MOB Caches - a new tool

3k · February 17

1 hour ago, JL_HSTRE said:

Adventure Lab bonus caches do not have an Additional Logging Requirement. There is no requirement to complete the AL to log the bonus cache, although that's certainly usually the easiest way to find the coordinates.

As fas as I know, there was no requirement to play a MOB before to sign the logbook and log it online, but now, someone has interpreted that playing a MOB was an ALR. I guess that someone has misinterpreted that solving the coordinates of mystery cache is an ALR.

3k · February 17

9 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

Where is this rule actually stated in the guidelines?

I guess it should be noted here https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=97&pgid=297

But it seems to be this

On 2/1/2024 at 5:48 PM, Keystone said:

Privately, the Reviewers have more detailed guidance, which includes advice to question links to websites that are geocaching or technology related (among other things). We do not need to question links to websites if Geocaching HQ has indicated their blanket approval.

and this

On 2/1/2024 at 6:28 PM, Keystone said:

If I saw a cache page that links to the OP's website, I wouldn't publish it. I would "question" it by asking Geocaching HQ if it was permitted. I would only publish the cache page after they said "yes."

So it may depend on the reviewer? I have not tried to publish anything but Jigidi and Youtube links lately, so I have no experience about any changes how reviewers may react, if I would do something that I am used to do earlier.

February 18

Although the website wasn't running for a long time, I'll keep it up until the end of the month. If you want to copy your data you left there, take your chance before the 1st March.

Thank you for all your support given here on the forum and in private messages. I believed I could add something valuable for the community.

If the next consequence is archiving all Jigidi geocaches, it was dadgum worth it :laughing:

February 19

This MOB cache is one of my most memorable multi-cache finds. https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC6TWAG

It had seven stages and four of them were MOB, including one that was in the middle of a lake (stage 6). Denali41 and I did this together and we had five devices between the two of us to get the MOB stages. While there were seven Found It logs on the cache, four of them were "beta testers" that never actually worked through every stage (including one of the team cache owners), they were only present when the final was placed.. Denali41 and I were the only two true finders.

Edited February 20 by icezebra11

February 19

One of the MOBs in my area has been revived as a Traditional "in memory of" cache, instead of removing it from the field :laughing:

https://coord.info/GCAKP89

The owner also made the original MOB container trackable, and it will want to travel to places where MOBs existed :drama:

https://coord.info/TBAKHCD

February 23

On 2/16/2024 at 10:03 PM, Keystone said:

You can figure out the answer by reading this page.

what bit am i missing - do they collect data or not - is the jigsaw website getting stopped ?

March 26

On 2/17/2024 at 8:50 AM, Ragnemalm said:

If that would be the case, it would be wonderful! I don't need to collect data to make a fun myst based on an online solution.

What is a myst based game? Is this a type of home built adventure/point an click game you have created to bolt on to a cache? Sounds interesting.

5.7k · March 27

On 2/16/2024 at 3:03 PM, Keystone said:

You can figure out the answer by reading this page.

It is unnecessary to set up an account to solve puzzles there - unless you wish to log out and resume later for some reason - but leaving a browser tab open works fine, too.

Even after an account is set up, you can opt out of use of your data apart from what's necessary to fully use the site (as mentioned above, saving puzzle states, 'posting' puzzles for others to solve, etc.). I don't see anything there that would run afoul of privacy requirements.

5.7k · March 27

On 2/19/2024 at 7:45 AM, icezebra11 said:

This MOB cache is one of my most memorable multi-cache finds. https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC6TWAG

It had seven stages and four of them were MOB, including one that was in the middle of a lake (stage 6). Denali41 and I did this together and we had five devices between the two of us to get the MOB stages. While there were seven Found It logs on the cache, four of them were "beta testers" that never actually worked through every stage (including one of the team cache owners), they were only present when the final was placed.. Denali41 and I were the only two true finders.

Wish I'd been with you guys. That said, how is it that it didn't get archived due to Stage 5 issues?

Just realized I haven't seen a CEGT cache since 2017.

March 28

16 hours ago, ecanderson said:

Wish I'd been with you guys. That said, how is it that it didn't get archived due to Stage 5 issues?

Just realized I haven't seen a CEGT cache since 2017.

Hey Chris,

That would have been a fun boat ride with you and Sherwood.

CEGT was primarily MemfisMafia and Barasaur. Since the Mafia moved to Florida, CEGT hasn't launched any new caches.

Stage 5 was in a small hidden park between Pratt and Bross, north of 2nd. It is open seasonally and with certain hours. There was a sign with a number to call and that's how we gained access.

