Pigeon's Last Message Mystifies British Codebreakers

Karloff

New member
Oct 19, 2009
6,474
0
0
Pigeon's Last Message Mystifies British Codebreakers



Without knowing who sent the message, and who it was sent to, this pigeon's final transmission may never be decoded.

When David Martin found the remains of a dead messenger pigeon in his chimney [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120479-Brit-Finds-Secret-Message-on-Dead-World-War-II-Carrier-Pigeon], the World War Two era coded transmission it carried in a canister on its leg was sent off to the best codebreakers the British have. Regrettably, the best just couldn't decipher the pigeon's final message. The Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) may never know whodunit, because it doesn't know who sent it.

Messages like these were top priority stuff, and encoded by the sender in such a way that, without access to the sender's codebooks, understanding the message is next to impossible. Use of what was called a one-time pad meant that a random key could be applied to the message, known only to the sender and the recipient. One-time meant that the key was used once only, for that one message. GCHQ doesn't know who sent it; it has no record of Sergeant W Stot, assumed to be the signatory. Without knowing who sent it, GCHQ can't know who it was intended to be sent to. No sender and no recipient means no key, and thus no way of understanding the pigeon's transmission.

Pigeons were tagged with the descriptor NURP and a number code, and two of those appear in the message. Tracing those numbers is GCHQ's next move. In the meantime GCHQ has asked that anyone with any information as to the identity of W Stot contact it.

There may yet be hope. "The most helpful suggestion we had through all of this," said a GCHQ researcher [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20456782], "was from a member of the public who suggested that, since the message was found in the chimney, the first two words were likely to be Dear Santa." So at least GCHQ has a lead, of sorts.

Source: GCHQ [http://www.gchq.gov.uk/Press/Pages/Pigeon-takes-secret-message-to-the-grave.aspx]


Permalink
 

Lvl 64 Klutz

Crowsplosion!
Apr 8, 2008
2,338
0
0
I'm gonna go with message from the future warning us of our own undoing and instructions on how to prevent it from ever happening.
 
Oct 2, 2012
1,267
0
0
I say its a message from the future by aliens telling us how to destroy ourselves so they can come and feast upon our delicious Human brains.
 

Sol_HSA

was gaming before you were born
Nov 25, 2008
217
0
0
> "without access to the sender's codebooks, understanding the message is next to impossible"

Next to?

Okay, granted, if you don't have access to the code book but have access to the procedure used to generate said code book, then yes, it's "next to impossible". Unless, of course, it's a proper procedure, in which case it is, again, absolutely impossible.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
1
0
Lvl 64 Klutz said:
I'm gonna go with message from the future warning us of our own undoing and instructions on how to prevent it from ever happening.
I'm guessing it says send more pigeons to be quite honest. Either that or it's saying to get that person outta there. XD
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,903
9,591
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
Obviously it says "Be sure to drink your Ovaltine".

Karloff said:
There may yet be hope. "The most helpful suggestion we had through all of this," said a GCHQ researcher [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20456782], "was from a member of the public who suggested that, since the message was found in the chimney, the first two words were likely to be Dear Santa."
Ah, that dry British wit.
 

Daaaah Whoosh

New member
Jun 23, 2010
1,041
0
0
Anyone else notice how on 'number of copies sent' it says 2? Doesn't that mean that there's another one of these out there somewhere, probably in the British Archives or something?
 

craddoke

New member
Mar 18, 2010
418
0
0
Here's a question: Even if they manage to ferret out the sender/recipient identities, does that mean they will be able to match the message up to the correct one-time pad? Based on my experience with historical archives, which were medieval and not modern I'll grant, I have my doubts about whether what is effectively ephemera were cataloged well enough to track down the necessary information (assuming anyone even bothered to preserve the pad needed).
 

Frezzato

New member
Oct 17, 2012
2,448
0
0
Sol_HSA said:
> "without access to the sender's codebooks, understanding the message is next to impossible"

Next to?

Okay, granted, if you don't have access to the code book but have access to the procedure used to generate said code book, then yes, it's "next to impossible". Unless, of course, it's a proper procedure, in which case it is, again, absolutely impossible.
HEAR HEAR for an insightful answer. One-time pads are randomly generated and unbreakable, and those five-digit letters definitely look like the work of a one-time pad.
 

Notsomuch

New member
Apr 22, 2009
239
0
0
On the bright side, the system works. Imagine you were all Nazi's and this was WW2. You wouldn't know what.
 

Wargamer

New member
Apr 2, 2008
973
0
0
Theoretically, couldn't we brute force this?

The codes must be built to a standard pattern, yes? So all we need is a computer to run every possible permutation of the coding algorithm and compare the results to a spell checker until it finds a word.
 

miketehmage

New member
Jul 22, 2009
396
0
0
Wargamer said:
Theoretically, couldn't we brute force this?

The codes must be built to a standard pattern, yes? So all we need is a computer to run every possible permutation of the coding algorithm and compare the results to a spell checker until it finds a word.
This. Computers suck at factorization which is what is needed to break encryption, but they will get there eventually. I don't believe for a second that the UK's BEST codebreakers are unable to decrypt this.

Brute force that *****!

Edit: There is no brute forcing OTP's apparently.
 

Kaymish

The Morally Bankrupt Weasel
Sep 10, 2008
1,256
0
0
yeah given that one time pads are generated by truly random sources for example radioactive elemental decay or atmospheric radio noise makes brute force ineffective some methods of one time pads makes even looking for sequences in the code itself pointless
also this is probably a low priority for the code breakers who are probably more interested in breaking the latest north Korean messages
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
miketehmage said:
Wargamer said:
Theoretically, couldn't we brute force this?

The codes must be built to a standard pattern, yes? So all we need is a computer to run every possible permutation of the coding algorithm and compare the results to a spell checker until it finds a word.
This. Computers suck at factorization which is what is needed to break encryption, but they will get there eventually. I don't believe for a second that the UK's BEST codebreakers are unable to decrypt this.

Brute force that *****!

Edit: There is no brute forcing OTP's apparently.
everything can be bruteforced. it jut takes more time as it is more complex. such lenght OTP would likely take a few million years with a standart server speeds.
 

medv4380

The Crazy One
Feb 26, 2010
672
4
23
As much as OTP are supposed to be un-crack-able. The Key is almost certainly 5 values of 1 - 26 for each block at worst. That's only 12 Million combinations for each block. It work take my computer no time at all to run all 12 million combinations. Only a few of them could have any meaning. Toss the ones that are actually English words into a table and any human being would be able to pick out the most likely or even obvious words. I know what I'm coding tonight.