[CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step?

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Pete, 

> But let's carry the discussion a step further.  Once a station's 
> log in an ARRL contest has been submitted and checked, why  
> shouldn't ARRL automatically enter those QSOs as confirmed in LOTW, 
> if both stations already have LOTW certificates on file?  It seems 
> to me that this step would be technically quite manageable, and would 
> be a powerful incentive for more people to participate in both ARRL 
> contests and LOTW.

Without reopening the debates over LotW, this is not possible.  When 
a station "signs" and uploads QSO data to LotW, that data is signed 
using the station's private key.  By design, ARRL does not have access 
to that private key (the "public key" which the ARRL holds only serves 
to validate the private key).

If contest sponsors were to upload contest logs to LotW, they (the 
contest sponsor) would need their own "private key" and the system 
would need to be modified to validate either the individual station 
private key or the private key of any number of possible contest 
sponsors. 

However, putting aside the desirability of allowing contest sponsors 
to upload submitted logs to LotW, my logs (and those of any other 
station) are my personal "property" (or those of the station).  I see 
nothing that gives an contest sponsor the right to release my logs 
for ANY purpose without my specific permission.  To compel that 
permission as a condition of entry is absolutely wrong.  Such conditions

are the equivalent of an employer demanding access to the employee's 
personal bank accounts as a condition of employment and are 
unconscionable. 

Log checking is the equivalent of auditing of a company's financial 
statements or a consumer's "credit report."  An auditor or credit 
bureau generally has access to personal or proprietary data but does 
not have the right to disclose that data and can be punished severely
if they do so. 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 7:46 AM
> To: VE5ZX; CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step?
> 
> 
> At 11:54 AM 7/27/2008, VE5ZX wrote:
> >Hopefully this indicates that soon ARRL contest logs will be made 
> >public too.
> >
> >... Sylvan
> >
> >Sylvan Katz, VE5ZX
> >Saskatoon, SK
> 
> 
> I hope so.  I see absolutely no reason for them not to do it.
> 
> I understand that the scenario they used to worry about was 
> that K4xx, for 
> a hypothetical example, would see a QSO with N4xx by a rare 
> station and 
> write to the manager claiming that it was "just a miscopy."  
> If the manager 
> bought that, then he would send a QSL to someone who wasn't 
> "deserving".
> 
> Well, this has never made much sense, and it makes even less 
> sense in the 
> context of open contest logs.  Sure, we need to encourage QSL 
> managers to 
> ignore such fishing requests, but suppose someone *were* to use this 
> technique to cheat on DXCC.  That would work until the first 
> time both he 
> and I applied with cards for the same QSO, at which time he 
> would be *so* 
> busted.
> 
> But let's carry the discussion a step further.  Once a 
> station's log in an 
> ARRL contest has been submitted and checked, why  shouldn't ARRL 
> automatically enter those QSOs as confirmed in LOTW, if both stations 
> already have LOTW certificates on file?  It seems to me that 
> this step 
> would be technically quite manageable, and would be a 
> powerful incentive 
> for more people to participate in both ARRL contests and 
> LOTW.  Then carry 
> it a step further, and develop an agreement between ARRL and 
> CQ to do the 
> same for CQ contests. Even more incentive!
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> 
>     
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest