HappyScrappy... Code... whomever - decrypt this =)

[strongchick]

Cryptonomicon.

 

[HappyScrappy]

Cryptonomicon.

while that was an excellent book - that doesn't fit his 1.5 rule.

although I assume you were referring to the war time stealing of codes.

I love that book - hell, I love all neal stephenson's books

 

[Warik]

if it is 1.5 times longer, then some chars are substituted with multiple - meaning A could map to +< or watever.

One character is not necessarily mapped to multiple characters. As a matter of fact, the funny part is, there is NO padding involved in the encryption. I'm not having the word "Hello" and then adding in letters everywhere and then smudging it all up and then adding in more bullshit. =)

meaning if your message were two pages long, and as fonz says - not a one time pad, then it would be easy to break in a matter of minutes if feasible.

OK... if I encrypt my last Philosophy paper (7 pages double spaced 12pt font) with the same method, will you try to break it? =)

-Warik

 

[Warik]

a one time pad is a random arrangement of characters, and then you map the message to those chars.
then to decrypt it you need that exact pad.

There is absolutely no randomness associated with the arrangement of the characters.

-Warik

 

[HappyScrappy]

One character is not necessarily mapped to multiple characters. As a matter of fact, the funny part is, there is NO padding involved in the encryption. I'm not having the word "Hello" and then adding in letters everywhere and then smudging it all up and then adding in more bullshit. =)



OK... if I encrypt my last Philosophy paper (7 pages double spaced 12pt font) with the same method, will you try to break it? =)

-Warik

hmmm - interesting - not sure how the encrypted text can be longer if it has no padding, or doesn't map in a non one-to-one ratio...

and yes - the longer, the easier it is - can run statistical models on it.
which wouldn't do jack if it is a one time pad.

 

[Warik]

hmmm - interesting - not sure how the encrypted text can be longer if it has no padding, or doesn't map in a non one-to-one ratio...

and yes - the longer, the easier it is - can run statistical models on it.
which wouldn't do jack if it is a one time pad.

Ok... let me write a PHP crypter really quickly... I did that last one by hand and it was annoying. No way I'm encrypting a 7 page paper by hand.

-Warik

 

[HappyScrappy]

this is interesting - maybe Code can point out where I'm not thinking.
but if something encrypted is 1.5 longer than the orignial.
then there are two options, data was added, or there is a non-one-to-one mapping.
you say that there was no data added.

so that means there can't be a one to one mapping.

for instance:
ACBDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
PQRSTUVWXYZACBDEFGHIJKLMNO

those map one to one - if I write HappyScrappy, it works out to the same size encrypted or not.

whereas if I do what you did, and use what looks to be the first 128 chars or so of the ascii set - then like I said, it would be possible that $$ maps to A, and % maps to B - you don't know what goes where.
not saying that makes it impossible - just makes it harder.

 

[Crazier]

What the fuck are you nerds talking about?!?!
--

 

[Warik]

this is interesting - maybe Code can point out where I'm not thinking.
but if something encrypted is 1.5 longer than the orignial.
then there are two options, data was added, or there is a non-one-to-one mapping.
you say that there was no data added.

so that means there can't be a one to one mapping.

for instance:
ACBDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
PQRSTUVWXYZACBDEFGHIJKLMNO

Bwahaha!

You are correct, there was no data added. I didn't take "Hello," turn it into "3324H32ejkljllggho" and then encrypt it or vice-versa.

As for one-to-one mapping, meaning "Letter X stands for letter Y and only letter Y," you're right, there will be none of that here.

But to answer what you're probably thinking, no, I did not sit down and arbitrarily decide "Ok... $$ = A and * = X and $#@!# = the number 5." There is a relatively simple method involved and the only mathematics involved is a simple addition that can be done mentally by a grade-schooler.

-Warik

 

[HappyScrappy]

There is a relatively simple method involved and the only mathematics involved is a simple addition that can be done mentally by a grade-schooler.

-Warik

damn - then I'm out.

haha.

this sounds surprisingly like the code that Code posted (enigma simplified) - but his is more complex underneath - this one I just need to sit down with (since it is known that it is english underneath, and you claim it isn't a one time pad...).