--- Ken Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I were to enter an e.QSL into my log and then submit that log to > the LoTW program how would LoTW know if the QSO has been > confirmed via e.QSL? Would LoTW care?
LoTW doesn't know anything or care about confirmations in your log. All it knows is the callsign, date, time, band, mode, etc. of the QSOs you made. > Or to put it another way .... are you saying that an e.QSL'd QSO > from W7XYZ in my log submission would -only- be accepted by > the LoTW program if there is already a private key associated > with W7XYZ? If W7XYZ does -not- hold a private key would > LoTW accept a "laundered-via-my-log" e.QSL to me from him? There is no such thing as "accepted". All LoTW can do is match QSO information in a log YOU submit with QSO information in a log someone else submits. If there is a match, the QSO is considered "confirmed". Your QSOs must be signed with your private key, and the DX station's QSOs must be signed with his private key. In simple terms, you tell LoTW something unique about a QSO you had with a DX station. The DX station tells LoTW something unique about a QSO it had with you. If LoTW decides that you are both telling the same story, then it considers the QSO to have happened. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.ad1c.us From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Feb 22 07:19:20 2007 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Date: Thu Feb 22 07:24:21 2007 Subject: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi Ken and others As a DXCC Card Checker we operate as an extension of the League. Therefore we will not accept an eQSL. Tony N2MFT In a message dated 2/22/2007 5:39:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Subject: Re: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits To: "Dave Perry N4QS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[email protected]" [email protected] Hello Dave, others, It's my understanding that if one were to (pay for) and print a QSL from the e.QSL website and then physically send/mail it to Newington it would be rejected because the League won't accept e.QSL's. As an aside, I wonder how a field QSL checker would deal with an eQSL? Are there guidelines for them regarding e.QSL's? I am assuming that the printed out QSL's are in some way labeled ...? <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Feb 22 11:49:11 2007 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin H. Green) Date: Thu Feb 22 11:54:09 2007 Subject: [Dx4win] RE: Dx4win Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24 In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Although people have referred in this thread to "certificates", perhaps it would to understand that these certificates are based on sophisticated encryption technology. LOTW uses public key encryption and digital certificates. In public key encryption, computers are used to create a PAIR of encryption keys. One key is called the PUBLIC key and one key is called the PRIVATE key. It is absolutely ESSENTIAL to understand that both keys are UNIQUELY and MATHEMATICALLY bound to each other in such a way that anything encrypted with one key CAN ONLY BE DECRYPTED by the OTHER matching key in the pair. Let's say that we want to be absolutely certain that the sender of a message is who he says he is. The owner would encrypt the message using his PRIVATE and send it to the recipient. Since the message can only be decrypted by the sender's matching public key, the recipient is assured of the identity of the sender. However, what prevents someone from publishing a public key and claiming to be K0PP? Actually, nothing. So, what is needed is a way to provide assurance that the key in question is really K0PP's key. That's where digital certificates come in. A digital certificate is an encrypted digital document prepared and issued by a certificate issuer which certifies that the key is really K0PP's. To get his certificate, K0PP must first satisfy the certificate issuer that he is K0PP. Once satisfied, the certificate issuer would prepare and issue an encrypted digital file which "certifies" that the encryption key being used really belongs to K0PP. That's how LOTW works. ARRL is the certificate issuing authority. In the application process it requires K0PP to satisfy ARRL that he is really K0PP. Once satisfied, ARRL issues a digital certificate to K0PP. From then on, in order to submit his log, K0PP must digitally sign it, i.e. encrypt it using the encryption key and certificate provided by LOTW. Only LOTW can decrypt this digitally signed log using the other matching key. An additional layer of protection is provided by the requirement to use a secret password, known only to K0PP, in order to even use the certificate. Even if someone hacked into K0PP's computer and stole his digital certificate, without this extra secret password, it would be impossible for anyone to "forge" K0PP's log. The same thing applies to every other log submitted to LOTW. Only when the digitally encrypted and certified logs of BOTH parties to a QSO are received and decrypted and MATCHED by LOTW's computers are the QSO'S confirmed. By this process, it should be clear why a QSL can NEVER be confirmed based solely on the information contained in only one submitted log. Hope this helps. Also, it should be clear, where U.S. currency can be successfully counterfeited with a computer and color laser printer, why eQSL's "Authenticity Guaranteed" process of merely accepting a fax copy of a license (many of which, such as FCC licenses, don't even have pictures) is not considered sufficient by ARRL. So, please, send all of your logs to LOTW. I received DXCC in a week after uploading my log, no postage, no IRC's no "green stamps". Some of the QSOs dated back YEARS! Who knows, if you all send in your logs, maybe I'll get WAS, WAZ, WAC, .... :-) 73, Marty, N1HT -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:03 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Dx4win Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24 Send Dx4win mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Dx4win digest..." Today's Topics: 1. DXCC / LoTW credits (Ken Kopp) 2. Re: DXCC / LoTW credits (Dave Perry N4QS) 3. Re: DXCC / LoTW credits (Ken Kopp) 4. Re: DXCC / LoTW credits (Jim Reisert AD1C) 5. Re: DXCC / LoTW credits (Dick Flanagan) 6. More about LoTW credits (Ken Kopp) 7. AWD database (Ernie Walls) 8. Re: AWD database (Jim Reisert AD1C) 9. Re: More about LoTW credits (K2DBK - David) 10. Re: More about LoTW credits (Jim Reisert AD1C) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:33:00 -0000 From: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response FWIW ... I'm a long-time friend of N7NG, the now-departed (:-(( "Oracle" of the LoTW program. He tells me that the operation is headed by Dave Patton, and "customer service" is being handled by Kathy Anderson ... 860-594-0206. Now, to pop the lid off the proverbial can of worms .... Has anyone managed to disguise/legitimatize e.QSL's and use them for credit via LoTW by importing them into their logging program and then into a LoTW submission? I --DO NOT-- approve of this or would never consider doing so, but others may view it differently. I know the League has gone to considerable length to avoid accepting e.QSL's, but ... sadly... I don't see any way of preventing it from happening, once the QSO/QSO's are imported into your log, regardless of which program you're using. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:04:00 -0600 From: "Dave Perry N4QS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits To: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Ken, I do not understand your concern. If the QSOs actually took place, then you have every right to upload them to Lotw as part of your log. They will only be confirmed if the other station likewise uploads a matching QSO to Lotw. The fact that the same QSO may have been confirmed by eQSL by both stations is totally irrelevant. How can you cheat the system under this approach? You cannot upload QSOs from another station without that station's certificate. The Lotw system is a fantastic innovation. Wayne needs to be commended. Dave, N4QS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:33 PM Subject: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits > FWIW ... > > I'm a long-time friend of N7NG, the now-departed (:-(( > "Oracle" of the LoTW program. He tells me that the > operation is headed by Dave Patton, and "customer service" is being > handled by Kathy Anderson ... 860-594-0206. > > Now, to pop the lid off the proverbial can of worms .... > > Has anyone managed to disguise/legitimatize e.QSL's and use them for > credit via LoTW by importing them into their logging program and then into > a LoTW submission? I --DO NOT-- approve of this or would never consider > doing so, but others may view it differently. > > I know the League has gone to considerable length to avoid accepting > e.QSL's, but ... sadly... I don't see any way of preventing it from > happening, once the QSO/QSO's are imported into your log, regardless of > which program you're using. > > 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > or > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > Dx4win mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/694 - Release Date: 2/20/2007 > 1:44 PM > > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 02:45:49 -0000 From: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits To: "Dave Perry N4QS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Hello Dave, others, It's my understanding that if one were to (pay for) and print a QSL from the e.QSL website and then physically send/mail it to Newington it would be rejected because the League won't accept e.QSL's. As an aside, I wonder how a field QSL checker would deal with an eQSL? Are there guidelines for them regarding e.QSL's? I am assuming that the printed out QSL's are in some way labeled ...? I am aware that e.QSL does have a way to "validate" a user. Apparently their method of "validation" isn't acceptable to the League. There seems to be no way for the League to detect an e.QSL that's been "laundered" by submitting the QSL via a LoTA submission. It would appear that -if- one can submit a laundered e.QSL via LoTW there is little reason for the League to continue their stringent methods that have made the DXCC program so creditable, and that's sad. I have 12K+ QSO's to submit, but I'm now having second thoughts about participating in the program. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:55:46 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Reisert AD1C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 --- Ken Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Has anyone managed to disguise/legitimatize e.QSL's > and use them for credit via LoTW by importing them into > their logging program and then into a LoTW submission? Can't happen. Your QSOs are signed with YOUR private key, and their QSOs are signed by THEIR private key. The private keys are issued by ARRL, and must be certified via postal mail to your home address. There is no way to cheat the system in the way you describe. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.ad1c.us ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:05:08 -0800 From: Dick Flanagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] DXCC / LoTW credits To: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 06:45 PM 2/21/2007, Ken Kopp wrote: >There seems to be no way for the League to detect an e.QSL >that's been "laundered" by submitting the QSL via a LoTA >submission. I don't understand how that could happen. I can only submit MY contacts via LOTW, not yours, not anyone else's. There is no way I can fake my own confirmation, eQSL notwithstanding. 73, Dick -- Dick Flanagan K7VC NV SM [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 03:49:49 -0000 From: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Dx4win] More about LoTW credits To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Thanks Jim, I do have my private key and I understand that it is my submitted QSL's validation for my log's acceptance into the LoTW file in Newington. If I were to enter an e.QSL into my log and then submit that log to the LoTW program how would LoTW know if the QSO has been confirmed via e.QSL? Would LoTW care? Or to put it another way .... are you saying that an e.QSL'd QSO from W7XYZ in my log submission would -only- be accepted by the LoTW program if there is already a private key associated with W7XYZ? If W7XYZ does -not- hold a private key would LoTW accept a "laundered-via-my-log" e.QSL to me from him? Thank you for your patience and help. I'm obviously having trouble understanding this issue. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Ken Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Has anyone managed to disguise/legitimatize e.QSL's > and use them for credit via LoTW by importing them into > their logging program and then into a LoTW submission? Can't happen. Your QSOs are signed with YOUR private key, and their QSOs are signed by THEIR private key. The private keys are issued by ARRL, and must be certified via postal mail to your home address. There is no way to cheat the system in the way you describe. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.ad1c.us _______________________________________________ Dx4win mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:03:11 +1100 From: "Ernie Walls" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Dx4win] AWD database To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" The Award database within DX4Win, absolutely excellent though it is has many awards that I have not the slightest interest in - is it possible to edit the file, culling those awards of no interest out completely - and would this also remove those same awards from the 'Custom Award' box listing within the logging window? Thanks in anticipation of someone knowing the answer. Ernie Ernie Walls VK3FM [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:18:38 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Reisert AD1C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] AWD database To: Ernie Walls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 --- Ernie Walls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Award database within DX4Win, absolutely excellent though it is has > many awards that I have not the slightest interest in - is it possible > to edit the file, culling those awards of no interest out completely - > and would this also remove those same awards from the 'Custom Award' box > listing within the logging window? Yes on both. Just make sure DX4WIN is shut down before making the changes. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.ad1c.us ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:22:04 -0500 From: K2DBK - David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] More about LoTW credits To: "Ken Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="891"; format=flowed Ken, It doesn't matter whether or not a QSO you and another station have made has been confirmed on eQSL (or via email or even good old-fashioned cardboard). "Confirming" it in your own log just says that you are comfortable that it's been confirmed. The confirmed flag in your log has no bearing on the information that's uploaded to the LoTW. The only way that LoTW will consider a QSO to be confirmed is if both parties have uploaded their properly signed (with their private keys) logs to LoTW and there are matching QSO records. The private key is only used to sign your log so that the LoTW server can be sure that it was really you who uploaded the QSO information, and not anyone else. There's a good article in the September 2005 QST by Ward, N0AX, which is also available on the ARRL website as a PDF file: http://www.arrl.org/lotw/silver.pdf that explains the whole process in some detail. Hopefully Ward's writeup will help you to understand the process and why "forging" in the way that you've described just isn't an easy thing to do. (I'll never say that it's impossible, but it certainly would not be trivial). 