unforum

[DJ FreeMason]

[Dranioth]

I warn you, Have you're trouts at the ready!

I was thinking. Is it possible that the messages are double, or possibly triple encrypted? What's i'm getting at is that They messages are first encrypted with some random cipher, Lets go with an ROT 13. Then, using those scrambled letters, they are once again encrypted with another type of cipher? Perhaps then those letters are anagrammed or something, but If that's the case, without the key wouldnt it be impossible to solve?

[TekkiBreki]

If the cipher is solitaire, we don't have to worry about double or triple or n-tuple encryption. I played around with Schneier's algorithm and found some stuff out. Solitaire is cyclical with period 26. If you run a plaintext through the encryption, then take the resulting ciphertext and encrypt it, you will be two steps around a circle with 26 positions, rather than two levels up or down. If you recursively encrypt 24 more times, you'll get the plaintext you started with. It's like spinning the dial on a combination lock.

Just as you can spin the dial clockwise or counterclockwise, you can run a plaintext or ciphertext through the decryption process 26 times and end up where you started.

An interesting thing I did find was at the 13th pass or 12th recursion or halfway 'round the dial or whatever you want to call it, there will be short strings of original input present in the output.

[arnezami]

Regarding double encryption. I believe it just may have been used. But not in the normal sense of the way (which TekkiBreki suggested).

Here is how they might have created the puzzle:

Lets say you have a plaintext:

[arnezami]

This is a question to those that have the card.

I was wondering how exactly the groups of 5 and the group of 3 letters are positioned.

Is it like this:

[poozle]

None of the lines actually line up, it looks almost as though the second line's text is slightly larger to fit a slightly smaller ammount of text on the same line.

[arnezami]

[doublecross]

Shuffled brainstorming session!

[DJ FreeMason]

9 PM UK time... That would be what 4 PM EST? How long is it going to go for, an hour, 2? If the former, I won't be able to make it, I work until about 5, if the latter, I'll be able to make the last hour.

Actually, using the idea of junk characters that arnezami suggested, that would give us a possibility of how to solve it. If the characters are junk and are all the same, we can subtract the two values using the "(A+K)-(B+K)=A-B" equation. I've been goofing around with it and it might provide an answer. Even the first disappearing 10 characters bounded on the initial 10 characters might, given the same cipher, could possibly provide an answer. That is making a huge assumption that they are the same encryption protocol.

I'll see what I can come up with. It's going to be a long day. I'm punching away at the 13th Labour duckiemonster puzzle as well as my usual cryptic crossword. I'm a puzzle fanatic.

[bertyb]

Re: Shuffled brainstorming session!

[beglee]

Re: Shuffled brainstorming session!

[baf]

[BrianEnigma]

[justdig]

Please don't trout me for asking, but has there actually been a concerted effort at finding anagrams in the "If entropy..." message yet? I know people have mentioned it before, but has anybody spent any length of time actually trying to find anything? The name "Shuffled", combined with the apparent necessity for a key that we just don't have, combined with that apparently meaningless, oddly-worded phrase have all convinced me that an anagram is very likely.

EDIT: While I think of it, I'd also like to bring to light that the Solitaire Cipher is actually quite an assumption. As previously mentioned, the text not being in blocks of 5 is a little odd for the Solitaire, and the number of characters being exactly divisible by the number of cards in a deck would surely indicate some other playing-card related method. Also, the hint in the Sentinel about it needing to be "reframed" or something would indicate that most people are set in a view that's not correct. I know that this has also been mentioned before, but it doesn't seem to be receiving all that much consideration.

[bertyb]