[CQ-Contest] Skimmer and M/2, M/M

[David Robbins K1TTT]

> Perhaps a better fix would be to suggest that Alex to limit the Telnet
> host in CW Skimmer to one IP address - 127.0.0.1, which is local to a 
> single computer or network

nope, my wintelnetx could still take that local connect and make it public,
or feed it to a cluster, or whatever.  The purpose of such a receiver, if
advertised, is obvious and would undoubtedly be classified as a remote
receiver... it would be obvious because you would have to enable non-cq
spots, which are only useful if you are trying to copy stations calling in
pileups.

There would still be the questions of:
1. accuracy of the copied calls... if you can't hear them, how can you
verify that skimmer copied the call?
2. exchanges... if you can't hear them, how do you get the exchanges?



David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt at arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 13:09
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer and M/2, M/M
> 
> At 08:25 AM 6/13/2008, Hal Kennedy wrote:
> >Taking an audio feed from the N4GG receiver is against the rules
> >- the receiver is outside the 500 meter circle of PJ4O.  But taking a
> >packet (or Skimmer) feed - one that is public - is okay by existing
> >rules.  With this Skimmer feed I can raise my 160 total at PJ4O from 300
> >Qs to 900 Qs in a weekend - no problem.
> 
> Good catch, Hal.  Two things occur:
> 
> In order for a Skimmer telnet host to be legal by this definition, its IP
> address would have to be *widely* publicized - otherwise it is not public
> in the same sense that the dx cluster network is.  I suspect that such
> publicity would lead quickly to strong criticism on ethical or other
> grounds.  That, of course, still leaves cheating.
> 
> Perhaps a better fix would be to suggest that Alex to limit the Telnet
> host
> in CW Skimmer to one IP address - 127.0.0.1, which is local to a single
> computer or network (multiple port numbers could still be
> allowed).  Originally, it was thought that an externally accessible Telnet
> host would be necessary to implement the reverse beacon network, but it
> turned out that a better way was to use web services, an access protocol
> that does not require opening a Telnet port to the outside world (and
> possible hacking).  This is the approach used by skimmer.dxwatch.com.
> This
> is a quick thought, and there may be objections to this, but maybe Alex
> could include this limitation in the release of version 1.2, which already
> includes dramatic improvements in callsign validation, making it a "must
> have" for Skimmer users.
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest