Hacks, Kludges & Other Such Tomfoolery

[JBookup]

Forgive me for my confidence. It is truly foolishly placed seeing as how this is my first attempt at writing an encryption algorithm. One that is only 26 keys none the less. And as I think about this brute force method I fear I may be beaten. But I remain confident that on a 256 key scale the brute force method would be ineffective. But once again let me reitterate I do not know what I am talking about. This is merely speculation based on the very little knowledge that I have. And as a side note about myself my limited knowledge will not stop me from making assumptions or from drawing conclusions. Although I may often be mistaken, I never stop. For it is from those mistakes that I learn the truth.

[Junkenstein]

Right, you're growing on me. You've got a lot to read up on though, I think you may be a little shocked at how much effort has been devoted to breaking significantly more complicated encryptions.

So, tell us about yourself. Thread was being used for little else anyway.

[JBookup]

I am fully aware of the effort. I also remember a time when an encryption was put out to be decyrpted and the person that ended up cracking it after I think a couple years had ended up saying it was one of the most simple encryptions they ever saw. Not that mine is dynamically complex or anything. It seems fairly simple to me, but then again what has always been simple for me has always seemed so difficult for others.

Me? I am nobody. I am nothing. I am useless. And I am lost.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I have a friend who is all about encryption stuff, I can give this to him if you'd like.

[JBookup]

Please do. And love the quote btw. This whole time I thought I was the only one that knew most of everyone is a slave.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Please do. And love the quote btw. This whole time I thought I was the only one that knew most of everyone is a slave.

Thanks!

It seems like you are, indeed, in the right place.

[JBookup]

I might not find what I'm looking for here, but I knew this place was for me as soon as I found out what principia discordia meant.

[Eater of Clowns]

I might not find what I'm looking for here, but I knew this place was for me as soon as I found out what principia discordia meant.

Hey could you let us know what principia discordia means? We keep trying to figure it out and nobody tells us. 

[JBookup]

Lol. Hilarious. I guess I can elaborate. It's not solely just what it means that affected my judgement. It was a multitude of things that caught my attention. Starting with it's meaning being principles of disorder. Just that in itself somehow calls to me. Then I find out its a book and I'm immediately impressed and I can tell that this is a book that of read and understood properly it would teach value and affect ones views. Value and views that I'm certain parallel mine. And that is what the name of this website is, awesome. Then I read the topics of discussion and everything is in one way or another relevant to my interests.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

GOOBLE GOBBLE ONE OF US

[Reginald Ret]

GOOBLE GOBBLE ONE OF US

Seconded.

[Faust]

For the fun of it I had a look at the possibility that this wasn't a strongly encrypted cypher, I didn't have my tools with me so I did it the old fashioned way, please bare in mind I'm not great at cryptography and some gross assumptions are made here:

p3gdo ^ ubjucpc ^ 2dq

The repetition of characters and their mostly being within the regular ascii range made me think maybe the ^ symbol is either a space or a dot

if the ^ is a space than:

01011110 ^
00100000 (space)  first and last bits static everything else inverted didn't really give me much to go on, I tried the same adjustment on the other characters. No dice.

So then I took the assumption that ^ corresponded to a dot, its likely the three characters are a domain so I tried .com and .net

if ^ was dot
01011110 ^
00101110 .
01110000 mask1

0110010 2
01100011 c
01010001 mask2


01100100 d
01101111 o
00001011 mask3

01110001 q
01101101 m
00011100 mask4

No pattern I can derive from the masks

Same with .net

if ^ was dot
01011110 ^
00101110 .
01110000 m1


01101110 n
00110010 2
01011100 m2

01100101 e
01100100 d
00000001 m3

01110100 t
01110001 q
00000101 m4

01110000
01011100
00000001
00000101

so I tried some basic fitting

p3gdo^ubjucpc^2dq
becomes
p3goo.ubjucpc.com

and if the middle is a dictionary word
cpc is likely to be ses
which makes it become
e3goo.ubjuses.com

or

u3goo.ubjusus.com

I'm probably barking up the wrong tree entirely with this approach.

[Telarus]

Welcome to the Discordian Society, JBookup!

[Pæs]

If the cipher doesn't shift at all as it progresses, there are dozens of potential strings that fit that pattern. I am choosing to believe that the string is "urban.ephesus.com" or "enjoy.aliases.com".

When he says he only encrypted the alphabet, though, it sounds as though we're not working with a cipher that can handle a dot?

We can sit here and endlessly offer suggestions that fit the string but if newguy doesn't know himself what the string is, we have no way to confirm and too small a sample to reverse engineer the process used to create the string. Similarly I can tell you that 8SFO{ is an encrypted string, but that doesn't give you anywhere near enough information to do anything with it.

[Pæs]

Realistically, though, it's been proven time and time again that the most robust encryption algorithms don't rely on the process being secret, but well known, well read and examined, but irreversible without the key regardless of this. "I'm not telling you how I made this string" tends to be the hallmark of an obscure, but weak encryption method.