| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 26 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 55:44:50 |
| Calls: | 632 |
| Files: | 1,187 |
| D/L today: |
27 files (19,977K bytes) |
| Messages: | 179,250 |
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
09147 18110 41059 73715 23675 11716 31344 61936 58405 71789
67996 04102 81613 41793 49867 77121 88375 80775 60638 90347
24676 39058 85504 92003 48722 10115 46990 44086 24854 24159
20664 01522 57274 15899 85065 70377 35752 53492 58559 88988
35370 43081 68166 86373 65926 75374 33291 85632 67446 59349
63704 65749 72091 66837 50171 43248 57595 16454 91499 39226
96517 88044 56393 01838 17430 52594 84964 23196 23914 22203
38920 55335 19311 43922 28110 85530 38860 62709 80794 00892
79201 97026 95796 57573 01408 45600 05825 23271 53168 89392
79895 92055 56120 97719 88677 37834 52558 70854 7
The spaces are for readability only - the ciphertext consists
entirely of digits. If you paste the above into a new file, s/
//g (remove all spaces)
and add an ASCII 0x0a newline (which vim
will do automatically for you), the resulting file will give you
an md5sum of:
-a f5dfacff56e1494715ead7028fc288b5
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
(The plaintext is in plain English (straight ASCII) and has an md5sum of >2f682c420d4f5cd443719f33050eac67.)
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
(The plaintext is in plain English (straight ASCII) and has an md5sum of
2f682c420d4f5cd443719f33050eac67.)
Success! :-)
The md5sum of the solution without the first byte is a777bb3b77b25613a52720634b0dfcc3.
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
Es schrieb einmal Richard Heathfield:
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
"...and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt" and this /feeling/. ;-)
Alfred
{and I'm afraid I won't even get the T-Shirt}
On 28/03/2025 17:28, Alfred.Peters wrote:
Es schrieb einmal Richard Heathfield:
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
"...and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt" and this /feeling/. ;-)
...and (FWIW) my respect.
Alfred
{and I'm afraid I won't even get the T-Shirt}
-a _____-a-a-a _____
-a/-a-a-a-a `--'-a-a-a-a-a \
/___| C-a-a-a-a-a |____\
-a-a-a |-a R-a-a-a-a |
-a-a-a |-a-a Y-a-a-a |
-a-a-a |-a-a-a P-a-a |
-a-a-a |-a-a-a-a T-a |
-a-a-a |-a-a-a-a-a O |
-a-a-a |-a 2025-a |
-a-a-a |________|
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
09147 18110 41059 73715 23675 11716 31344 61936 58405 71789
67996 04102 81613 41793 49867 77121 88375 80775 60638 90347
24676 39058 85504 92003 48722 10115 46990 44086 24854 24159
20664 01522 57274 15899 85065 70377 35752 53492 58559 88988
35370 43081 68166 86373 65926 75374 33291 85632 67446 59349
63704 65749 72091 66837 50171 43248 57595 16454 91499 39226
96517 88044 56393 01838 17430 52594 84964 23196 23914 22203
38920 55335 19311 43922 28110 85530 38860 62709 80794 00892
79201 97026 95796 57573 01408 45600 05825 23271 53168 89392
79895 92055 56120 97719 88677 37834 52558 70854 7
The spaces are for readability only - the ciphertext consists entirely
of digits. If you paste the above into a new file, s/ //g (remove all spaces) and add an ASCII 0x0a newline (which vim will do automatically
for you), the resulting file will give you an md5sum of:
-a f5dfacff56e1494715ead7028fc288b5[...]
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:[...]
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
The spaces are for readability only - the ciphertext consists entirely
of digits. If you paste the above into a new file, s/ //g (remove all
spaces) and add an ASCII 0x0a newline (which vim will do automatically
for you), the resulting file will give you an md5sum of:
-a-a f5dfacff56e1494715ead7028fc288b5[...]
I don't have a lot of time to work on this, but:
scos 42 66
t3SF -hD &ua:2oP^'y L)6f?* vP .6R _ckN2 r1Y\ t l\_yJ}9G ? ;$q P(n Z@1bM
[0o G'5 g?4 bG#sOA*aSKZ
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.[...]
scos 42 66
z9gG 1 tG#6R:(: &!8m H]xYI &cQ/ 7b # "0oN$y^ ;7d0 n 0L.x U S[1 jK#n b@7Y2
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
scos 42 66
z9gG 1 tG#6R:(: &!8m H]xYI &cQ/ 7b # "0oN$y^ ;7d0 n 0L.x U S[1 jK#n b@7Y2
SCOS2 42 66
v3f G8iRj 5S'&b ,#n b>9 gN9n Q{"k.+v" h.6
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF:
*fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
Just under 3.5 hours!
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
Just under 3.5 hours!
That was more of a coincidence. Alfred, others and I
had played IIRC with this kind of encryption in de.test
(and/or eternal-september.test) a few months ago. :-)
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF:
*fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
On 29/03/2025 09:17, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF:
*fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
This is not the first time I've seen quoted evidence of Chris
wrestling with one of my challenges. I am not unsympathetic, and
forever is a long time, so I have just removed invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com from my killfile.
I hope I won't have to reinstate it.
I can make it harder, obviously. :-)
ro#roCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCro> ro#roCroCroCroCro> ro#roCro> ro#roCroCro> ro#roCroCro>..66..ro#--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/2025 09:17, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF: >>>> *fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
This is not the first time I've seen quoted evidence of Chris
wrestling with one of my challenges. I am not unsympathetic, and
forever is a long time, so I have just removed
invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com from my killfile.
I hope I won't have to reinstate it.
Given that he still has a great penchant to "insert" his hmac crypt web
page into every thread (whether relevant to the thread or not), you
just may eventually reinstate the entry.
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF:
*fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
On 29/03/2025 09:17, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF:
*fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
This is not the first time I've seen quoted evidence of Chris wrestling
with one of my challenges. I am not unsympathetic, and forever is a long time, so I have just removed invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com from my killfile.
I hope I won't have to reinstate it.
9e F" yT @6e,Y GC~2y 2^yV%!= D5XJ- 7WB 0iK %oa#5X C8 dP@8V:) cG%zN'U OE$qI\y' ]+xWCM--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
On 3/29/2025 7:39 AM, Rich wrote:
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/2025 09:17, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF: >>>>> *fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
This is not the first time I've seen quoted evidence of Chris
wrestling with one of my challenges. I am not unsympathetic, and
forever is a long time, so I have just removed
invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com from my killfile.
I hope I won't have to reinstate it.
Given that he still has a great penchant to "insert" his hmac crypt web
page into every thread (whether relevant to the thread or not), you
just may eventually reinstate the entry.
SCOS2 69 96
[ FU dcilv frx m0x51 (84] ^?->F]B?R5 :QRMeWdYp I m015 "s8( -) ]#, ./ ~'G
\M KTV YPPfV U iiwzuq 16$2 9( 7 ;%}: =DG.FLS VT OPh jijeeum! 86 %y[a
!![' #Av ! MBHK DZae hYUq plklq 3x %59{ ')*- /,'Aa #D|V bWfZU Vb gukj5L
t&( %)[' }}']>L ; \QKN GTZke jfph j0qp4P q8$] (%;?]<Fa ~CFI^(- , YUse wu 5062 9" 1 ["$:@> #B~/M,K PTe= Pln tior pq8 tv0" $-'# .]@C >DMAQGXbTbX WeaornzvwP
Wg acjnfnj tn8 8z$217[g ]@< @<F.KPHPL gZii bjaf ir1ww$ 6^{+ ^?->F\G<<N DZNaeWea qhukjp "zz&5 $] ); @}# DBFB\8
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 7:39 AM, Rich wrote:
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/2025 09:17, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF: >>>>>> *fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
This is not the first time I've seen quoted evidence of Chris
wrestling with one of my challenges. I am not unsympathetic, and
forever is a long time, so I have just removed
invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com from my killfile.
I hope I won't have to reinstate it.
Given that he still has a great penchant to "insert" his hmac crypt web
page into every thread (whether relevant to the thread or not), you
just may eventually reinstate the entry.
SCOS2 69 96
[ FU dcilv frx m0x51 (84] ^?->F]B?R5 :QRMeWdYp I m015 "s8( -) ]#, ./ ~'G
\M KTV YPPfV U iiwzuq 16$2 9( 7 ;%}: =DG.FLS VT OPh jijeeum! 86 %y[a
!![' #Av ! MBHK DZae hYUq plklq 3x %59{ ')*- /,'Aa #D|V bWfZU Vb gukj5L
t&( %)[' }}']>L ; \QKN GTZke jfph j0qp4P q8$] (%;?]<Fa ~CFI^(- , YUse wu
5062 9" 1 ["$:@> #B~/M,K PTe= Pln tior pq8 tv0" $-'# .]@C >DMAQGXbTbX
WeaornzvwP
scos2 69 96
Wg acjnfnj tn8 8z$217[g ]@< @<F.KPHPL gZii bjaf ir1ww$ 6^{+ ^?->F\G<<N DZNaeWea qhukjp "zz&5 $] ); @}# DBFB\8
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
If you mean SCOS, it is also not Unix shell friendly. :-(
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
I can make it harder, obviously. :-)
Not for me at the moment. I probably won't have much
time next month.
Mini Mailer in sci.crypt:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
If you mean SCOS, it is also not Unix shell friendly. :-(
If you use here documents in bash, try to *quote* the
end-of-file marker as shown here:
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2 e 12 16 <<"EOF"
| > Hallo Welt. Das ist ein Test mit SCOS2.
| > EOF
| T2'EX Vt*|5 @c! *BS Tn8 4;Ul u6/ ==Jd'l
This is important escpecially when decrypting, as e. g.
a $ sign might expand a variable.
See "man bash", too.
SCOS is not well thought out. It should use the base64
alphabet
and allow binary encoding as well.
On 29/03/2025 22:43, Mini Mailer wrote:
SCOS is not well thought out. It should use the base64
alphabet
It does. It just doesn't confine itself to that alphabet.
and allow binary encoding as well.
Your comment is not well thought out. You should have stopped to think
about what SCOS is /for/. Complaining about lack of support for binary encoding is like complaining that your car can't drive on rivers.
SCOS was designed to be a very light layer of encryption over sci.crypt chit-chat, and almost as easy to crack as ROT-13. It wasn't designed to encode binaries because Usenet is a text medium, and because people
don't generally chit-chat in binaries.
Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 29/03/2025 22:43, Mini Mailer wrote:
SCOS is not well thought out. It should use the base64
alphabet
It does. It just doesn't confine itself to that alphabet.
and allow binary encoding as well.
Your comment is not well thought out. You should have stopped to think
about what SCOS is /for/. Complaining about lack of support for binary
encoding is like complaining that your car can't drive on rivers.
Well, a beautiful base64 output, with 64 chars per line, is a nice feature and does not look so ugly, like your versions output and binary support is
a welcome addition.
Why, you may ask? Because it can replace a standard
base64 encoder and allows to use key values from 0-63, so that third parties do not know it is a SCOS message or a Standard base64 encoded message. :-)
M QPiy\&;H |bbiN 4-}L v6b33'W mIQ %h99* Ur k9 [
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
On 3/29/2025 12:29 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 7:39 AM, Rich wrote:
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/2025 09:17, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
y pa J&nC(3T<4 X<}3b A2UMC O R#yYJ 5h C(0S G& dH_ uYD$ fP 'xV@1bMb IF: >>>>>>> *fK !lX- 1S B^e L#3P :6kPd |wZ ob?-qXn
SCOS2 42 66
y 5iB-e E@0X *6ZD!0Ln :'2bgS= ycK8 dN# 8V: $iM(4 e\4bP(nZ
@8nH +tJ -3fE71 I/tOG $oM_ 0Y'S:5G
This is not the first time I've seen quoted evidence of Chris
wrestling with one of my challenges. I am not unsympathetic, and
forever is a long time, so I have just removed
invalid_chris_thomasson_invalid@invalid.com from my killfile.
I hope I won't have to reinstate it.
Given that he still has a great penchant to "insert" his hmac crypt web >>>> page into every thread (whether relevant to the thread or not), you
just may eventually reinstate the entry.
SCOS2 69 96
[ FU dcilv frx m0x51 (84] ^?->F]B?R5 :QRMeWdYp I m015 "s8( -) ]#, ./ ~'G >>> \M KTV YPPfV U iiwzuq 16$2 9( 7 ;%}: =DG.FLS VT OPh jijeeum! 86 %y[a
!![' #Av ! MBHK DZae hYUq plklq 3x %59{ ')*- /,'Aa #D|V bWfZU Vb gukj5L
t&( %)[' }}']>L ; \QKN GTZke jfph j0qp4P q8$] (%;?]<Fa ~CFI^(- , YUse wu >>> 5062 9" 1 ["$:@> #B~/M,K PTe= Pln tior pq8 tv0" $-'# .]@C >DMAQGXbTbX
WeaornzvwP
scos2 69 96
Wg acjnfnj tn8 8z$217[g ]@< @<F.KPHPL gZii bjaf ir1ww$ 6^{+ ^?->F\G<<N DZNaeWea qhukjp "zz&5 $] ); @}# DBFB\8
SCOS2 69 96
AJIS{ :aoehjD Mvs3"X m 7= ;@>\Iw % GKSKHM dcdY ptugwst u2y)49'(/, @<
LENN CGHZjdkYa mhy1mvw 0$) {^^ 5s7^M ! ;F QRKSO- >Vlb iv 4x66 ^2$$8 !^&/C,D>EG <DVbMPb kbb qxu2q7 'o&[ _+~:}:~ <:M MDQGFLd[ eiq iqyn38084
[)## -~_} #>FAAQ KSbZ SmYoyBMGJc Vul183^% :]B.,F eVYrk u" 6= }+#
GHONN]9(88} ^>},A/A, MDQGFL hVVlb iw o1 0ux ^$*$9eJ y, A:~J ?JNVMMc SeWoysznp 1w%*1!" :+.] ^1*{V QRKSO L RZZceukw5 zw_R o)] ~//{q 8HIM
PGKSSTbX irt ou3p ww$2V VGN
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
On 3/29/2025 5:14 PM, Mini Mailer wrote:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
[...]
For some reason on my version of SCOS2 I get:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
#include <stdio.h>
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
[...]
So, something odd is occurring. Not quite sure yet.
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 5:14 PM, Mini Mailer wrote:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
[...]
For some reason on my version of SCOS2 I get:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
#include <stdio.h>
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
[...]
So, something odd is occurring. Not quite sure yet.
This /implies/ your SCOS2 decoder is not quite yet fully SCOS2
compliant.
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 5:14 PM, Mini Mailer wrote:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
[...]
For some reason on my version of SCOS2 I get:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
#include <stdio.h>
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
[...]
So, something odd is occurring. Not quite sure yet.
This /implies/ your SCOS2 decoder is not quite yet fully SCOS2
compliant.
SCOSv2 47 11
SCOSv2 47 11[...]
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
roe ro!roCroCro< ro!roCroCro< ro!roCroCroCro< ..24..roe roe ro#roCro< ro#roCroCroCroCro< ro!roCro< ro#roCro< ro#roCroCroCro> ro!roCroCroCro>ro#roCroCro> ro#roCroCro> ro#roCroCro> ro#roCroCroCroCroCroCroCro> ro#roCroCroCroCro> ro#roCro> ro#roCroCroCroCro> ..58..ro#roCroCroCroCroCroCroCroC
On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 20:14:42 -0400 (EDT) Mini Mailer wrote:
SCOSv2 47 11
-a-+-+-i-e-+-| -U-+-#-U-+-#-+! -o-|-+-|-C-i -A -e-#-|-|-| -+-+-|-a -+-U-+-+-+-i-+-+-#-#-e-i SCOS -U-+ -U-#-+-+-+-+ -|-C-a-+-i-A-+-+. :)
Nomen Nescio wrote:
-a-+-+-i-e-+-| -U-+-#-U-+-#-+! -o-|-+-|-C-i -A -e-#-|-|-| -+-+-|-a -+-U-+-+-+-i-+-+-#-#-e-i SCOS -U-+ -U-#-+-+-+-+ -|-C-a-+-i-A-+-+. :)
You're welcome!
Mini Mailer in sci.crypt:
SCOSv2 47 11
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g[...]
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
Self-written or generated by AI again?
SCNR
BTW:
| Message-ID: <406894c176.1743293683@lmhhi.zx>
^^^^^^^^
Not USENET conform.
Mini Mailer in sci.crypt:
Nomen Nescio wrote:
-a-+-+-i-e-+-| -U-+-#-U-+-#-+! -o-|-+-|-C-i -A -e-#-|-|-| -+-+-|-a -+-U-+-+-+-i-+-+-#-#-e-i SCOS -U-+ -U-#-+-+-+-+ -|-C-a-+-i-A-+-+. :)
You're welcome!
I almost have the impression that we are being taken for a bit
of a ride here.
Marcel
On 3/29/2025 9:30 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 5:14 PM, Mini Mailer wrote:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
[...]
For some reason on my version of SCOS2 I get:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
#include <stdio.h>
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
[...]
So, something odd is occurring. Not quite sure yet.
This /implies/ your SCOS2 decoder is not quite yet fully SCOS2
compliant.
I tried it from the one Richard posted as a reference impl back in the
old thread. Was there another one from Ben in there? It seems to not
like new lines...
On 3/29/2025 9:30 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 5:14 PM, Mini Mailer wrote:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
uMccw*!= 0Rdmo48h;4
6Yoo8~=? $Np577i:5
[...]
For some reason on my version of SCOS2 I get:
h|PPj3x9 nEQLbsJ7g
#include <stdio.h>
iAQQk4y! oFRMfnrV_s
[...]
So, something odd is occurring. Not quite sure yet.
This /implies/ your SCOS2 decoder is not quite yet fully SCOS2
compliant.
Hey now. When I paste the ciphertext it works like a charm:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <ctype.h>
[...]
Perfect. When I paste it directly into the command shell it messes
things up.
Well, shit happens! :^)
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1
64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm OifnD
Grrr!
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, shit happens! :^)
No, you have now /discovered/ that "the command shell" interprets some >characters itself, and not passing them through to the command.
Rich in sci.crypt:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Well, shit happens! :^)
No, you have now /discovered/ that "the command shell" interprets some >>characters itself, and not passing them through to the command.
Perhaps he uses the "here documents" feature of the shell.
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1
64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm OifnD >>
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Marcel Logen <333200007110-0201@ybtra.de> wrote:
Rich in sci.crypt:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
^ not (?)No, you have now /discovered/ that "the command shell" interprets some >>>characters itself, and not passing them through to the command.
Perhaps he uses the "here documents" feature of the shell.
That is possible, but even so, there's two versions of here docs, one
that interpretes shell metacharacters and one that does not. Using the >'interpreting' variant would produce the same results.
Rich in sci.crypt:
Marcel Logen <333200007110-0201@ybtra.de> wrote:
Rich in sci.crypt:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
^ not (?)No, you have now /discovered/ that "the command shell" interprets some >>>>characters itself, and not passing them through to the command.
Perhaps he uses the "here documents" feature of the shell.
That is possible, but even so, there's two versions of here docs, one
that interpretes shell metacharacters and one that does not. Using the >>'interpreting' variant would produce the same results.
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok e 55 77 <<"EOF"
| > Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what happens.
| > EOF
| !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
|
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok d 55 77 <<qqqq
| > !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
| > qqqq
| Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what hapOXc_
|
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok d 55 77 <<"qqqq"
| > !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
| > qqqq
| Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what happens.
man bash, chapter "Here Documents":
| If any part of word is quoted, the delimiter is the
| result of quote removal on word, and the lines in the
| here-document are not expanded. If word is
| unquoted, all lines of the here-document are
| subjected to parameter expansion, command substitution,
| and arithmetic expansion, the character sequence
| \<newline> is ignored, and \ must be used to quote
| the characters \, $, and `.
"word" is here "EOF" or "qqqq".
The \ quotes the $ sign before the 5 in the qqqq
version.
