- Location
- Ottawa
The text used to do the ciphering, I mean. Sorry if that was unclear.
That's the key, which is combined by some algorithm with the plaintext you wish to conceal to produce the ciphertext you then send.The text used to do the ciphering, I mean. Sorry if that was unclear.
ROT13 is a one-time pad, just one with an all-N ciphertext. As I said a few posts back, "In real life, you can be fairly confident in your ROT13-breaking because the probability of something encoded differently just happening to be a coherent ROT13d message is so incredibly low. But the infallibility of the magic involved here makes probability-based arguments inapplicable."
Again, the Charm doesn't decode anything. It involves no frequency analysis and no algorithmic anything.
It lets you read ciphered messages as though they were not ciphered. Doesn't matter what the cipher is. There's not a lot of ambiguity in "browse ciphered manuscripts as if they were in their original language".
Incidentally, the damaged tablet example actually supports my side. If a big chunk of text is missing, it's missing, and no amount of logic will tell you what it said. But the Charm will.
Here's the thing though: the ROT13 analogy is silly because it isn't relevant to the claim of what the Solar is actually doing. The perspective being advocated here is that the Charm makes you hyperintuitive at noticing the kinds of details and patterns that go into these things. It makes sense that you can crack ROT13 here, because you'll notice "hey, I'm seeing a bunch of one letter words with the letters 'v' and 'n', and in general words look around the same length as they might in an unencrypted method, so I'll try a few algorithms that might turn 'v' and 'n' into a/i, and look ROT13 produces a message."I agree that the ROT13 analogy is a bit silly; that's the point. It's the mirror image of your "nobscure the communication happening 20 miles away in a castle with meters of solid rock between you and the speakers" example. Because flawlessly determining that the message is encoded with ROT13 requires determining that it was not encoded with any of the countless other codes it could've been encoded with. Which is exactly what you need to do to break an OTP. If you can determine that every key but one is invalid, you've found the right key.
The other-Charms-based argument that the Charm shouldn't do what it does seems a little beside the point; it does what it does regardless of what it should do. And part of what it does is let you read encoded text as though it wasn't encoded.
The basic concept of "determine the True Meaning" requires you to draw upon information that just wouldn't be present in the real world. Even for simple codes. Even for messages that aren't encoded! But I guess that doesn't bother you, given your comments on EET. Maybe I'm mixing up your objections with Chung's.
PS: Shadow Over Water totally does let you ignore whatever DV penalty a hail of mountains might impose. Barring true undodgeability, but that's a carefully-spelled-out exception. And DSE has no such exception spelled out.
I have a better interpretation: that Charm is written like ass and you're basically forced to come into an agreement with the ST to even define its limitations.The only interpretation that fits, from my point of view, is this one:
I mean, this covers a lot of Charms.I have a better interpretation: that Charm is written like ass and you're basically forced to come into an agreement with the ST to even define its limitations.
I'm pretty sure that having this is kinda the entire point. It's not that OTP's are a mystical force that means there's no counterplay and the story has to end there. It's that there's actually some counterplay to this charm.If i introduced a non breakable thing like that I would put in a element where you can pull of a heist of some sort to grab the key. Or do what hackers do and just call the person in question and politely ask for the key. Which people fall for, a lot.
Turn it into a situation where the more social or sneaky people have a chance to shine.
Not entirely? Jon Chung at least is also mentioning things like Book ciphers or some types of shorthand (does 'Execute order 66' give that, or does it give you the full text of Special order 66?), the former of which definitely exists in Creation and the latter definitely exists.Actually, if I read the argument correctly, the people saying it can't beat OTPs also think OTPs are beyond Creation's cryptographic technology. That the Charm trumps any non-Charm-based encryption anyone's ever likely to use against you seems to be universally agreed.
Actually, if I read the argument correctly, the people saying it can't beat OTPs also think OTPs are beyond Creation's cryptographic technology. That the Charm trumps any non-Charm-based encryption anyone's ever likely to use against you seems to be universally agreed.
Put another way, "You can read whatever's there as long as the information is in the message or can be extrapolated from the message" satisfies all the examples and the text of the charm just fine...
"Activate Order 66" isn't a coded message, though. Not in the way that something passed through ROT13 is a coded message. It's a message written in unscrambled plaintext that just refers to some totally different document. The argument here is that it isn't code.It doesn't need to give you the full text of Order 66. It just needs to tell you, "Order 66 is code for kill the Jedi". And if it can't do that, it can't break codes at all.
Obviously there's some fuzziness regarding what information is "in the message" and what information is context to the message, but that kind of ambiguity is pretty unavoidable no matter how you write Charms that relate to language and cryptography.
In the interest of clarity, let me ask you a list of quick questions:
-What would you have the Charm do on a message saying "execute Order 66"?
-What would you have the Charm do on a book cipher, if the book's available?
-What would you have the Charm do on a book cipher, if the book's not available?
-What would you have the Charm do on modern public key encryption?
-What would you have the Charm do on the message "kill them", encoded with ROT13 to give the text "xvyygurz"?
-What would you have the Charm do on the message "stay home", encoded with an OTP key that results in the text "xvyygurz"?
It doesn't need to give you the full text of Order 66. It just needs to tell you, "Order 66 is code for kill the Jedi". And if it can't do that, it can't break codes at all.
Obviously there's some fuzziness regarding what information is "in the message" and what information is context to the message, but that kind of ambiguity is pretty unavoidable no matter how you write Charms that relate to language and cryptography.
In the interest of clarity, let me ask you a list of quick questions:
-What would you have the Charm do on a message saying "execute Order 66"?
-What would you have the Charm do on a book cipher, if the book's available?
-What would you have the Charm do on a book cipher, if the book's not available?
-What would you have the Charm do on modern public key encryption?
-What would you have the Charm do on the message "kill them", encoded with ROT13 to give the text "xvyygurz"?
-What would you have the Charm do on the message "stay home", encoded with an OTP key that results in the text "xvyygurz"?
It doesn't, though. The Charm is quite explicit about ignoring codes, and codes are often / usually not breakable with the information contained within a message sent with them. They're never breakable with the certainty the Charm provides.
For some reason my point about certainty seems to have been overlooked in this debate, and I find that kind of weird since it's the heart of my position. So I won't to draw your attention to it specifically. The certain knowledge provided by this Charm requires it pull information out of nowhere (or from the least god of the message, or something).
The simplest solution is "the Charm decodes any message as if you had the key but does not actually provide the key or what type of key it is."
So if you had a coded message, you could read it regardless of what the key is. But if the key was a book you wouldn't know what book, the contents of the book or even that it was a book cipher. You couldn't recite passages from the book or use your decoding of one message to further decode other messages, not without either activating the Charm again or doing a bunch of extra work. In the case of languages this would be "as if you had a hypothetical Rosetta Stone or equivalent."
This means it can't decode a message that is damaged or incomplete, because even having the key wouldn't help you. If the words are illegible or removed or what have you then you could read what is legible but not anything else. If you want to bypass a Solar cryptographer the key isn't to make the code unbreakable, it's to make certain the full message never falls into their hands.
Or better yet, only ever send a messenger who never writes the message down. Like a PC, for example.
the thread is 2149 pages long now, you know better
It doesn't need to give you the full text of Order 66. It just needs to tell you, "Order 66 is code for kill the Jedi". And if it can't do that, it can't break codes at all.
The simplest solution is "the Charm decodes any message as if you had the key but does not actually provide the key or what type of key it is."
So if you had a coded message, you could read it regardless of what the key is. But if the key was a book you wouldn't know what book, the contents of the book or even that it was a book cipher. You couldn't recite passages from the book or use your decoding of one message to further decode other messages, not without either activating the Charm again or doing a bunch of extra work. In the case of languages this would be "as if you had a hypothetical Rosetta Stone or equivalent."
This means it can't decode a message that is damaged or incomplete, because even having the key wouldn't help you. If the words are illegible or removed or what have you then you could read what is legible but not anything else. If you want to bypass a Solar cryptographer the key isn't to make the code unbreakable, it's to make certain the full message never falls into their hands.
Or better yet, only ever send a messenger who never writes the message down. Like a PC, for example.