Why must Chinese maps be obfuscated?Is the ruling Chinese party seen more favorably than it was 25 years...

What is the most expensive material in the world that could be used to create Pun-Pun's lute?

Why do distances seem to matter in the Foundation world?

"My boss was furious with me and I have been fired" vs. "My boss was furious with me and I was fired"

A faster way to compute the largest prime factor

Retract an already submitted recommendation letter (written for an undergrad student)

Why do games have consumables?

How to be good at coming up with counter example in Topology

What makes accurate emulation of old systems a difficult task?

Multiple options vs single option UI

Older movie/show about humans on derelict alien warship which refuels by passing through a star

What is purpose of DB Browser(dbbrowser.aspx) under admin tool?

Where was the County of Thurn und Taxis located?

Combinatorics problem, right solution?

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

How do I produce this Greek letter koppa: Ϟ in pdfLaTeX?

Island of Knights, Knaves and Spies

Can a level 2 Warlock take one level in rogue, then continue advancing as a warlock?

How to have a sharp product image?

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

Find a stone which is not the lightest one

Multiple fireplaces in an apartment building?

Negative Resistance

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

How much cash can I safely carry into the USA and avoid civil forfeiture?



Why must Chinese maps be obfuscated?


Is 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?













41















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





























    41















    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



























      41












      41








      41


      5






      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 14 hours ago









      JJJ

      7,83832965




      7,83832965










      asked yesterday









      indigochildindigochild

      19.5k260142




      19.5k260142






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          35














          Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the GPS Selective Availability 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.



          Google bought the China map data from an officially approved Chinese source company. Other maps providers (that didn't/don't operate locally in China) aren't skittish to transform/align the Chinese maps to WGS84.




          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 in a post from April 2015:




          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.




          Since then Xinhua reported new regulations on maps being passed at the end of 2015, and taking effect in 2016. Amazingly these are available in English, but they say nothing about using some specific coordinates; so the ambiguity noted in that Chinese dev comment basically continues. The new regulations do say that maps must be submitted for government review, except in some very limited circumstances.



          For on-line maps there's this verbiage in the new regs (which doesn't clarify much):




          Article 33. To provide the public with services such as geospatial positioning, geoinformation uploading and labeling, and map database development, a provider of Internet map services shall obtain the necessary qualification certificate for surveying and mapping in accordance with law.



          To engage in Internet map publishing, a provider of Internet map services shall be subject to review by and approval of the competent publication administration department of the State Council in accordance with law.



          Article 34. A provider of Internet map services shall place its map data servers within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, and shall establish the management system and introduce safeguard measures for the security of Internet map data.



          The competent administration departments for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the people’s governments at or above the county level shall, jointly with the relevant departments, strengthen supervision and administration of the security of Internet map data.



          [...]



          Article 38 A provider of Internet map services shall use maps that have been reviewed and approved in accordance with law, and strictly verify newly added content of the Internet maps, and it shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State, file such content with the competent administration department of the State Council for surveying, mapping and geoinformation or the competent administration department for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government.




          Basically it seems to be a system of: give us your maps and will give them back to you as we think they should be published... which at some point probably involves the coordinate system, but it's not mentioned explicitly in these regs. There are some up to 100,000 yuan fines for not following these regulations.



          Also according to a Chinese page, GCJ-02 (although developed by the State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping) is not the same as the official Chinese CGCS2000 system, for which a lot public info is available.



          So it's hard to answer a "why" for something that's hard to even find an official record that it needs to happen...





          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. And BDS broadcasts its location info in the aforementioned CGC[S]2000.



          Finally, Baidu "Total View" has a Street View equivalent with altered photos ... like [badly] disappeared buildings etc. You'd probably be hard pressed to find an official explanation for this either. That article contains some speculation about the reasons, but that's about it.






          share|improve this answer


























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

            – Nosrac
            14 hours ago








          • 6





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 2





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 4





            @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

            – DaveInCaz
            12 hours ago






          • 2





            @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago



















          13














          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 an official 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. The U.S. previously required another technology which also altered location data for defense purposes.



          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
            yesterday






          • 3





            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
            16 hours ago






          • 5





            @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
            16 hours ago






          • 3





            @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago






          • 2





            ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

            – David Richerby
            10 hours 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









          35














          Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the GPS Selective Availability 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.