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1
64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm OifnD >>>
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1 >>>> 64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm OifnD >>>>
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >. If I go back to look at my
original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one
will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Marcel Logen <333200007110-0201@ybtra.de> wrote:
Rich in sci.crypt:
Marcel Logen <333200007110-0201@ybtra.de> wrote:
Rich in sci.crypt:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
^ not (?)No, you have now /discovered/ that "the command shell" interprets some >>>>> characters itself, and not passing them through to the command.
Perhaps he uses the "here documents" feature of the shell.
That is possible, but even so, there's two versions of here docs, one
that interpretes shell metacharacters and one that does not. Using the
'interpreting' variant would produce the same results.
The word 'same' there was referring to the output Chris received,
although looking it over now, that was also an ambigious back
reference.
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok e 55 77 <<"EOF"
| > Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what happens.
| > EOF
| !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
|
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok d 55 77 <<qqqq
| > !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
| > qqqq
| Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what hapOXc_
|
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok d 55 77 <<"qqqq"
| > !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
| > qqqq
| Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what happens.
man bash, chapter "Here Documents":
| If any part of word is quoted, the delimiter is the
| result of quote removal on word, and the lines in the
| here-document are not expanded. If word is
| unquoted, all lines of the here-document are
| subjected to parameter expansion, command substitution,
| and arithmetic expansion, the character sequence
| \<newline> is ignored, and \ must be used to quote
| the characters \, $, and `.
"word" is here "EOF" or "qqqq".
We (you and I) do not know:
1) if chris was even using here docs -- he *might* very well be trying to pass SCOS input via a CLI parameter;
2) in the case he was using here docs, we don't know which one he used
-- if he used the unquoted version, then it is likely at least one meta character was consumed by the unquoted here doc
espansions/substitutions, and if that happens, all characters after
that point become garbled.
The \ quotes the $ sign before the 5 in the qqqq
version.
Yes, one can escape the metacharacters in the unquoted here doc
version. But, under the assumption Chris was using here docs, did Chris perform the escaping, and perform the escaping correctly?
On 3/30/2025 12:38 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{ >>>>>> _ ^1*{U |DETLPf]-a Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq >>>>>> rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={ >>>>> D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA-a ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1 >>>>> 64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58"
\PLbbm OifnD
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,-a A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
-a *9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
-a .ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
-a EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >.-a If I go back to look at my
original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one
will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl >> ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX >> TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm >> Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV >> UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Okay. I got:
SCOS2 13 34
g~O&sp 5 Ar~Zt ZR)K m+T y>R!' W{?d~u n=N7@YW-a ~Fz, 1-f%/o (B1}O1]h*<p-
Tn= c3}c),r$E ]z/j2"V-a ( v(Ly' k8H Y"Og]ar<Sz Ie9 Ag?Zt ;d=Ft} O1{N8 |
g)M +O Vr= d0;f% \r_Rs ~g% ?q+Qm(X w.i1Hn{D0&by<eT!o+42 :K!E m8\ Um:d
+d)Co+ Er;T 5.a0Ie%Lm /OpB Y* <n&No .X wEj_Af]Kx,P!Bl6O>{Sp~S_ Hd8J|
Looks okay to me. Thanks.
On 3/30/2025 12:48 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/30/2025 12:38 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf]-a Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA-a ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0* ^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1
64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm
OifnD
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,-a A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
-a *9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
-a .ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
-a EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >.-a If I go back to look at my
original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl
ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX
TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm
Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV
UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Okay. I got:
SCOS2 13 34
g~O&sp 5 Ar~Zt ZR)K m+T y>R!' W{?d~u n=N7@YW-a ~Fz, 1-f%/o (B1}O1]h*<p-
Tn= c3}c),r$E ]z/j2"V-a ( v(Ly' k8H Y"Og]ar<Sz Ie9 Ag?Zt ;d=Ft} O1{N8 |
g)M +O Vr= d0;f% \r_Rs ~g% ?q+Qm(X w.i1Hn{D0&by<eT!o+42 :K!E m8\ Um:d +d)Co+ Er;T 5.a0Ie%Lm /OpB Y* <n&No .X wEj_Af]Kx,P!Bl6O>{Sp~S_ Hd8J|
Looks okay to me. Thanks.
When you get some free time to burn, can you email me the plaintext
as-is so I can see any possible errors?
On 3/30/2025 12:32 PM, Rich wrote:
Marcel Logen <333200007110-0201@ybtra.de> wrote:
Rich in sci.crypt:
Marcel Logen <333200007110-0201@ybtra.de> wrote:
Rich in sci.crypt:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
^ not (?)No, you have now /discovered/ that "the command shell" interprets some >>>>>> characters itself, and not passing them through to the command.
Perhaps he uses the "here documents" feature of the shell.
That is possible, but even so, there's two versions of here docs, one
that interpretes shell metacharacters and one that does not. Using the >>>> 'interpreting' variant would produce the same results.
The word 'same' there was referring to the output Chris received,
although looking it over now, that was also an ambigious back
reference.
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok e 55 77 <<"EOF"
| > Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what happens.
| > EOF
| !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
|
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok d 55 77 <<qqqq
| > !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
| > qqqq
| Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what hapOXc_
|
| user15@o15:/tmp$ ./scos2-ok d 55 77 <<"qqqq"
| > !(8sf <|#5h[ R@&9 jd > \86r( 7@4 T rNA[ *mW Y?"^ mPO\$5u+
| > qqqq
| Hello World, this is a test. And I will see what happens.
man bash, chapter "Here Documents":
| If any part of word is quoted, the delimiter is the
| result of quote removal on word, and the lines in the
| here-document are not expanded. If word is
| unquoted, all lines of the here-document are
| subjected to parameter expansion, command substitution,
| and arithmetic expansion, the character sequence
| \<newline> is ignored, and \ must be used to quote
| the characters \, $, and `.
"word" is here "EOF" or "qqqq".
We (you and I) do not know:
1) if chris was even using here docs -- he *might* very well be trying to
pass SCOS input via a CLI parameter;
2) in the case he was using here docs, we don't know which one he used
-- if he used the unquoted version, then it is likely at least one meta
character was consumed by the unquoted here doc
espansions/substitutions, and if that happens, all characters after
that point become garbled.
The \ quotes the $ sign before the 5 in the qqqq
version.
Yes, one can escape the metacharacters in the unquoted here doc
version. But, under the assumption Chris was using here docs, did Chris
perform the escaping, and perform the escaping correctly?
I am using the damn command line from windows:
Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.26100.3476]
On 3/30/2025 12:38 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{ >>>>>> _ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqqrs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={ >>>>> D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1 >>>>> 64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm OifnD
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS] M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >. If I go back to look at my
original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one
will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl >> ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX >> TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm >> Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV >> UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Okay. I got:
SCOS2 13 34
g~O&sp 5 Ar~Zt ZR)K m+T y>R!' W{?d~u n=N7@YW ~Fz, 1-f%/o
(B1}O1]h*<p-Tn= c3}c),r$E ]z/j2"V ( v(Ly' k8H Y"Og]ar<Sz Ie9 Ag?Zt
;d=Ft} O1{N8 |g)M +O Vr= d0;f% \r_Rs ~g% ?q+Qm(X w.i1Hn{D0&by<eT!o+42
:K!E m8\ Um:d +d)Co+ Er;T 5.a0Ie%Lm /OpB Y* <n&No .X
wEj_Af]Kx,P!Bl6O>{Sp~S_ Hd8J|
Looks okay to me. Thanks.
On 3/30/2025 12:48 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/30/2025 12:38 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm... >>>>>>>SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{ >>>>>>> _ ^1*{U |DETLPf]-a Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq >>>>>>> rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={ >>>>>> D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA-a ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0* >>>>>> ^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1 >>>>>> 64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58"
\PLbbm OifnD
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,-a A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
-a *9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
-a .ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
-a EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >.-a If I go back to look at my
original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one
will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl
ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX
TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm
Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV
UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Okay. I got:
SCOS2 13 34
g~O&sp 5 Ar~Zt ZR)K m+T y>R!' W{?d~u n=N7@YW-a ~Fz, 1-f%/o (B1}O1]h*<p-
Tn= c3}c),r$E ]z/j2"V-a ( v(Ly' k8H Y"Og]ar<Sz Ie9 Ag?Zt ;d=Ft} O1{N8 |
g)M +O Vr= d0;f% \r_Rs ~g% ?q+Qm(X w.i1Hn{D0&by<eT!o+42 :K!E m8\ Um:d
+d)Co+ Er;T 5.a0Ie%Lm /OpB Y* <n&No .X wEj_Af]Kx,P!Bl6O>{Sp~S_ Hd8J|
Looks okay to me. Thanks.