5.7k · April 15

On 3/28/2024 at 9:34 AM, icezebra11 said:

Hey Chris,

That would have been a fun boat ride with you and Sherwood.

CEGT was primarily MemfisMafia and Barasaur. Since the Mafia moved to Florida, CEGT hasn't launched any new caches.

Stage 5 was in a small hidden park between Pratt and Bross, north of 2nd. It is open seasonally and with certain hours. There was a sign with a number to call and that's how we gained access.

Interesting. I have a 'stage' of an adventure in the same park that I may have to adjust to another location. It used to be open to the public apart from special events - they would sometimes rent it for weddings on weekends. Lately, it seems to be closed pretty much 24/7/365.

June 21

Hi all,

I too came up with a new MOB service right as the existing MOB event caches were being archived. I was also going through the vetting process, which I was given the thumbs down. The issue with new MOB services is that GCHQ has to follow laws by protecting online privacy. This includes any personal data that gets sent by a users device. Sent data includes live GPS coordinates. Yes the end user has to give permission to allow the sending of a device location, but under GCHQ interpretation of the law, end users giving permission to send GPS information does not constitute legality in this case. Things may change in the future, but for now we must respect GCHQ rules in these matters.

9.1k · June 21

guh?

Does that mean no web-based 'puzzle' can be permitted to use of gps locations even if permission is granted by the user (requested by the device itself)?

What does that mean for things like Intercache? Web-based Wherigo-style web applications? In that case, what makes a 3rd party mobile app any different than a web-based gps app? Other than running of a browser instead of the OS directly? ... =/

June 21

Good questions thebruce0!

New web based puzzle caches that use live GPS data cannot be published. However, old caches that uses live GPS data have been grandfathered, and are allowed to stay published.

I do not know about Intercache, but I know Web-based Wherigo-style web applications are also no longer allowed due to the live GPS data rules. I have a cache where I built a Wherigo style web app that is still allowed to be played. It too was grandfathered into allowing to stay published.

3rd party mobile apps that use live GPS coordinates from a users device that are being sent across the internet are only allowed if the app is on the GCHQ approved list. As far as I know, there are no longer any 3rd party apps like this on that list. The approved Wherigo apps use live GPS coordinates, but that information is not sent across the internet to a 3rd party server. A WIG cartridge is completely self contained, running on the users device, and does not require any data being sent to and from a server on the Internet.

Personally, I do not like Wherigo seeing how it is soooooo easy to cheat these cartridges by using online tools that reverse engineer the cartridge. Even if the cartridge was compiled using the obfuscated method, it is still quite easy to extract all the data needed to find, calculate, or even play on an emulator to find the final coordinates. It just requires a little extra work. But that is a different story and won't go into any details. LOL

Again, this is not the fault of GCHQ. It all just has to do with online privacy laws.

3k · June 22

9 hours ago, talk2azs said:

Sent data includes live GPS coordinates.

Why do your App send GPS coordinates to internet? If you have an App, it should be able to process the location data locally, in the phone.

6.2k · June 22

2 hours ago, arisoft said:

Why do your App send GPS coordinates to internet? If you have an App, it should be able to process the location data locally, in the phone.

For a MOB cache website/app wouldn't that be necessary so that the site/whatever can count how many people are at the location? I don't see how that could be processed locally for everyone at the site to confirm how many others are there too, I guess it could be done by Bluetooth but that's probably more of a concern for most people than sharing their co-ordinates.

3k · June 22

If the information wether a player is on site or not is too sensitive for an anonymous participant to send to the internet, the MOB could share a password for encrypting the data trasnsfer between them so that everything is computed locally. Only encrypted data is shared by the server with this method.

Edited June 22 by arisoft

June 22

If you process the data locally on a users device, you would have to use Javascript. Any code running on a local device can easily be extracted and seen by the end user. This opens the puzzle up to the armchair puzzle solvers. Why go onsite when you can just run the code at home and easily extract the final cache container information. I have seen too many people with web puzzles do this around the world. I have solved many web page puzzles that use Javascript at the comfort of my computer. My purpose for doing this was to let the CO's of those caches know how easy it was to armchair solve them. Javascript is great for online privacy, but not good at all for security and the never ending battle against the cheaters. LOL

June 22

So I have been working on something new based on the original MOB event caches. I decided to reveal it to anyone reading the posts on this forum. I call it MOB Event Cache 2.0. Instead of using live GPS coordinates, it will use a question that needs to be answered about the area at GZ. Once all users enter the answer, all users must submit the answer at the same time. I have been testing this and have had great results from my experimenting. This will be VERY hard for cheaters to solve in the comfort of their own homes, as I have included security code to help prevent armchair solving. I have just created a beta website for this. If you would like to give this a shot, go to "talk2azs dot com/mob20beta". The answer to the question in the beta version is 1234.

Please let me know what you think.

3k · June 23

7 hours ago, talk2azs said:

Any code running on a local device can easily be extracted and seen by the end user. This opens the puzzle up to the armchair puzzle solvers.

No puzzle solver would decode the app because they can use fake gps.

6 hours ago, talk2azs said:

Once all users enter the answer, all users must submit the answer at the same time.

Good solution for not using GPS but timing is not a very good proof of location. Does this open a loophole for cheaters that they can play it anywhere?

June 23

Good points arisoft. But I thought about those things also.

The original MOB by Chiliehead did not take spoofing GPS on devices into account. I have solved many MOB events using fake GPS apps using many tools I have available to me. In my GPS enabled web apps(apps I cannot use for Geocaching), I placed in some code to detect GPS spoofing. It gets quite detailed, and will not get into the details. During the time right before GCHQ was deciding what to do with all MOB caches, I had the privilege of working with a number of MOB cache owners in other countries to breath new life into and resurrect their caches from the dead. A couple of these CO's tried to use every trick in the book they could think of to try and armchair their new MOB web app. They were VERY impressed they were unable to spoof GPS my version of the MOB web app!

As far as my non-GPS solution to MOB 2.0 caches, YES it does open the loophole to play everywhere. But as you stated, the thing about using a fake GPS, that opens widely the loophole of playing everywhere. At least having the user answer a question about the location, pretty much closes the play anywhere loophole, if they do not have the answer. Questions have to be chosen wisely. The biggest thing here is to make sure no one can find the answer using Google Street Maps. Another is a user can try answering the question until they hit the correct answer. The solution here is to only give the user so many times they can answer the question. The penalty could be to disable the users game for 24 hours. Sure one could get around this if they knew exactly how I coded this penalty. As far as the question, hunters would have to share the question answer with others in order for the game to be played everywhere properly. The solution for this: Have rotating questions. I would find a place where I could come up with 20 or more questions. A hunter would have to dedicate MANY days and hours of their lives to get all questions. If you think someone is doing this, then go out and make changes and come up with 20 more new questions. I don't think it will ever have to come to this, but its always better of have a solution and not need it, than needing a solution and not having one.

So when I coded my version of MOB 2.0, I did take into account device internet latency and coded for that as well. Before coding for Internet Latency, I had many problems getting my MOB 2.0 to work properly. But with the latency coding, the app worked surprisingly well. Sure there may be a rare occasion where not all devices will be counted, but I made it easier for a group to replay the game by pre-filling the users answer into the submission field so that they would not have to type in the answer again. So when selecting a place for hunters to meet, I will make sure there are cell towers located very close, by the big 3 cell providers, drastically reducing the latency times. In fact I have a new cache almost ready for submission using my MOB 2.0 web app.

Edited June 23 by talk2azs

August 19

On 6/21/2024 at 9:36 PM, talk2azs said:

Hi all,

I too came up with a new MOB service right as the existing MOB event caches were being archived. I was also going through the vetting process, which I was given the thumbs down. The issue with new MOB services is that GCHQ has to follow laws by protecting online privacy. This includes any personal data that gets sent by a users device. Sent data includes live GPS coordinates. Yes the end user has to give permission to allow the sending of a device location, but under GCHQ interpretation of the law, end users giving permission to send GPS information does not constitute legality in this case. Things may change in the future, but for now we must respect GCHQ rules in these matters.

This is the first time I see any clear data about what the rule actually is. It is crazy that we can't send coordinates if they (1) do not include identification and (2) the user has given permission. Even crazier is that I asked the support about this twice and never got a clear answer. First I got a copy-paste and the second time they didn't respond at all.

OK, so the rule is that no locations are to be sent to the server? But what if we don't send coordinates to the server but process them locally? The coordinates never leave the user's device? That must be legal.

1.3k · August 19

9 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

Even crazier is that I asked the support about this twice and never got a clear answer. First I got a copy-paste and the second time they didn't respond at all.

You received a clear, non copy-paste answer the first time that you wrote in. You did not like the answer, so you wrote again. We generally don't engage in back-and-forth with people who don't like answers because it's not sustainable when our team answers hundreds of emails each day.

Besides the potential privacy issues related to mob caches, requiring several finders to gather in order to gain access to the cache is an Additional Logging Requirement, and will not be permitted.

Add it all up, and HQ is not interested in considering alternatives for mob caches at this time.

9.1k · August 20

I think that's the first I've heard of mob caches as an "ALR". I'd liken it to puzzle solving. And we all know you don't need to solve a puzzle to find a cache, at the very least if you attain the coordinates from someone else - and this can happen with mob caches too. Strictly speaking, I don't agree with it being classified as an ALR... It's still a cache that can be signed as long as you can find the container, regardless how it's done, and the log can be verified and locked from deletion if the CO disagrees with the 'how'.

I'm torn on the 'privacy' clause of using locations to solve puzzles. On one hand, it greatly reduced the variety of interactivity one can develop to solve puzzles for caches, but, on the other hand, it helps bring geocaching back to the core - use the information provided to find hidden containers without need to 'solve' fluff extra stuff... *shrug*

Maybe the removal of mob caches doesn't sit well because the reasoning doesn't seem to jive with the increasing promotion of adventure labs and smiley counts without finding geocaches... blah. But then it's kind of like streamlining geocaching to geocaching , while moving 'iffy' stuff to the AL platform; and that's fine; except for 'what does a find mean?'

Anyway, I'm starting to rant again :laughing: I'm on the fence on the loss of mob caches. I'll leave it at that

3k · August 20

On 8/19/2024 at 7:14 PM, Rock Chalk said:

requiring several finders to gather in order to gain access to the cache is an Additional Logging Requirement, and will not be permitted.

Gaining acces to the cache is an ALR. Does this include ladders also?

1.3k · August 21

2 hours ago, arisoft said:

Gaining acces to the cache is an ALR. Does this include ladders also?

I've yet to see a cache design that required 5-20 people to bring their ladders to a location in order for the cache's coordinates to appear on their smart phones.

Needing a ladder to reach a cache is an entirely different thing than needing several people to gather at a location in order to gain access to cache coordinates.

August 21

One person can bring five devices.

1.4k · August 21

On 8/19/2024 at 6:14 PM, Rock Chalk said:

requiring several finders to gather in order to gain access to the cache is an Additional Logging Requirement, and will not be permitted.

Oh really?

I have found many gadget caches, where it was physically impossible for a single person to retrieve the cache. E.g. you needed at least 3 hands, or you had to simultaneously operate two parts of the device, which were several meters apart. In all these cases, this was clearly indicated in the listing, and the cache had the "Teamwork required" attribute.

3k · August 21

19 hours ago, Rock Chalk said:

Needing a ladder to reach a cache is an entirely different thing than needing several people to gather at a location in order to gain access to cache coordinates.

I understand that this is different thing but I see that in both cases the acces to the cache is somehow restricted as originally stated. If we change this to gaining acces to the cache coordinates we are on a slippery slope.

Frankly, it would be the best just say that MOB caches are not allowed without trying to find an excuse to say so. Disallowing is OK - anything else just makes things difficult to sort out.

Edited August 21 by arisoft

6.2k · August 21

These two were also archived by GCHQ under the MOB cache rule, and they aren't even MOB caches, they require a number of people to open a web page and when the required number are on the page it gave them the final co-ords, so no ALR for finding the cache, no need for anyone to share their co-ords, just need to go to a publicly accessible web page.

https://coord.info/GC6DFME
https://coord.info/GC6DX5H

I think the bottom line here is GCHQ have made their decision, right or wrong, and they're unlikely to backtrack on it whatever we say or do.

9.1k · August 22

18 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

These two were also archived by GCHQ under the MOB cache rule, and they aren't even MOB caches, they require a number of people to open a web page and when the required number are on the page it gave them the final co-ords, so no ALR for finding the cache, no need for anyone to share their co-ords, just need to go to a publicly accessible web page.

Oh these kinds were also popular; gathering people from multiple countries to view a page at the same time - a great way to coordinate and meet people at the same time. A virtual mob, in a sense. Sad that this rule is also reaching to this setup...

18 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

I think the bottom line here is GCHQ have made their decision, right or wrong, and they're unlikely to backtrack on it whatever we say or do.

Aye. Like I said earlier, if they're getting back to 'just finding caches', then great; and yeah attempting to define a logical reason just opens a can of worms because if it's a 'new' clause people will extend it to SO many other similar experiences, and then either the ball will start rolling and we'll see oodles of archivals because they're forced to uphold consistency with application of the clause, or we just get "because" as a reason. Or, the rule is backtracked. But the latter is unlikely. IMO, better to just say the 'mob' setup is being disallowed, which has no bearing on setups that require teamwork, even if that's a reason in the clause.

But man... what does "Teamwork Required" mean now? Not really required, because that would be an ALR? =(

August 22

On 8/20/2024 at 2:14 AM, Rock Chalk said:

You received a clear, non copy-paste answer the first time that you wrote in. You did not like the answer, so you wrote again. We generally don't engage in back-and-forth with people who don't like answers because it's not sustainable when our team answers hundreds of emails each day.

Besides the potential privacy issues related to mob caches, requiring several finders to gather in order to gain access to the cache is an Additional Logging Requirement, and will not be permitted.

Add it all up, and HQ is not interested in considering alternatives for mob caches at this time.

This requires the cachers to be in different locations so it's okay?

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCAT18P

3k · August 22

Will this new decision affect events? Or at least MOB events?

August 22

6 hours ago, arisoft said:

Will this new decision affect events?

While I doubt it would be addressed, I could see how the MOB cache rules could be applied to events, at least tangentially.

"Can't share your location" on the surface would apply to two or more people getting together at the same location for an event. You are encouraging people to all meet at the same designated coordinate. No one is forcing these people to get together, but (taking the argument to the extreme) you are infringing on someone's privacy by knowing their location.

In regards to MOB caches, in the end, it was still a voluntary action. You had to "opt in" to sharing your location. To me this is considered consent. I never did a lot of them, but it was a nice ice breaker and I meet a few people through the process.

Edited August 22 by igator210

6.2k · August 22

9 hours ago, Team Canary said:

This requires the cachers to be in different locations so it's okay?

Sadly I think you may have just put that one in the cross-hairs, I wonder how long it will last now?

BTW I once did a Wherigo which required teams to be in 2 distant locations and to input the info at your location, it then generated a code based on the time and your location that you shared with the other team who input your code into their WIG, and you were both then presented with part of the final co-ords - it was great fun.

4.4k · August 23

As someone who caches alone, especially when travelling (when I do most of my caching), I can't do these.

My opinion of them 👿👿👿👿.

9.1k · August 23

As someone who doesn't have scuba gear, or a motor boat, or any knowledge of advanced electrical circuitry, amongst many other things, there are many geocaches I couldn't do alone. That's not really a reason for disallowing them.

7k · August 23

3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

As someone who caches alone, especially when travelling (when I do most of my caching), I can't do these.

My opinion of them 👿👿👿👿.

I've only done one, a 5/5 with widely-spread waypoints, one roadside at Coalcliff on the Illawarra coast south of Sydney, a kayaking one on Parramatta River in western Sydney, a swimming one in Sydney's eastern suburbs and one on Cockatoo Island in Sydney harbour. We had a group of at least seven doing it and, at the Illawarra waypoint, we had to co-opt a muggle to go to the mob website on her phone as a couple of our phones weren't playing nice with it. COVID struck in amongst our attempt so it ended up taking about two years to get to all the waypoints, but then GZ turned out to be in the middle of a fenced-off construction site so we had to wait another six months for that to be finished. Of course the cache went missing during the construction so we then had to wait for the CO to arrange a replacement. I think that one was enough for one lifetime, well it's going to have to be now, I guess.

4.4k · August 24

19 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I've only done one, a 5/5 with widely-spread waypoints, one roadside at Coalcliff on the Illawarra coast south of Sydney, a kayaking one on Parramatta River in western Sydney, a swimming one in Sydney's eastern suburbs and one on Cockatoo Island in Sydney harbour. We had a group of at least seven doing it and, at the Illawarra waypoint, we had to co-opt a muggle to go to the mob website on her phone as a couple of our phones weren't playing nice with it. COVID struck in amongst our attempt so it ended up taking about two years to get to all the waypoints, but then GZ turned out to be in the middle of a fenced-off construction site so we had to wait another six months for that to be finished. Of course the cache went missing during the construction so we then had to wait for the CO to arrange a replacement. I think that one was enough for one lifetime, well it's going to have to be now, I guess.

As someone who collects SideTracked caches, it's disappointing that the one I still have to find in Brisbane (whenever I get there next - may next year) is a mob cache, and that's one I will never be able to add to the collection.

August 26

On 8/24/2024 at 11:23 AM, Goldenwattle said:

As someone who collects SideTracked caches, it's disappointing that the one I still have to find in Brisbane (whenever I get there next - may next year) is a mob cache, and that's one I will never be able to add to the collection.

Still Active?

4.4k · August 26

1 hour ago, Team Canary said:

Still Active?

No idea. It was found in August, but how much help there was for that I don't know. GCA3ZVP

Need four players.

August 26

3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

No idea. It was found in August, but how much help there was for that I don't know. GCA3ZVP

Need four players.

Same tool as the one I linked to.

@Rock Chalk is that tool okay to use for Mob Caches?

MOB Caches - a new tool

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation