Bear vs. Ranger Rick... Advantage Bear - Real images from a bear's release gone bad.
Animals Breaking Through Racial Stereotypes - These animal couples are coming out of the closet. Further progress can be made against a code by collecting many codetexts encrypted with the same code and then using information from other sources
For example, a particular codegroup found almost exclusively in messages from a particular army and nowhere else might very well indicate the commander of that army. A codegroup that appears in messages preceding an attack on a particular location may very well stand for that location. Of course, cribs can be an immediate giveaway to the definitions of codegroups. As codegroups are determined, they can gradually build up a critical mass, with more and more codegroups revealed from context and educated guesswork. One-part codes are more vulnerable to such educated guesswork than two-part codes, since if the codenumber "26839" of a one-part code is determined to stand for "bulldozer", then the lower codenumber "17598" will likely stand for a plaintext word that starts with "a" or "b". At least, for simple one part codes.
Constructing a new code is like building a new language and writing a dictionary for u tube; it was an especially big job before computers. If a code is compromised, the entire task must be done all over again, and that means a lot of work for both cryptographers and the code users. In practice, when codes were in widespread use, they were usually changed on a periodic basis to frustrate codebreakers, and to limit the useful life of stolen or copied codebooks. Once codes have been created, codebook distribution is logistically clumsy, and increases chances the code will be compromised. There is a saying that "Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead," Benjamin Franklin - Wikiquote and though it may be something of an exaggeration, a secret becomes harder to keep if it is shared among several people. Codes can be thought reasonably secure if they are only used by xtube a few careful people, but if whole armies use the same codebook, security becomes much more difficult. In contrast, the security of ciphers is generally dependent on protecting the cipher keys. Cipher keys can be stolen and people can betray them, but they are much easier to change and distribute. In more recent practice, it became typical to encipher a message after first encoding it, so as to provide greater security by increasing the degree of difficulty for cryptanalysts. With a numerical code, this was commonly done with an "additive" - simply a long key number which was digit-by-digit added to the code groups, modulo 10. Unlike the codebooks, additives would be changed frequently. The famous Japanese Navy code, JN-25, was of this design, as were several of the (confusingly named) Royal Navy Cyphers used after WWI and into WWII. One might wonder why a code would be used if it had to be enciphered to provide security for you tube spoofs? As well as providing security, a well designed code can also compress the message, and provide some degree of automatic error correction. For ciphers, the same degree of error correction has generally required use of computers that make money from home. |
Heximania is a game that invites the whole family to a fun half-hour of strategic word play. Strategic word play. Family. These are ideas normally don't go together, but Heximania is simple enough for a first-grader to enjoy playing, and interesting enough to produce parental glee.
Various tricks can be used to "plant" or "sow" information into a coded message, for example by executing a raid at a particular time and location against an enemy, and then examining code messages sent after the raid. Coding errors are a particularly useful fingerhold into a code; people reliably make errors, sometimes disastrous ones. Of course, planting data and exploiting errors works against ciphers as well.