Cryptography Thread

[Anonymous No.5647050]

How come the Zodiac killer's cryptograms were never decrypted? Surely they can't be that complex. None of the best minds could crack it? Math guys, comp sci guys, hobbyists?

[Anonymous No.5647056]

>256-bit double-prime RSA encryption
No problem.

>Coded letters from a murderous basement dweller
Woah, too difficult

[Anonymous No.5647060]

>>5647050

They did.

[Anonymous No.5647063]

>>5647060
Only one of them, right? There are still several others that they weren't able to decode.

[Anonymous No.5647067]

You can't decrypt random nonsense. Same goes for the Voynich Manusript.

[Anonymous No.5647069]

>>5647067
You don't know whether it's random nonsense or nt.

[Anonymous No.5647071]

The first 480 cipher in 1969 was partially solved.

The second 340 cipher has yet to be definitively solved. In 1970 he sent a 13-character cipher following "My name is" and I don't think that was ever decoded either.

[Anonymous No.5647081]

>>5647050
>three instances of back-to-back plus signs

Anyone think + is o? ++ is oo?

aa, ee, ii, uu don't fit.

[Anonymous No.5647083]

>>5647069
That's the problem. But I think it makes sense if he mixed nonsense into his message, just to mess with peoples minds (to get attention). Besides that, judging how there are in any language letters that get more used than others, it might be a good idea to even the numbers out with meaningless stuff. Just a thought.

[Anonymous No.5647084]

>>5647069
The dude was a massive troll, it's just as likely to be actual code as nonsense.

[Anonymous No.5647100]

this fat nerd from MA claims to have cracked the 340

[Anonymous No.5647102]

How do you know he didn't use a different symbol for every character?

[Anonymous No.5647107]

>>5647102
Because the symbols repeat themselves?

[Anonymous No.5647108]

>>5647102
because it wouldn't encrypted, it would just be scrambled and unsolvable

he wanted someone to crack it.. maybe not the police,or the public, but someone... someone that he'd consider to be on par with his own intellect

[Anonymous No.5647118]

>>5647108
Solving an encrypted message is vastly more difficult than simply encrypting on though.

[Anonymous No.5647120]

>>5647108

or maybe he was just a troll

ever considered that

[Anonymous No.5647126]

>>5647100
What does it say?

[Anonymous No.5647131]

>>5647126

[Danuis No.5647133]

>>5647050

We should give aliens the Voynich shit.

If they can crack that, then, two birds with one stone - they'll know we're intelligent and we'll know what the fuck it means.

[Talimar No.5647134]

Run from the inner circle outwards. Taking the blue/red triangles, you can co-relate certain similar forms. So the "word" that is sideways in the inner section that is covered by a particular blue/red section will show up slightly modified around the circle that is on the opposite side...

Using the star quantities, and the "yellow thingies", you can also see a similar pattern, though it's less concise. (some kind of look like a mirror reflection, while others are not. A third type is a truncated value.)

[Anonymous No.5647147]

>>5647133
what's the significance of the Voynich manuscript? i'm not familiar with it.

why do people believe it even means anything important? just because it's old and can't be interpreted?

[Anonymous No.5647161]

>>5647147
Most people don't. The commonly accepted theory is that it's doesn't mean anything.

[Danuis No.5647170]

>>5647161

The throes of a defeatist! Everything can be solved if you have it at your fingertips!

[Anonymous No.5647174]

>the Voynich text includes Zodiac and star charts

What if the Zodiac killer used part of Voynich to create his ciphers?

[Anonymous No.5647177]

>>5647161
aliens

[Anonymous No.5647180]

>give aliens the Voynich shit

Has already been done.

[Anonymous No.5647269]

I've heard that the voynich manuscript was created by a young Da Vinci, and that it was forged by a nut named Edward Kelly

who knows

[Anonymous No.5647282]

>>5647269
I saw that video

[Anonymous No.5647340]

Are there any other uncracked encryptions like Voynich and the Zodiac ciphers?

[Anonymous No.5647347]

>>5647340
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptos

[Anonymous No.5647352]

>>5647347
Jim Sanborn, an artist, encrypted it? or someone else?

[Anonymous No.5647358]

>>5647352
Ed Scheidt

[Anonymous No.5647362]

/sci/ let's solve the Beale ciphers together and collect the ~$63 million treasure.

[Anonymous No.5647374]

>>5647340
Kryptos
the Shugborough inscription
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 90
the Beale ciphers
Ricky McCormick's encrypted notes
the Dorabella Cipher
the Blitz ciphers (probably a hoax)

[Anonymous No.5647382]

>>5647161
>>5647170
The most compelling evidence I've seen that it's a fake is that there are no "mistakes." Like not once in the entire thing is there any evidence that the author had to make a correction. It was obviously very common to screw up and use the equivalent of white-out to go back and fix it. There's not one place in the manuscript where that happened, so it seems likely that the author just made up some symbols and started throwing them down in random order.

[Anonymous No.5647384]

Why is decryption so much harder than encryption?

There's usually balance in nature.

[Anonymous No.5647391]

>>5647382
But it could've been a final draft, right? That type of parchment and ink was apparently very expensive in the 15th or so century. If it were me, I'd do all the work first on cheap separate paper before actually writing it on the parchment.

[Anonymous No.5647394]

>>5647131

>my name is Leigh Allen

[Anonymous No.5647397]

>>5647394
Arthur Leigh Allen?

[Anonymous No.5647409]

>>5647384
>why is hiding something easier than finding something hidden

[Anonymous No.5647408]

If you look at it long enough, you can see a sailboat.

[Anonymous No.5647423]

>>5647409
is harder to multiply or divide?

[Anonymous No.5647452]

>>5647423
> division isn't just multiplication
look at this decimal pleb

[Anonymous No.5647470]

>>5647452
>decryption isn't just encryption in reverse

[Anonymous No.5647504]

>>5647384

Decryption isn't harder than encryption if you have the method/key used to perform the decryption. In this case, it's not simply a matter of decrypting something, but first discovering the method/key of decryption then applying it.

This would be a "known ciphertext" attack, meaning the only information known is the ciphertext, and it is the most difficult type of attack on a cryptosystem because of the lack of information.

[Anonymous No.5647512]

Are there many jobs in cryptography? Do they only hire math majors? I'm comp sci.

[Anonymous No.5648939]

>>5647512
NSA, CIA

[Anonymous No.5649548]

We should have cryptography challenges.

Post our own cipher texts and see who can decrypt them.

[Anonymous No.5649555]

>>5649548
Or we can tackle these: >>5647374

A cryptography general could be pretty sweet.

[Anonymous No.5649578]

Its pretty trivially easy to come up with a cipher that can't be broken. All you need is a one-time pad.

Since there is no reason to think it is at all breakable, or meaningful, I personally wouldn't want to spend my time on it.

[Anonymous No.5650435]

>>5649578
What's a pad?

[Anonymous No.5650440]

The NSA has a declassified paper on the voynich manuscript where one of the guys hypothesized that it is related to icelandic or some shit.

[Anonymous No.5650451]

>>5650440
Yeah, what if it's just some really obscure language that died out centuries ago? Everybody assumes it must be some encrypted cool stuff.

[Anonymous No.5650496]

>>5650435
Go nuts
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/applied-math/cryptography

[Anonymous No.5650503]

Encrypting something simply takes seconds. Decrypting it can take years, even if you know the method they used.

Thats how encryption works. If it was too easy to decrypt, it wouldn't be so widely used to store secret info.

[Anonymous No.5651669]

>>5650496
but what's a pad?

[Anonymous No.5651723]

>>5647470
You didn't do what I think you just did, did you?

[Anonymous No.5651743]

>>5647056
Further proof that STEMs are autistic number crunchers who can't solve real-world problems.

[Anonymous No.5651794]

>>5651723
What do you think I just did? Done goofed?

[Anonymous No.5653060]

>remove all consonants
>arrange remaining vowels in alphabetical order

Original unbreakable code please don't steal.

[Anonymous No.5653681]

>>5647050
What if it was book cipher?

[Anonymous No.5653909]

>>5653060
>implying that's encryption and not just scrambling

[Anonymous No.5654028]

its upside-down the zodiac symbol should go at the top.

[Anonymous No.5654094]

>>5647081
>three instances of back-to-back plus signs

>Anyone think + is o? ++ is oo?

You (or anybody else to whom this occurred) try reading up on some elementary ideas behind private key cryptography. In particular the idea of a substitution cipher and a Vigenere cipher.

The conclusion you should come to is that if the unsolved Zodiac cipher was simply an example of the former (or even the latter) and security/cryptography experts couldn't crack it then clearly they are fucking morons that never should have been hired in the first place.

[Anonymous No.5654119]

If it was a one-time pad then it's unbreakable.

[Anonymous No.5654128]

>>5647174
why is nobody acknowledging this man??

[Anonymous No.5654322]

>>5654119
but why would Mr. Zodiac use a one-time pad when he clearly wanted all of his ciphers to be cracked by worthy minds?

[Anonymous No.5654341]

any good books about cryptology? want to learn how to do this

[Anonymous No.5654343]

>>5654341
The Khan Academy playlist should cover the basics really well

[Anonymous No.5654347]

Because who gives a shit. I mean if it's the same guy who wrote >>5647060, it's just bullshit rambling.

[Anonymous No.5654352]

I cracked the Zodiac, where do I collect my paycheck?

[Anonymous No.5655563]

>>5647394
>>5647397
Woah, he might have just wanted to frame the guy tho.

[Anonymous No.5655564]

>>5654352
In your fantasy world.