Scream cipher
31–40 of 112 posts
Re: Scream cipher
#32One could use emojis instead, then the message could be hidden in plain sight in places where emoji-spam is common.
Re: Scream cipher
#33... in the same sense that ROT13 or base64 would be a cipher.
Rot 13 is a cipher. It's a substitution cipher, and more specifically a shift cypher or Caesar cipher. It's not a secure cipher but it is one. Base64 is an encoding. It's an algorithm, no attempt at secrecy, thus not a cipher.
Re: Scream cipher
#34There are a little over 256 unicode Combining Marks that have a 2-byte UTF-8 encoding. I picked a set of them, defining an encoding I call zalgo256: https://gist.github.com/DavidBuchanan314/07da147445a90f7a049... Since an arbitrarily tall stack of combining characters still counts as one grapheme cluster, if some application limits string length by counting grapheme clusters then you can stuff an unlimited amount of…
Re: Scream cipher
#35https://xkcd.com/3054/
Re: Scream cipher
#36https://xkcd.com/3054/
Re: Scream cipher
#37Ảặậậ ạẵaạǡ ȧặaậậā ǎẩạặȧặǡạǎẩẳ, a áǎạ ầẫȧặ ằȁẩ ạẫ ȁǡặ ạẵaẩ ȦẪẠ13
Re: Scream cipher
#38Re: Scream cipher
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
And people are telling you yes, they (rot13 and base64) are indeed ciphers. What's the confusion?
What people in this thread call a "key" is, not like a key, auxiliary input data, but hard-coded into the program. We are looking at encodings. Maybe this differentiation is not popular or well accepted, but it was surely part of my cryptography curriculum and the following exam. I'd rather believe my prof than strangers on the internet.
Re: Scream cipher
#40One could use emojis instead, then the message could be hidden in plain sight in places where emoji-spam is common.
Emojis have a high overhead, a single emoji is typically 4 bytes but may be up to 35 bytes.