          Google bought the China map data from an officially approved Chinese source company. Other maps providers (that didn't/don't operate locally in China) aren't skittish to transform/align the Chinese maps to WGS84.




          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 in a post from April 2015:




          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.




          Since then Xinhua reported new regulations on maps being passed at the end of 2015, and taking effect in 2016. Amazingly these are available in English, but they say nothing about using some specific coordinates; so the ambiguity noted in that Chinese dev comment basically continues. The new regulations do say that maps must be submitted for government review, except in some very limited circumstances.



          For on-line maps there's this verbiage in the new regs (which doesn't clarify much):




          Article 33. To provide the public with services such as geospatial positioning, geoinformation uploading and labeling, and map database development, a provider of Internet map services shall obtain the necessary qualification certificate for surveying and mapping in accordance with law.



          To engage in Internet map publishing, a provider of Internet map services shall be subject to review by and approval of the competent publication administration department of the State Council in accordance with law.



          Article 34. A provider of Internet map services shall place its map data servers within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, and shall establish the management system and introduce safeguard measures for the security of Internet map data.



          The competent administration departments for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the people’s governments at or above the county level shall, jointly with the relevant departments, strengthen supervision and administration of the security of Internet map data.



          [...]



          Article 38 A provider of Internet map services shall use maps that have been reviewed and approved in accordance with law, and strictly verify newly added content of the Internet maps, and it shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State, file such content with the competent administration department of the State Council for surveying, mapping and geoinformation or the competent administration department for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government.




          Basically it seems to be a system of: give us your maps and will give them back to you as we think they should be published... which at some point probably involves the coordinate system, but it's not mentioned explicitly in these regs. There are some up to 100,000 yuan fines for not following these regulations.



          Also according to a Chinese page, GCJ-02 (although developed by the State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping) is not the same as the official Chinese CGCS2000 system, for which a lot public info is available.



          So it's hard to answer a "why" for something that's hard to even find an official record that it needs to happen...





          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. And BDS broadcasts its location info in the aforementioned CGC[S]2000.



          Finally, Baidu "Total View" has a Street View equivalent with altered photos ... like [badly] disappeared buildings etc. You'd probably be hard pressed to find an official explanation for this either. That article contains some speculation about the reasons, but that's about it.






          share|improve this answer


























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

            – Nosrac
            14 hours ago








          • 6





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 2





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 4





            @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

            – DaveInCaz
            12 hours ago






          • 2





            @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago
















          35














          Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the GPS Selective Availability 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.



          Google bought the China map data from an officially approved Chinese source company. Other maps providers (that didn't/don't operate locally in China) aren't skittish to transform/align the Chinese maps to WGS84.




          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 in a post from April 2015:




          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.




          Since then Xinhua reported new regulations on maps being passed at the end of 2015, and taking effect in 2016. Amazingly these are available in English, but they say nothing about using some specific coordinates; so the ambiguity noted in that Chinese dev comment basically continues. The new regulations do say that maps must be submitted for government review, except in some very limited circumstances.



          For on-line maps there's this verbiage in the new regs (which doesn't clarify much):




          Article 33. To provide the public with services such as geospatial positioning, geoinformation uploading and labeling, and map database development, a provider of Internet map services shall obtain the necessary qualification certificate for surveying and mapping in accordance with law.



          To engage in Internet map publishing, a provider of Internet map services shall be subject to review by and approval of the competent publication administration department of the State Council in accordance with law.



          Article 34. A provider of Internet map services shall place its map data servers within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, and shall establish the management system and introduce safeguard measures for the security of Internet map data.



          The competent administration departments for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the people’s governments at or above the county level shall, jointly with the relevant departments, strengthen supervision and administration of the security of Internet map data.



          [...]



          Article 38 A provider of Internet map services shall use maps that have been reviewed and approved in accordance with law, and strictly verify newly added content of the Internet maps, and it shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State, file such content with the competent administration department of the State Council for surveying, mapping and geoinformation or the competent administration department for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government.




          Basically it seems to be a system of: give us your maps and will give them back to you as we think they should be published... which at some point probably involves the coordinate system, but it's not mentioned explicitly in these regs. There are some up to 100,000 yuan fines for not following these regulations.



          Also according to a Chinese page, GCJ-02 (although developed by the State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping) is not the same as the official Chinese CGCS2000 system, for which a lot public info is available.



          So it's hard to answer a "why" for something that's hard to even find an official record that it needs to happen...





