Why must Chinese maps be obfuscated? Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraIs the ruling Chinese party seen more favorably than it was 25 years ago?Is the Chinese Communist Party really an autocracy?Chinese contingency plans due to N. Korea collapsingWhy don't Western countries penalize Chinese companies in the same way that China restricts Western companies working on its territory?Why won't the Western countries block Chinese websites in retaliation for China blocking American and European online services?Would a Social Credit System like the one contemplated in China be Constitutional In The U.SWhat is the fundamental difference between post WW2 German and post Cold War Chinese model of industrialization?Why doesn't the Chinese foreign minister speak English?Chinese government internet censorship - statistics on evasion?Why doesn't the Chinese Communist Party induct everyone into the party?

How to translate "red flag" into Spanish?

Do I need to watch Ant-Man and the Wasp and Captain Marvel before watching Avengers: Endgame?

Israeli soda type drink

Why did C use the -> operator instead of reusing the . operator?

How would this chord from "Rocket Man" be analyzed?

What is this word supposed to be?

Is Diceware more secure than a long passphrase?

What does a straight horizontal line above a few notes, after a changed tempo mean?

Is accepting an invalid credit card number a security issue?

tikz-feynman: edge labels

Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?

std::unique_ptr of base class holding reference of derived class does not show warning in gcc compiler while naked pointer shows it. Why?

Suing a Police Officer Instead of the Police Department

Is there metaphorical meaning of "aus der Haft entlassen"?

Multiple options vs single option UI

Is it acceptable to use working hours to read general interest books?

What is the term for a person whose job is to place products on shelves in stores?

What is /etc/mtab in Linux?

Mistake in years of experience in resume?

"Whatever a Russian does, they end up making the Kalashnikov gun"? Are there any similar proverbs in English?

Why do games have consumables?

Double-nominative constructions and “von”

Did the Roman Empire have penal colonies?

What is it called when you ride around on your front wheel?



Why must Chinese maps be obfuscated?



Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraIs the ruling Chinese party seen more favorably than it was 25 years ago?Is the Chinese Communist Party really an autocracy?Chinese contingency plans due to N. Korea collapsingWhy don't Western countries penalize Chinese companies in the same way that China restricts Western companies working on its territory?Why won't the Western countries block Chinese websites in retaliation for China blocking American and European online services?Would a Social Credit System like the one contemplated in China be Constitutional In The U.SWhat is the fundamental difference between post WW2 German and post Cold War Chinese model of industrialization?Why doesn't the Chinese foreign minister speak English?Chinese government internet censorship - statistics on evasion?Why doesn't the Chinese Communist Party induct everyone into the party?










24















According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.



In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.



Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?










share|improve this question
























  • Well, anyone familiar with China government ambiguity over many things, you can simply assume this is typical red tape to safeguard those in the bureaucrat, to avoid possible political correctness implication.

    – mootmoot
    39 mins ago















24















According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.



In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.



Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?










share|improve this question
























  • Well, anyone familiar with China government ambiguity over many things, you can simply assume this is typical red tape to safeguard those in the bureaucrat, to avoid possible political correctness implication.

    – mootmoot
    39 mins ago













24












24








24


2






According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.



In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.



Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?










share|improve this question
















According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.



In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.



Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?







china






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 59 mins ago









JJJ

7,75932965




7,75932965










asked 16 hours ago









indigochildindigochild

19.5k258142




19.5k258142












  • Well, anyone familiar with China government ambiguity over many things, you can simply assume this is typical red tape to safeguard those in the bureaucrat, to avoid possible political correctness implication.

    – mootmoot
    39 mins ago

















  • Well, anyone familiar with China government ambiguity over many things, you can simply assume this is typical red tape to safeguard those in the bureaucrat, to avoid possible political correctness implication.

    – mootmoot
    39 mins ago
















Well, anyone familiar with China government ambiguity over many things, you can simply assume this is typical red tape to safeguard those in the bureaucrat, to avoid possible political correctness implication.

– mootmoot
39 mins ago





Well, anyone familiar with China government ambiguity over many things, you can simply assume this is typical red tape to safeguard those in the bureaucrat, to avoid possible political correctness implication.

– mootmoot
39 mins ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















11














What the Law Says



After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.



However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.



U.S. - Selective Availability



There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.



Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:




Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)







share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

    – indigochild
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

    – Fizz
    2 hours ago






  • 3





    @Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

    – pipe
    2 hours ago


















6














Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:



enter image description here



That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.



It's speculated that Google abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.




enter image description here



On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).




As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:




Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.



Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.



Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.




Unless the Chinese decide to change that (leaked code) and ban all prior maps, this doesn't compare to the SAASM, which supposedly changed keys (on the satellites and receivers) once in a while. SAASM even allows rekeying over insecure channels, while the older PPS-SM required a secure channel (e.g. taking the GPS device to an authorized/secure location for rekeying.)



I suppose I should mention that the Chinese are building their own GPS alternative, the BDS (BeiDou Navigation Satellite System), which apparently became operational in December last year, but that's a different story.






share|improve this answer

























  • What does this add over the existing answer?

    – indigochild
    12 mins ago












  • The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

    – Nosrac
    10 mins ago












  • @indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • @Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

    – indigochild
    49 secs ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40991%2fwhy-must-chinese-maps-be-obfuscated%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









11














What the Law Says



After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.



However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.



U.S. - Selective Availability



There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.



Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:




Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)







share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

    – indigochild
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

    – Fizz
    2 hours ago






  • 3





    @Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

    – pipe
    2 hours ago















11














What the Law Says



After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.



However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.



U.S. - Selective Availability



There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.



Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:




Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)







share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

    – indigochild
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

    – Fizz
    2 hours ago






  • 3





    @Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

    – pipe
    2 hours ago













11












11








11







What the Law Says



After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.



However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.



U.S. - Selective Availability



There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.



Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:




Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)







share|improve this answer















What the Law Says



After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.



However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.



U.S. - Selective Availability



There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.



Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:




Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 9 hours ago

























answered 10 hours ago









indigochildindigochild

19.5k258142




19.5k258142







  • 1





    Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

    – indigochild
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

    – Fizz
    2 hours ago






  • 3





    @Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

    – pipe
    2 hours ago












  • 1





    Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

    – indigochild
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

    – Fizz
    2 hours ago






  • 3





    @Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

    – pipe
    2 hours ago







1




1





Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

– indigochild
10 hours ago





Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.

– indigochild
10 hours ago




1




1





Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

– Fizz
2 hours ago





Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.

– Fizz
2 hours ago




3




3





@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

– pipe
2 hours ago





@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.

– pipe
2 hours ago











6














Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:



enter image description here



That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.



It's speculated that Google abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.




enter image description here



On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).




As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:




Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.



Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.



Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.




Unless the Chinese decide to change that (leaked code) and ban all prior maps, this doesn't compare to the SAASM, which supposedly changed keys (on the satellites and receivers) once in a while. SAASM even allows rekeying over insecure channels, while the older PPS-SM required a secure channel (e.g. taking the GPS device to an authorized/secure location for rekeying.)



I suppose I should mention that the Chinese are building their own GPS alternative, the BDS (BeiDou Navigation Satellite System), which apparently became operational in December last year, but that's a different story.






share|improve this answer

























  • What does this add over the existing answer?

    – indigochild
    12 mins ago












  • The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

    – Nosrac
    10 mins ago












  • @indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • @Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

    – indigochild
    49 secs ago















6














Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:



enter image description here



That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.



It's speculated that Google abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.




enter image description here



On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).




As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:




Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.



Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.



Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.




Unless the Chinese decide to change that (leaked code) and ban all prior maps, this doesn't compare to the SAASM, which supposedly changed keys (on the satellites and receivers) once in a while. SAASM even allows rekeying over insecure channels, while the older PPS-SM required a secure channel (e.g. taking the GPS device to an authorized/secure location for rekeying.)



I suppose I should mention that the Chinese are building their own GPS alternative, the BDS (BeiDou Navigation Satellite System), which apparently became operational in December last year, but that's a different story.






share|improve this answer

























  • What does this add over the existing answer?

    – indigochild
    12 mins ago












  • The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

    – Nosrac
    10 mins ago












  • @indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • @Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

    – indigochild
    49 secs ago













6












6








6







Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:



enter image description here



That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.



It's speculated that Google abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.




enter image description here



On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).




As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:




Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.



Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.



Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.




Unless the Chinese decide to change that (leaked code) and ban all prior maps, this doesn't compare to the SAASM, which supposedly changed keys (on the satellites and receivers) once in a while. SAASM even allows rekeying over insecure channels, while the older PPS-SM required a secure channel (e.g. taking the GPS device to an authorized/secure location for rekeying.)



I suppose I should mention that the Chinese are building their own GPS alternative, the BDS (BeiDou Navigation Satellite System), which apparently became operational in December last year, but that's a different story.






share|improve this answer















Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:



enter image description here



That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.



It's speculated that Google abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.




enter image description here



On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).




As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:




Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.



Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.



Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.




Unless the Chinese decide to change that (leaked code) and ban all prior maps, this doesn't compare to the SAASM, which supposedly changed keys (on the satellites and receivers) once in a while. SAASM even allows rekeying over insecure channels, while the older PPS-SM required a secure channel (e.g. taking the GPS device to an authorized/secure location for rekeying.)



I suppose I should mention that the Chinese are building their own GPS alternative, the BDS (BeiDou Navigation Satellite System), which apparently became operational in December last year, but that's a different story.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 56 mins ago

























answered 2 hours ago









FizzFizz

16.9k242108




16.9k242108












  • What does this add over the existing answer?

    – indigochild
    12 mins ago












  • The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

    – Nosrac
    10 mins ago












  • @indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • @Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

    – indigochild
    49 secs ago

















  • What does this add over the existing answer?

    – indigochild
    12 mins ago












  • The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

    – Nosrac
    10 mins ago












  • @indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • @Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

    – Fizz
    6 mins ago












  • Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

    – indigochild
    49 secs ago
















What does this add over the existing answer?

– indigochild
12 mins ago






What does this add over the existing answer?

– indigochild
12 mins ago














The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

– Nosrac
10 mins ago






The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites they do have a global navigation satellite system; it's called BeiDou.

– Nosrac
10 mins ago














@indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

– Fizz
6 mins ago






@indigochild: corrects your various misleading claims like "GCJ-02 datum [...] has a random disturbance" and adds a quote from a Chinese dev on his 2 cents how and why this is the way it is. The latter also contradicts your claim that "the law does require the usage of a certain datum".

– Fizz
6 mins ago














@Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

– Fizz
6 mins ago






@Nosrac: that's covered in the last para if you take the time to read the whole anwer. And that's not same thing as them having GPS satellites (with Chinese codes). You need a different receiver for BDS to work. (True there are some Chinese mixed receivers, but then so are mixed GPS/GLONASS receivers--I have one).

– Fizz
6 mins ago














Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

– indigochild
49 secs ago





Thanks for the clarification. I will use that to improve my answer also. Would you consider making the answer to the question more explicit? To me, it was not obvious among all the technical details.

– indigochild
49 secs ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40991%2fwhy-must-chinese-maps-be-obfuscated%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Oświęcim Innehåll Historia | Källor | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmeny50°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.2213950°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.221393089658Nordisk familjebok, AuschwitzInsidan tro och existensJewish Community i OświęcimAuschwitz Jewish Center: MuseumAuschwitz Jewish Center

Valle di Casies Indice Geografia fisica | Origini del nome | Storia | Società | Amministrazione | Sport | Note | Bibliografia | Voci correlate | Altri progetti | Collegamenti esterni | Menu di navigazione46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)Sito istituzionaleAstat Censimento della popolazione 2011 - Determinazione della consistenza dei tre gruppi linguistici della Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige - giugno 2012Numeri e fattiValle di CasiesDato IstatTabella dei gradi/giorno dei Comuni italiani raggruppati per Regione e Provincia26 agosto 1993, n. 412Heraldry of the World: GsiesStatistiche I.StatValCasies.comWikimedia CommonsWikimedia CommonsValle di CasiesSito ufficialeValle di CasiesMM14870458910042978-6

Typsetting diagram chases (with TikZ?) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)How to define the default vertical distance between nodes?Draw edge on arcNumerical conditional within tikz keys?TikZ: Drawing an arc from an intersection to an intersectionDrawing rectilinear curves in Tikz, aka an Etch-a-Sketch drawingLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themHow to place nodes in an absolute coordinate system in tikzCommutative diagram with curve connecting between nodesTikz with standalone: pinning tikz coordinates to page cmDrawing a Decision Diagram with Tikz and layout manager