[Dxspider-support] Here we are again (huge flooding)

[Kin]

With Dirk's permission, who I hope will correct me if I have misunderstood.
 
The use of the $DXProt::senderverify variable is focused on the verification of the spotter and its IP.
What does this imply? Well, to consider a spotter (and spot) as ‘reliable’, it has to pass the callsign_spotter+IP_spotter filter.
And right here there is a problem.
Nodes of any kind, if they do not send PC92 with the IPs of the users accessing their nodes, it is not possible to know what their IP is.
There are three types of nodes that do not provide this information or it is not correct:
* Those that have it expressly disabled.
* Certain websites that always send the same IP or none at all.
* Nodes that do not have the ability to generate PC92, say, the archaic ones.
 
But this is only relative to the verification to avoid spoofing. There are other mechanisms implemented in the dxspider that take care of verifying if a spot is really a duplicate.
Different fields of the spot are analysed in order to determine if it really is a duplicate (in the time domain).
 
By the way, I don't think there is a single node in the whole network, which receiving the same data stream as the others (without having something similar to $DXProt::senderverify) has shown only real spots.
More information in the history of this List.
 
The combination of both algorithms tries to stop yesterday's spoofing. But as not all of us contribute with the necessary information, it happens that there may be a spot that is considered false due to lack of data. And this, it is up to YOU to solve it.
 
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the sysops who have decided to secure the links to their partners. And to those who have gone a step further, and have activated the registration/password.
 
Kin EA3CV
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.tobit.co.uk/pipermail/dxspider-support/attachments/20250217/387df6f8/attachment-0001.htm>