73, David, K2DBK At 10:49 PM 2/21/2007, Ken Kopp wrote: >Thanks Jim, > >I do have my private key and I understand that it is my >submitted QSL's validation for my log's acceptance into >the LoTW file in Newington. > >If I were to enter an e.QSL into my log and then submit that log to >the LoTW program how would LoTW know if the QSO has been >confirmed via e.QSL? Would LoTW care? > >Or to put it another way .... are you saying that an e.QSL'd QSO >from W7XYZ in my log submission would -only- be accepted by >the LoTW program if there is already a private key associated >with W7XYZ? If W7XYZ does -not- hold a private key would >LoTW accept a "laundered-via-my-log" e.QSL to me from him? > >Thank you for your patience and help. I'm obviously having trouble >understanding this issue. > >73! Ken Kopp - K0PP >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >or >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >--- Ken Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Has anyone managed to disguise/legitimatize e.QSL's >>and use them for credit via LoTW by importing them into >>their logging program and then into a LoTW submission? > >Can't happen. Your QSOs are signed with YOUR private key, and their QSOs are >signed by THEIR private key. The private keys are issued by ARRL, and must be >certified via postal mail to your home address. There is no way to cheat the >system in the way you describe. > >73 - Jim AD1C > > >-- >Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 >USA +978-251-9933, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.ad1c.us >_______________________________________________ >Dx4win mailing list >[email protected] >http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win > > >_______________________________________________ >Dx4win mailing list >[email protected] >http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:26:19 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Reisert AD1C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] More about LoTW credits To: Ken Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 --- Ken Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I were to enter an e.QSL into my log and then submit that log to > the LoTW program how would LoTW know if the QSO has been > confirmed via e.QSL? Would LoTW care? LoTW doesn't know anything or care about confirmations in your log. All it knows is the callsign, date, time, band, mode, etc. of the QSOs you made. > Or to put it another way .... are you saying that an e.QSL'd QSO > from W7XYZ in my log submission would -only- be accepted by > the LoTW program if there is already a private key associated > with W7XYZ? If W7XYZ does -not- hold a private key would > LoTW accept a "laundered-via-my-log" e.QSL to me from him? There is no such thing as "accepted". All LoTW can do is match QSO information in a log YOU submit with QSO information in a log someone else submits. If there is a match, the QSO is considered "confirmed". Your QSOs must be signed with your private key, and the DX station's QSOs must be signed with his private key. In simple terms, you tell LoTW something unique about a QSO you had with a DX station. The DX station tells LoTW something unique about a QSO it had with you. If LoTW decides that you are both telling the same story, then it considers the QSO to have happened. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.ad1c.us ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Dx4win mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win End of Dx4win Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24 ************************************** From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Feb 22 23:09:52 2007 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Kopp) Date: Thu Feb 22 23:30:12 2007 Subject: [Dx4win] Thank you for the help w/LoTW! Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I want to thank Jim AD1C, Dave N4QS and especially Marty N1HT for their explanations about how submissions to the LoTW program work. I now understand that -BOTH- calls involved in the QSO must have established their private keys within the program. I had the idea that if I put an e.QSL'd QSO into my log and submitted it via my LoTW submission it would be "laundered" of its e.QSL heritage and thereby raised to the League's level of acceptance. Each of you put a signifigant amount of effort into your responses ... beyond the norm I think ... and I appreciate that. Again, thank you and ... 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
