John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
1–10 of 49 posts
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#2The diagram on page 14 (page 3 of the machine description) vaguely resembles a Markov model, which I could imagine would be useful for cryptanalysis, but I don't see how such a system would be reasonable for encryption or decryption if you have the keys. Am I misunderstanding the machine?
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#3Why do the generals refer to him as Mr. Nash? (and not Dr. Nash, or Prof. Nash)?
It's not like the military is not used to being precise about titles (i.e. ranks)
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#4The diagram on page 14 (page 3 of the machine description) vaguely resembles a Markov model, which I could imagine would be useful for cryptanalysis, but I don't see how such a system would be reasonable for encryption or decryption if you have the keys. Am I misunderstanding the machine?
The NSA's response said about the same thing, once you get to the end --- not interesting, not reasonable for encryption and decryption.
Interesting, I think, the statement that Nash's machine requires "comparatively" too much hardware. This implies the NSA did have auto-keying systems at the time that had higher security, and lower hardware burden.
Remember, in '55 we didn't have single-chip CPUs, we barely had practical transistors, we didn't have planar process circuits (invented in about '60 according to the computer history museum).
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/digital-logic/12/3...
Nash believed in helping the US keep its secrets safe, and exposing the secrets of the enemy. One thing to remember when you look at Snowden's papers exposing not just domestica activities but foreign activities.
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#5The diagram on page 14 (page 3 of the machine description) vaguely resembles a Markov model, which I could imagine would be useful for cryptanalysis, but I don't see how such a system would be reasonable for encryption or decryption if you have the keys. Am I misunderstanding the machine?
The NSA's response said about the same thing, once you get to the end --- not interesting, not reasonable for encryption and decryption. Interesting, I think, the statement that Nash's machine requires "comparatively" too much hardware. This implies the NSA did have auto-keying systems at the time that had higher security, and lower hardware burden. Remember, in '55 we didn't have single-chip CPUs, we barely had prac…
now that you mention it, the red threat of the 1950s and the civil rights movement are quite similar to the dangers posed by the American populace since 911.
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#6Why do the generals refer to him as Mr. Nash? (and not Dr. Nash, or Prof. Nash)? It's not like the military is not used to being precise about titles (i.e. ranks)
I could be wrong, but I believe that Princeton PhD's go by "mister" instead of "doctor."
Princeton considers itself a unique institution in this way. They do not accept transfer students, they do not have any professional degree programs, etc.
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#7Why do the generals refer to him as Mr. Nash? (and not Dr. Nash, or Prof. Nash)? It's not like the military is not used to being precise about titles (i.e. ranks)
I could be wrong, but I believe that Princeton PhD's go by "mister" instead of "doctor." Princeton considers itself a unique institution in this way. They do not accept transfer students, they do not have any professional degree programs, etc.
> I believe that Princeton PhD's go by "mister" instead of "doctor."
Would you have a reference for this? This is really interesting.
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#8Why do the generals refer to him as Mr. Nash? (and not Dr. Nash, or Prof. Nash)? It's not like the military is not used to being precise about titles (i.e. ranks)
I could be wrong, but I believe that Princeton PhD's go by "mister" instead of "doctor." Princeton considers itself a unique institution in this way. They do not accept transfer students, they do not have any professional degree programs, etc.
I can't find anything online supporting this.
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#9The diagram on page 14 (page 3 of the machine description) vaguely resembles a Markov model, which I could imagine would be useful for cryptanalysis, but I don't see how such a system would be reasonable for encryption or decryption if you have the keys. Am I misunderstanding the machine?
A Markov model can be represented as a finite state machine where transitions are probability driven (suppose I'm in a state 'a' and I can transition to state 'b' or 'c' where the probability of transitioning from 'a'->'b' is 30% and 'a'->'c' is 70%). The diagram on page 14 definitely looks like some sort of finite state machine but I don't know which classification it falls under. It doesn't switch states randomly so it's not a Markov chain.
Re: John Nash's letters to the NSA (1955) [pdf]
#10The diagram on page 14 (page 3 of the machine description) vaguely resembles a Markov model, which I could imagine would be useful for cryptanalysis, but I don't see how such a system would be reasonable for encryption or decryption if you have the keys. Am I misunderstanding the machine?
The NSA's response said about the same thing, once you get to the end --- not interesting, not reasonable for encryption and decryption. Interesting, I think, the statement that Nash's machine requires "comparatively" too much hardware. This implies the NSA did have auto-keying systems at the time that had higher security, and lower hardware burden. Remember, in '55 we didn't have single-chip CPUs, we barely had prac…
Today's generation is strongly detached from the military, I think that is why.
If everyone had a close family member or friend serving they would care more about the security of military operations.
Like it or not we have enemies still and need to maintain this secrecy to protect our country.