          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. And BDS broadcasts its location info in the aforementioned CGC[S]2000.



          Finally, Baidu "Total View" has a Street View equivalent with altered photos ... like [badly] disappeared buildings etc. You'd probably be hard pressed to find an official explanation for this either. That article contains some speculation about the reasons, but that's about it.






          share|improve this answer


























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

            – Nosrac
            14 hours ago








          • 6





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 2





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 4





            @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

            – DaveInCaz
            12 hours ago






          • 2





            @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago














          35












          35








          35







          Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the GPS Selective Availability 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.



          Google bought the China map data from an officially approved Chinese source company. Other maps providers (that didn't/don't operate locally in China) aren't skittish to transform/align the Chinese maps to WGS84.




          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 in a post from April 2015:




          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.




          Since then Xinhua reported new regulations on maps being passed at the end of 2015, and taking effect in 2016. Amazingly these are available in English, but they say nothing about using some specific coordinates; so the ambiguity noted in that Chinese dev comment basically continues. The new regulations do say that maps must be submitted for government review, except in some very limited circumstances.



          For on-line maps there's this verbiage in the new regs (which doesn't clarify much):




          Article 33. To provide the public with services such as geospatial positioning, geoinformation uploading and labeling, and map database development, a provider of Internet map services shall obtain the necessary qualification certificate for surveying and mapping in accordance with law.



          To engage in Internet map publishing, a provider of Internet map services shall be subject to review by and approval of the competent publication administration department of the State Council in accordance with law.



          Article 34. A provider of Internet map services shall place its map data servers within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, and shall establish the management system and introduce safeguard measures for the security of Internet map data.



          The competent administration departments for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the people’s governments at or above the county level shall, jointly with the relevant departments, strengthen supervision and administration of the security of Internet map data.



          [...]



          Article 38 A provider of Internet map services shall use maps that have been reviewed and approved in accordance with law, and strictly verify newly added content of the Internet maps, and it shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State, file such content with the competent administration department of the State Council for surveying, mapping and geoinformation or the competent administration department for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government.




          Basically it seems to be a system of: give us your maps and will give them back to you as we think they should be published... which at some point probably involves the coordinate system, but it's not mentioned explicitly in these regs. There are some up to 100,000 yuan fines for not following these regulations.



          Also according to a Chinese page, GCJ-02 (although developed by the State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping) is not the same as the official Chinese CGCS2000 system, for which a lot public info is available.



          So it's hard to answer a "why" for something that's hard to even find an official record that it needs to happen...





          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. And BDS broadcasts its location info in the aforementioned CGC[S]2000.



          Finally, Baidu "Total View" has a Street View equivalent with altered photos ... like [badly] disappeared buildings etc. You'd probably be hard pressed to find an official explanation for this either. That article contains some speculation about the reasons, but that's about it.






          share|improve this answer















          Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the GPS Selective Availability 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.



          Google bought the China map data from an officially approved Chinese source company. Other maps providers (that didn't/don't operate locally in China) aren't skittish to transform/align the Chinese maps to WGS84.




          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 in a post from April 2015:




          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.




          Since then Xinhua reported new regulations on maps being passed at the end of 2015, and taking effect in 2016. Amazingly these are available in English, but they say nothing about using some specific coordinates; so the ambiguity noted in that Chinese dev comment basically continues. The new regulations do say that maps must be submitted for government review, except in some very limited circumstances.



          For on-line maps there's this verbiage in the new regs (which doesn't clarify much):




          Article 33. To provide the public with services such as geospatial positioning, geoinformation uploading and labeling, and map database development, a provider of Internet map services shall obtain the necessary qualification certificate for surveying and mapping in accordance with law.



          To engage in Internet map publishing, a provider of Internet map services shall be subject to review by and approval of the competent publication administration department of the State Council in accordance with law.



          Article 34. A provider of Internet map services shall place its map data servers within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, and shall establish the management system and introduce safeguard measures for the security of Internet map data.



          The competent administration departments for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the people’s governments at or above the county level shall, jointly with the relevant departments, strengthen supervision and administration of the security of Internet map data.



          [...]



          Article 38 A provider of Internet map services shall use maps that have been reviewed and approved in accordance with law, and strictly verify newly added content of the Internet maps, and it shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State, file such content with the competent administration department of the State Council for surveying, mapping and geoinformation or the competent administration department for surveying, mapping and geoinformation of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government.




