It seems the rules are controlled by those in power and and a lot of gamesmanship is going on to try gain advantage. Is this fair racing or something else? Do the people setting the rules get the cars telemetry data during the race? I can see a lot possibilities with engine management software to make the cars appear to under perform and with some tweaking they suddenly come to life.
There is a lot of gamesmanship. Everyone lobbies all the time. This year is probably worse than others because Ford wants to win LM, and everyone wants to stop them, so it's unlikely you'll see real flat out performance until June, and in the meantime everyone will say this and that is unfair. There's a lot of grumbling that the GT is a cheater car, which I find dumb because building a road car that is racy isn't cheating any more than building a race car based-off a 4,500 lb BMW M6 is.
Yes, they have Bosch data loggers that cost about $18,000 per car in every car. It is obvious when drivers aren't driving flat out (IMSA claimed literally every car in the field was sandbagging at the test prior to Daytona) and there's minimal sandbagging to be done through calibration. If they think you aren't running as hard as you can or your car is too fast at baseline, you get what the GT has, which is 20-30kg of ballast and a power reduction.
You can see below, the GT has been made the heaviest car in the field, and it's maximum boost pressure ratio is lower than the 488 (which obviously doesn't tell the whole story, but we know they reduced the GTs power relative to the IMSA cars). That makes yesterday's result unsurprising. What is surprising is that this was the table for the test at Circuit Paul Ricard, the FIA looked at everything and chose not to change anything for the Silverstone race. 488 was faster at Prologue, no changes were made, no shock 488 was faster at the actual race.