Slashdot Mirror
Another Hint For Kryptos
rastos1 writes Four years ago Jim Sanborn, the sculptor who created the wavy metal pane called Kryptos that sits in front of the CIA in Langley revealed a clue for breaking the last remaining part of the encrypted message on Kryptos. The clue was: BERLIN.
But the puzzle resisted all all decryption efforts and is still unsolved.
To honor the 25th anniversary of the Wall's demise and the artist's 69th birthday this year, Sanborn has decided to reveal a new clue to help solve his iconic and enigmatic artwork. It's only the second hint he's released since the sculpture was unveiled in 1990 and may finally help unlock the fourth and final section of the encrypted sculpture, which frustrated sleuths have been struggling to crack for more than two decades. The next word in the sequence is: "clock."
The artist is 69...
I hope he wrote the solution in his will because at this rate the encryption will outlive him.
Actually maybe I don't. It would be also amusing to have a cypher-sculpture in front of CIA headquarters that never gets solved.
...to drink your Ovaltine".
Because cracking the code is a rewarding achievement unto itself? You sound like a highly unimaginative workaholic who can't comprehend why someone would do something purely for the novelty, entertainment or pure enjoyment of the act itself. To you, everything must have some sort of tangible reward such as a paycheck or prize. I feel sad for you. I mean, why do you bother to live? For what purpose? Clearly you find no satisfaction here, aside from working for a paycheck.
Try pointing out the positive aspects. You also sound negative. You;d rather point out the negative aspects of another's comments than explain what gives you joy.
The first fucking sentence was the positive aspect.
Actually, the NSA cracked the first 3 of the 4 coded messages themselves, but didn't go public with it until a member of the public had found the solution. Or they claim they did, anyway . . .
1st letter -= length * 2;
Using the ASCII table as a reference http://www.ascii-code.com/:
NYPVTT berlin
N - (6 * 2) = B
MZFPK clock
M - (5 * 2) = C
I'am probably miles off, but, gave me something to do for 10 minutes.
Be sure to drink your Ovaltine
It doesn't give me joy. Which would be why I'm not working on it. That doesn't mean someone else won't find it rewarding and hence positive.
They are looking at this puzzle the wrong way - the $5 wrench attack would get them some fast results!
That's it? Seriously that''s not enough for many people.
That's why many people aren't working on it.
But for people who do enjoy that kind of thing, it sure beats watching TV or hanging out at a bar.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
There are lots of pressing problems.
Cyphers, as opposed to codes, have well-defined functions (be it an algorithm or a lookup table) which map the input to the output. The same functions are applied in the same way across the entire input. Unless the functions are such that the output is truly indistinguishable from a random oracle (or, indeed, any other Oracle product), information is exposed, both information about the message and information about the method for producing the cyphertext. Since randomness can tell you nothing, by definition, the amount of information exposed cannot exceed the the information limit proposed by Shannon for a channel whose bandwidth is equal to the non-randomness of the output.
(A channel is a channel is a channel. The rules don't care.)
So, obviously you want to know how to get at the greatest amount of the unencrypted data that's encoded in the non-randomness, and how do you actually then extract the contents?
In other words, is there a general purpose function that can do basic, naive cryptanalysis? And what, exactly, can such a function achieve given a channel of N bits and a message of M bits?
In other words, how much non-randomness can a cypher have before you definitely know there's enough information leakage in some arbitrary cypher for the most naive cryptanalysis possible (excluding brute-force, since that's not analytical and isn't naive since you have to know the cypher) to be able to break the cypher in finite time? (Even if that's longer than the universe is expected to last.)
Is there some function which can take the information leakage rate and the type and complexity of the cypher to produce a half-life of that class of cyphers, where you can expect half of a random selection of cyphers (out of all cyphers with the same characteristics) to be broken at around that estimated half-life point?
If you can do that, then you know how complex you can make your cypher for a competition page, and how simple you can afford it when building a TrueCrypt replacement.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
My guess is that e.g. the "BER" is from numBER or novemBER or somesuch. I have no idea if the LINC computer was important enough to be immortalised here. However, no luck looking for quotations with e.g. octoBER LINC LOCK... etc.
God doesn't even exist, you brainless fucktard.
Has anyone taken a shovel to the coordinates in part 2?
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
I am a girl, you insensitive clod.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Then clearly we're dealing with a "Berlin clock sucker". :P :P :P
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
"The clock on the wall..." Damn, I'm out of time.
"in berlin the doomsday clock is forgotten on this day"
it's something like that.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
For someone supposedly so imaginative, you sure jump to conclusions. You really can't see any other perspective than your own? That's so sad that you live in such a tiny world. I feel sad for you.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
If you can do that, then you know how complex you can make your cypher for a competition page, and how simple you can afford it when building a TrueCrypt replacement.
Come on, there's an arbitrary number of formulas that could be used to encode the next bit. If you look at a sequence 1 3 5 7 and ask what's the next number most people would answer 9. Then the answer is "11, because it's the odd numbers excluding squares like 3*3 = 9" and people would go "How the f*ck should I know that?" and there's no analytic function that says how "weird" your formula is. You're just making a guess of how long it'd take before someone tries a formula like this, it could be in five minutes or fifty years.
Also, a cypher would be all but useless for building a TrueCrypt replacement because the secret is in the algorithm, not the key. Everyone with the software would have the cypher, it only works if that's a shared secret between you and the one you want to communicate with. Modern cryptographic software is built on the assumption that the algorithm is so strong that it doesn't matter unless the attacker has the key. Why create anything less, unless you plan to do it by hand?
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Come on, there's an arbitrary number of formulas that could be used to encode the next bit. If you look at a sequence 1 3 5 7 and ask what's the next number most people would answer 9. Then the answer is "11, because it's the odd numbers excluding squares like 3*3 = 9" and people would go "How the f*ck should I know that?" and there's no analytic function that says how "weird" your formula is. You're just making a guess of how long it'd take before someone tries a formula like this, it could be in five minutes or fifty years.
No, people would then ask "Why is 1 in the list then since 1*1 = 1?"
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Girls don't exist online either!
G.I.R.L. = Guy In Real Life
Link to image for those unaware: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...