“This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
history.stackexchange.com
“This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
1–10 of 144 posts
Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#2Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#3Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#41. https://archive.org/details/Fm3440.2BasicCryptAnalysis/mode/...
Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#5Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#6Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#7Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#8As a child I learned about codes from a library book. Fascinated with one-time pads, I convinced a friend to try a correspondence. We exchanged a few messages, and then got bored, because the juice wasn’t worth the squeeze.
Which makes me wonder about people who work in secrets. Encrypted communications seem opposite of scientific communications. Secrets peeps seem prolly aligned to politics.
Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#9This is a familiar concept from reading about WW2 spy stuff (Between Silk and Cyanide, for example, which I highly recommend). But what REALLY intrigues me is the typeface of the letter with its upper-case 'E' used in place of 'e'. What's up with that?
The suggestion that it may have been a striker from a bilingual - cyrillic typewriter that was mixed in is an interesting possibility; someone transcribing diplomatic telegrams in WWII may indeed have need of access to Cyrillic typewriters…
Re: “This telegram must be closely paraphrased before being communicated to anyone”
#10I would imagine that the paraphrasing wouldn't be necessary in this case because it isn't quite as useful to compare two encrypted versions of the text versus an encrypted version and an unencrypted version (also I feel like there is some risk of a game of 'telephone' in that the meaning would change bit by bit to the point of having a different meaning over time, even if not intentionally)