          Basically it seems to be a system of: give us your maps and will give them back to you as we think they should be published... which at some point probably involves the coordinate system, but it's not mentioned explicitly in these regs. There are some up to 100,000 yuan fines for not following these regulations.



          Also according to a Chinese page, GCJ-02 (although developed by the State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping) is not the same as the official Chinese CGCS2000 system, for which a lot public info is available.



          So it's hard to answer a "why" for something that's hard to even find an official record that it needs to happen...





          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. And BDS broadcasts its location info in the aforementioned CGC[S]2000.



          Finally, Baidu "Total View" has a Street View equivalent with altered photos ... like [badly] disappeared buildings etc. You'd probably be hard pressed to find an official explanation for this either. That article contains some speculation about the reasons, but that's about it.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 10 hours ago

























          answered 16 hours ago









          FizzFizz

          17k243109




          17k243109













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

            – Nosrac
            14 hours ago








          • 6





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 2





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 4





            @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

            – DaveInCaz
            12 hours ago






          • 2





            @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago



















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

            – Nosrac
            14 hours ago








          • 6





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 2





            @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
            14 hours ago








          • 4





            @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

            – DaveInCaz
            12 hours ago






          • 2





            @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago

















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

          – Nosrac
          14 hours ago







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

          – Nosrac
          14 hours ago






          6




          6





          @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
          14 hours 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
          14 hours ago






          2




          2





          @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
          14 hours 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
          14 hours ago






          4




          4





          @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

          – DaveInCaz
          12 hours ago





          @indigochild it seems to me that clarifying the very nature of the obfuscation is a fairly important part of explaining why it was done.

          – DaveInCaz
          12 hours ago




          2




          2





          @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

          – David Richerby
          10 hours ago





          @indigochild Your answer says nothing at all about the "why" and is very inaccurate about the "what".

          – David Richerby
          10 hours ago











          13














          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 an official 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. The U.S. previously required another technology which also altered location data for defense purposes.



          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
            yesterday






          • 3





            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
            16 hours ago






          • 5





            @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
            16 hours ago






          • 3





            @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago






          • 2





            ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago
















          13














          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 an official 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. The U.S. previously required another technology which also altered location data for defense purposes.



          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
            yesterday






          • 3





            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
            16 hours ago






          • 5





            @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
            16 hours ago






          • 3





            @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago






          • 2





            ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago














          13












          13








          13







          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 an official 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. The U.S. previously required another technology which also altered location data for defense purposes.



          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 an official 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. The U.S. previously required another technology which also altered location data for defense purposes.



          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 12 hours ago

























          answered yesterday









          indigochildindigochild

          19.5k260142




          19.5k260142








          • 1





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

            – indigochild
            yesterday






          • 3





            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
            16 hours ago






          • 5





            @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
            16 hours ago






          • 3





            @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago






          • 2





            ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago














          • 1





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

            – indigochild
            yesterday






          • 3





            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
            16 hours ago






          • 5





            @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
            16 hours ago






          • 3





            @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago






          • 2





            ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

            – David Richerby
            10 hours ago








          1




          1





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

          – indigochild
          yesterday





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

          – indigochild
          yesterday




          3




          3





          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
          16 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
          16 hours ago




          5




          5





          @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
          16 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
          16 hours ago




          3




          3





          @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

          – David Richerby
          10 hours ago





          @pipe Such an algorithm is properly described as a "pseudorandom number generator". In the case of this answer, it's particularly misleading to use the same word, "random", to describe two completely different phenomena. GPS selective availability is the addition of pseudorandom noise to the GPS signal so people with non-classified receivers receive less accurate information. In particular, A GPS unit will give different answers about the same location, when SA is in use. But the Chinese system applies a fixed distortion to the map that doesn't change over time. That distortion is "random"...

          – David Richerby
          10 hours ago




          2




          2





          ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

          – David Richerby
          10 hours ago





          ... only in the very weakest sense of the word, meaning that it displays no particularly obvious pattern.

          – David Richerby
          10 hours 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

          Why do type traits not work with types in namespace scope?What are POD types in C++?Why can templates only be...

          Will tsunami waves travel forever if there was no land?Why do tsunami waves begin with the water flowing away...

          Should I use Docker or LXD?How to cache (more) data on SSD/RAM to avoid spin up?Unable to get Windows File...