Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#2This article describes this as a "double transportation cipher" - which is incorrect. It's more correctly described in the article submitted nearly a week ago here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6960168
That also has a link to a more complete description:
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#3OT but 4MB sure is a lot for a static site.
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#4This article describes this as a "double transportation cipher" - which is incorrect. It's more correctly described in the article submitted nearly a week ago here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6960168 That also has a link to a more complete description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_transposition_cipher
"During World War I, the German military used a double columnar transposition cipher, changing the keys infrequently. The system was regularly solved by the French, naming it Übchi, who were typically able to quickly find the keys once they'd intercepted a number of messages of the same length, which generally took only a few days. However, the French success became widely known and, after a publication in Le Matin, the Germans changed to a new system on 18 November 1914. [1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_transposition_cipher#Do...
Courtesy of M. Édouard Snoden.
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#5OT but 4MB sure is a lot for a static site.
Came here to post this. Scrolling is a nightmare on this page. Why would you do this to your visitors? How would anybody still visit anyway?
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#6OT but 4MB sure is a lot for a static site.
Came here to post this. Scrolling is a nightmare on this page. Why would you do this to your visitors? How would anybody still visit anyway?
Times like this, am very thankful for Readability[1]
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#7This article describes this as a "double transportation cipher" - which is incorrect. It's more correctly described in the article submitted nearly a week ago here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6960168 That also has a link to a more complete description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_transposition_cipher
"During World War I, the German military used a double columnar transposition cipher, changing the keys infrequently. The system was regularly solved by the French, naming it Übchi, who were typically able to quickly find the keys once they'd intercepted a number of messages of the same length, which generally took only a few days. However, the French success became widely known and, after a publication in Le Matin,…
I think you meant: Mr. Édouard Neigedon.
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#8This article describes this as a "double transportation cipher" - which is incorrect. It's more correctly described in the article submitted nearly a week ago here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6960168 That also has a link to a more complete description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_transposition_cipher
"During World War I, the German military used a double columnar transposition cipher, changing the keys infrequently. The system was regularly solved by the French, naming it Übchi, who were typically able to quickly find the keys once they'd intercepted a number of messages of the same length, which generally took only a few days. However, the French success became widely known and, after a publication in Le Matin,…
Are we all Germans now?
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#9I don't know much about encryption - can someone explain why if this was considered so "unbreakable" it was abandoned as a method so long ago?
Re: Encryption enthusiast deciphers ‘Unsolvable’ WWI Encryption Code
#10I don't know much about encryption - can someone explain why if this was considered so "unbreakable" it was abandoned as a method so long ago?
Many codes are unbreakable (or are effectively so) if you only use them once, statistical attacks become possible with multiple messages. In this case if you send two messages of the same length with the same code both can be broken.
Also it's a rearrangement of the letters in the message. So a short message with distinct letters like 'Invade Pyatigorsk' could be easily cracked without knowing the code.