

The Code Even the CIA Can't Crack  - mlLK
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/17-05/ff_kryptos

======
arjunnarayan
The reason the code's not broken - because the CIA don't need it broken. This
is what happens when the CIA needs a code broken: <http://xkcd.com/538/>

------
zandorg
What I can't crack is how this ended up in Wired magazine twice!

------
tptacek
Oh god please make it stop.

Kryptos : Cryptography :: Astrology : Astronomy.

~~~
Gompers
"Sanborn [the artist] named his proposal after the Greek word for _hidden_."

~~~
tptacek
It's not Sanborn's fault, I know.

------
nickb
That's because CIA sucks at cryptanalysis. NSA on the other hand...

~~~
jedc
I've heard the NSA's got a computer or two that work reasonably well on stuff
like this...

~~~
tptacek
That's like saying the NSA's got a computer or two that would work reasonably
well at solving the Saturday New York Times Crossword Puzzle. I'm sure they
do.

------
kqr2
If it used a one time pad properly, it's in theory uncrackable.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_time_pad>

 _If the key is truly random, never reused in whole or part, and kept secret,
the one-time pad provides perfect secrecy_

~~~
falsestprophet
Or if he made a mistake (because he has no idea what he is doing), it is
uncrackable.

~~~
kirubakaran
When I was a kid, I had this idea that I was excited about, that I'll write
meaningless codes in pieces of paper and strategically place them to drive
people who try to figure out crazy. People just didn't care.

------
demallien
Well, if Yahoo ever decides that a strategy for distracting Google is needed,
we now know how. Plop one of these down out the front of Google in the middle
of the night. By mid-afternoon the next day, the Googleplex will no longer be
functioning :-)

<http://xkcd.com/356/>

------
jibiki
The last part is probably a Tara Ploughman quote.

------
carterschonwald
Maybe the entropy/ structure ratio for the last block of stuff is such that
there are multiple valid looking decryptions?

------
rrhyne
I bet it's gibberish, like the artist was giving the spooks something to work
on besides world domination once in a while.

~~~
otto
The artist has done other sculptures that have been solved, and the first 3
parts have been solved. So I doubt it is gibberish.

If you are interested you might check out Elonka's website:
<http://elonka.com/kryptos/>

She's given talks all over the country on Kryptos.

------
knightinblue
If anyone ever decides to make a list of the top 10 perfect examples for an HN
article, put this on there.

~~~
Tichy
Why? I don't think I learned anything from that article. Trying to decode an
artists random encoding seems like a huge waste of time to me.

~~~
knightinblue
Of course. If it seems like a huge waste of time to you, then is must be the
same for everyone else as well.

First, Sanborn didn't create a random encoding. He worked with a renowned CIA
cryptologist to come up with this, so there's a rhyme and reason.

Second, it's the _idea_ of it all, the effort it takes to break a code and
figure out its innards. To me, that counts as one of the perfect examples of
hackerdom.

~~~
Tichy
I just don't see the use for it - presumably one could create a random number
generator to generate all sorts of codes, and have all hackers be occupied
indefinitely? There are so many open problems whose solution would actually
increase the body of human knowledge.

Still, if you want to play, play. It probably is a good problem to practice
cryptography with.

