![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article gJfub.230766$Fm2.231960@attbi_s04, Paul Remde
writes snip What is the plan to get the approval back in place? That is up to the manufacturer, of course. Cambridge already makes the 302 series that use the DSA public/private key system that is assessed as equivalent in security strength to the original Rivest, Shamir and Adleman (RSA) system. The 302 is therefore, together with many other types of recorder, IGC-approved for "all flights" including of course world records. What must CAI do to make it meet your new requirements? If they think it worthwhile, offer an "RSA or equivalent" upgrade for their legacy recorder designs. The requirements are not new but go back to 1997, see below. ------------------------------------- For new recorder designs, "RSA or equivalent" level of security has been in the Technical Specification for IGC-approved GNSS Flight Recorders for many years. Here is an extract from the first edition of the IGC Specification, effective 1 October 1997: "FRs approved for world record flights must have an asymmetric algorithm (such as RSA) or have a system providing equivalent security". What we are talking about here is an adjustment to the "Grandfather rights" provisions for recorder designs that were IGC-approved a long time ago and do not comply with the current IGC Specification. Incidentally, you may recall that one of the non-RSA security systems for a GNSS recorder was successfully hacked by the Wedekinds in Germany. This was all in the public domain and was extensively publicised at the time. This was done as an exercise rather than for malpractice, but shows what can be done. The manufacturer concerned immediately changed to an RSA-based system without any prompting from IGC. The non-RSA recorder concerned is on the list recently announced, together with recorders with similar types of security. It was felt that we should be even-handed to all recorder designs rather than just adjust the IGC-approval for the Wedekind-hacked design and leave the rest. That is what has been done, perhaps a bit late, but first we had to get the IGC Plenary to agree to the new "all IGC badges and distance diploma" level first, to have somewhere to put legacy recorders that had lower levels of security without affecting the vast majority of owners and pilots. As it is, only world record aspirants will be affected and there are plenty of other recorder designs that are available for this type of flight. -- Ian Strachan Chairman IGC GFA Committee |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|