Cyber attacks in the OSM space

Something like that could make sense, but the problem is that the current notion of a ‘bounding box’ for changes in OSM only has a tenuous relation to the actual geographical extent of meaningful semantic change.
Simply adding a single node to a way causes the extent of the whole way to be added to the bounding box, which has the potential to be huge, even if the way itself has not been meaningfully changed in any way. The same applies to relations, where simply splitting a road could affect a continent-spanning route relation. Another source of big changeset bounding boxes are multiple small isolated edits with a large distance in between that are uploaded at the same time (e.g. StreetComplete changesets where a user makes some tiny changes to a POI, takes a flight halfway around the world and continues mapping there).
To do this properly, we would need to interpret the semantic content of changes and not just blindly count the affected OSM primitives. That is a huge challenge and an enormous amount of effort.

A simple check using the current bounding box definition could be of some use, but it would have to have very big continent-sized limits to keep the false positive rate down.

4 Likes