Register

Dissected

Moderators: Aud8us, Michael Butterfield

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 1346
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:47 pm
Location: Earth, mostly.

Re: Dissected

Postby smithy » Sun Aug 12, 2012 1:09 pm

IMO doesn't mean anything, since any substitution cipher will start with a sequence of seperate symbols - how many there are in an unbroken row is a function of how many substitution characters there are, and what the text is. That's about it.

(The last 18 of the 408 are of course filler. I think the last 14 of the 340 are too. I might even be right).

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:08 pm

Yes I don't think it means anything either Smithy at least in relation to the number 18 or any connection to the 408.

Dave, that is an interesting difference between the 408 and the 340 in regards the amount of non repeating symbols. I'm not sure what to derive from it but any difference is good in my opinion from the point of having something to look at.

I've been pondering the whole nature of "solutions" as presented by people over the years and my own "go's" at it. I was wondering if there's a pattern in them. I don't even mean a pattern that leads to a solution but maybe a pattern that can be discerned that leads people to these solutions. For instance do the majority of the compelling words fall within these areas of non repeating symbols because they are easier to fit there. Is this why there are so many varying solutions because those symbols allow that freedom.

I often end up seeing patterns when working with ZDK and doing a little pass the time plugging. I start with 340 uni plus and let it run. Then I will pick a word or a few words that read as English and not some stunted cryptic speak. I will either lock them or complete them and lock them then start it again and see what it does and I will often work backwards removing locks one at a time and see where that takes me. I have found many interesting combinations but the eternal quandary comes into play, when does interesting become compelling?

Do any of these initial stage decoding mean anything? By initial I mean the approach I described above and I call it initial because I think we're all pretty sure this isn't a straightforward substitution cipher so is any of that sort of approach even valid. Is there a pattern there of substitution showthru from part of the encoding process? Is that even possible or is it likely just a byproduct of ZDK trying to work out a substitution from a bunch of symbols that might not even be substitutions?

The whole thing where people anagram or derive two words from what appears to be a combination of those words in the plaintext. I see that all the time in the 340 when I'm messing with it. The weird thing is that it is almost readable but I've found that many times with many different attempts and saying many different things. I guess that's what I mean about a pattern. ZDK doesn't solve the 340 but what if it is taking us as far as it can and if so is there anything to be gleamed from that stop point no matter the plaintext reads.

Eh, I know I'm asking stuff that's most likely been debated and too beyond my paygrade to figure out quickly. Just musing out loud. I'll post one of my last attempts here to illustrate the point when I'm done re installing my system - don't ask. It's a good one - mentions Toschi by name and profession, a chess move, shooting a cabbie, presidio heights and then if you're feeling creative it may talk about bandages, being mistaken about something to do with presidio heights and possibly sitting at a cremation unnoticed and those bits would be an example of partial words or letters that look like they could be anagrammed.

The point would be for someone smarter than me to show why it doesn't matter how interesting it appears.
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Tue Aug 14, 2012 7:15 pm

Here we go.

I'm not posting it as an attempt as such but more as an example of how lots of interesting words can appear. As mentioned above I started with uniplus 340 and as something appeared I would lock it if it was interesting enough. I think this one started with what looked like "forced the queen back" then probably the "io" in presidio and I plugged that in then ZKD came up with cabbie on it's own and possibly even some of the letters from heights. The first like I can't remember but it came in pretty close to toschi the copedo and then copoffee. I just reduced it to cop. Sonoma was something like onona maybe. "The shame is" was as is.

toschi-output.jpg
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:38 am

Could be a new saying for such partials. Ah, gay dirt I see, good try lol.
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:50 am

doranchak wrote:"if yuo can raed tihs, you hvae a sgtrane mnid, too.
Can you raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it."


Yeah I knew about that. I didn't know that it was only 55 out of a 100 though, I thought most people could read it but apparently not then. Can't decide if it's a help or a hindrance though when it comes to staring at the 340 and it's many, many partials. Good I suppose if there's something in it of that nature to be found, not so useful if there isn't.
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Sun Aug 19, 2012 8:07 pm

If you mean gibberish interspersed with words in English then I totally agree. Most partials look like that tho lol.
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:24 pm

Found this a nice little succinct thing on the 408 construction.

http://ovo127.com/2011/02/05/trevor-bla ... explained/
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Dissected

Postby traveller1st » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:26 pm

Found this a nice little succinct thing on the 408 construction.

http://ovo127.com/2011/02/05/trevor-bla ... explained/
"I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb."

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 1346
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:47 pm
Location: Earth, mostly.

Re: Dissected

Postby smithy » Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:31 am

Trav - that's not a bad little thing on the construction. May I ask - and smack me if it sounds cheeky - did you need it? I don't think you did, did you? The reason I ask is if I'd thought something like that was necessary I'd have tried to come up with something like it, and it has me thinking how much we take all the basic knowledge we need about the 408 for granted now, after all these (*ahem*) years looking at it. Eek!
Another thing about it is that it's wrong, or at least incomplete, of course, since it doesn't talk about symbol assignments against usual frequency, and implies that the Z. cycled through the substitution characters accurately all the way through the 408 when he didn't, for instance.
Or perhaps I'm just being a stoopid pedant.
I'd be grateful for your opinion, and perhaps Dave-O should chip in here - when it comes to quantifying and defining/explaining, he's surely the man...

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 1346
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:47 pm
Location: Earth, mostly.

Re: Dissected

Postby smithy » Wed Aug 22, 2012 2:00 am

doranchak wrote:Interesting observation, trav. I dunno what to make of it. If you skip the first 5 symbols, there's an even larger series of non-repeating symbols:

ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage

29 symbols with no repeats. And the 2nd half has several big chunks that have few repeats. So, it's hard to say where the killer truly began assigning symbols. It's still interesting to me that the 408 started with many repeats, a much different arrangement than the 340.


D., I need to reiterate here for posterity. "any substitution cipher will start with a sequence of seperate symbols - how many there are in an unbroken row is a function of how many substitution characters there are, and what the text is." The 408 started showing repeats early because the "L's" repeated (the guy liked kiLLing), and his little ETAOIN SHRD scheme didn't L as well as it should have to compensate, because he didn't count the actual characters used in the plain text, he used a simple maths calculation against what would be "normal" in 408 characters, I'm sure. It's not hard to say where he started assigning symbols, either, since he started at the beginning! So there!

(And dropping the first five symbols of the 340 to find the longest unbroken run? That's just naughty. It's like saying "Except for the ones that repeat, there are an awful lot that don't repeat!" So there, again.)

I suspect we could define a result "length of unbroken string of symbols in cipher text" contributed to by variables "number of symbols" and "number of repeating characters in the plain text" if so inclined, no?
If we had such a "scale" to hand, we might be able to run it over a cipher like the 340 and say "Ah ha! In the first half where he rambles on about killing and shall'ing and collecting a lot, we get strings which get shorter - then when he changes the subject to gardening in the Presidio and playing on the swings, in the second half of the cipher, we get a similar result". Maybe.
(Modified by a misspelling factor and a number of mistakes guesstimate of course. Oh dear,my poor head.)

Am I ranting this morning? I think I'll go get a coffee. :shock:

PreviousNext

Return to November 8, 1969: The 340-symbol Cipher

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests