world record purposes, before
technological advances render them completely insecure.

Marc

Ian Strachan wrote:
A discussion was held on electronic security systems for flight
recorders that may be used for WR flight evidence. It was decided by a
two thirds majority vote that flight recorders not having public/private
key systems such as RSA or equivalent as part of the system by which
manufacturer's Validation program files are available through the IGC
GNSS web pages, will not be permitted for WR evidence. In accordance

because terrorists, hackers & spammers ar striving for world records :-)

--
--Peter Hermann(49)0711-685-3611 fax3758
--Pfaffenwaldring 27 Raum 114, D-70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
--http://www.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de/homes/ph/
--Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)

Ian Strachan wrote:
two thirds majority vote that flight recorders not having public/private
key systems such as RSA or equivalent as part of the system by which

Which cryptographic algorithms are considered ``equivalent'' to RSA?
What is the minimum key length prescribed?

Cheers
-Gerhard
--
Gerhard Wesp o o Tel.: +41 (0) 43 5347636
Bachtobelstrasse 56 | http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~gwesp/
CH-8045 Zuerich \_/ See homepage for email address!

If it's still more difficult to fake the flight than make the flight, those
devices are still secure enough, no?

"Nick Gilbert" wrote in message
...
Marc,

Not sure if the patronising reply was necessary. Also, it was presumptuous
of you to assume I know nothing about this topic, whether I do or not.

I am simply questioning the seriousness of the security flaw. If it has
been
proven that flight traces with the redundant devices can be falsified (one
can only assume they have, otherwise we wouldn't be going through this at
all), then why not ask the question?

Nick.

"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message
. com...
Nick Gilbert wrote:
Have all world records that were set with these devices been
retrospectively cancelled??

If not, why not if the security flaw is enough to cause the revoking of
the approval?

There is this little thing called "technological progress". The
computer
I have at home, right now, is around 500 times faster and has 2000 times
the memory that my computer had in 1996, when the original specs were
written for approved flight recorders. If you know anything, at all,
about computer-based cryptography, you'll recognize that security
ultimately depends upon certain kinds of calculations taking 10s to 100s
of years to complete. A calculation that would take 100 years on a fast
workstation in 1996, may be completed in a few weeks on a typical 2005
home PC. Now, extrapolate forward to 2010.

We can argue up, down, and sideways whether there is any need for
digital
signatures and other security mechanisms in approved flight recorders.
I'm fairly agnostic about that, myself. But, given that the IGC has
decided it wants at least some security, it is necessary to disallow
older
devices with questionable security for world record purposes, before
technological advances render them completely insecure.

Marc

At 13:30 17 March 2005, Peter Hermann wrote:
Ian Strachan wrote:
A discussion was held on electronic security systems
for flight
recorders that may be used for WR flight evidence.
It was decided by a
two thirds majority vote that flight recorders not
having public/private
key systems such as RSA or equivalent as part of the
system by which
manufacturer's Validation program files are available
through the IGC
GNSS web pages, will not be permitted for WR evidence.
In accordance

because terrorists, hackers & spammers ar striving
for world records :-)


Surely you mean terrorists, hackers & spammers are
trying to get world records without having to do any
striving?

--
--Peter Hermann(49)0711-685-3611 fax3758 -stuttg
art.de
--Pfaffenwaldring 27 Raum 114, D-70569 Stuttgart Uni
Computeranwendungen
--http://www.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de/homes/ph/
--Team Ada: 'C'mon people let the world begin' (Paul
McCartney)