

GCHQ code-breaking challenge cracked by Google search - rshm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/03/gchq_code_crack_compo_snafu/

======
DanBC
The Register links to a Sophos blog, which links to this site:

([http://www.alwaysbetesting.co.uk/seo/how-to-crack-the-
gchq-c...](http://www.alwaysbetesting.co.uk/seo/how-to-crack-the-gchq-code-
breaking-competition-using-google/))

Since the reg is notoriously unreliable it's probably a good idea to follow
the guidelines:

> _Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they
> found on another site, submit the latter._

------
AlexMuir
The success page is about as uninspiring as it gets, and I can't see that
people who actually solved this problem would stand out from all other
applicants - it just funnels into the same application process.

<http://canyoucrackit.co.uk/soyoudidit.asp>

~~~
politician
"So you did it. Well done! Now this is where it gets interesting. Could you
use your skills and ingenuity to combat terrorism and cyber threats? As one of
our experts, you'll help protect our nation's security and the lives of
thousands. Every day will bring new challenges, new solutions to find – and
new ways to prove that you're one of the best."

It's funny that they go for ego-stroking rather than for something that baits
_people who are smart enough to crack an encryption scheme_. It reads like
typical Go Army marketing.

~~~
pbsd
Not sure why you're dissociating ego-stroking from "smart enough to crack an
encryption scheme". Ego-stroking works pretty well, and if you look at most of
the cryptographers out there, they're not doing it for the money.

------
nodata
Except at the interview it will quickly become apparent if you don't know
enough about cryptography.

~~~
mukyu
The contest did not do that either considering it was more about x86 assembly.