When you get some free time to burn, can you email me the plaintext
as-is so I can see any possible errors?
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/30/2025 12:48 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/30/2025 12:38 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf]-a Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA-a ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0* >> > > > > > ^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1
64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm
OifnD
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-, >> > > > > A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K >> > > > > EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there >> > > > between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,-a A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
-a *9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
-a .ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
-a EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >.-a If I go back to look at my
original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one >> > > will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl
ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX
TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm
Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV
UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Okay. I got:
SCOS2 13 34
g~O&sp 5 Ar~Zt ZR)K m+T y>R!' W{?d~u n=N7@YW-a ~Fz, 1-f%/o (B1}O1]h*<p-
Tn= c3}c),r$E ]z/j2"V-a ( v(Ly' k8H Y"Og]ar<Sz Ie9 Ag?Zt ;d=Ft} O1{N8 |
g)M +O Vr= d0;f% \r_Rs ~g% ?q+Qm(X w.i1Hn{D0&by<eT!o+42 :K!E m8\ Um:d
+d)Co+ Er;T 5.a0Ie%Lm /OpB Y* <n&No .X wEj_Af]Kx,P!Bl6O>{Sp~S_ Hd8J|
Looks okay to me. Thanks.
When you get some free time to burn, can you email me the plaintext
as-is so I can see any possible errors?
Do you know why we have 'yas' (Yet Another SCOS) now? Because I also had problems when decoding with SCOS. :-D :-D :-D
Stefan Claas <fgrsna.pynnf@vagrearg.eh> wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/30/2025 12:48 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/30/2025 12:38 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 9:10 AM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
I might have made a copy-and-paste error or something... Humm...
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf]-a Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
SCOS2 69 96
[ LWe zK bXt kgy1t5% !&=] }).{. // OHQ STd bZ RVWoysz j eRgn] %8[~%={
D/G<? '*;<j OSTiaeuA-a ctt 4v7&+ 9(%'[] ]:JPADP g IYR t cp uv0jx0*
^5567@;- /# D.;M \NTWcahZik.^A b095y 4&)!d 5@p @D E.?HKa XMPaj nl mhy1
64 00 g 3)=?S*:[eC;LPD VMQYUj qftk tn8 0082_ $- '--;q 6HCF58" \PLbbm
OifnD
Grrr!
SCOS2 69 96
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2 *9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{ .ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K
EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
That is because the original I posted was:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
*9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
.ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
But in your quoted version above, it has been changed to:
MIe(j U Zlryn 'q$^ "&{ {@+.{ ]H~/Mo CGHWOS]-a M|OV vj47w% "5]))]-,-a A:EENCG WSIWhVlbd -ORdR>P-a g -"&{{ |/B ~>I>KUGWMO hYY Zaxyn u2
-a *9)) )]((/ ?>CG kn PGG XPPZc Xliqm r57 x&&-""# +'<]BCH<P|VNWY{
-a .ik'w vj48 "22 tgv2 &/C,DF \GPN UTUPhYckg wnj5 x! 1$9(% '# +\\D..K -a EMVJZafVn@mrjrr% "22%Y
An extra space after the opening >.-a If I go back to look at my original article, it shows (and decodes) correctly for me in tin.
Base64 version of the original scos2 posting above, hopefully this one
will not be broken by 'something' (most likely your client software):
Pk1JZShqIFUgWmxyeW4gJ3EkXiAiJnsge0ArLnsgXUh+L01vIENHSFdPU10gIE18T1Ygdmo0N3cl
ICI1XSkpXS0sCkE6RUVOQ0cgV1NJV2hWbGJkIC1PUmRSPlAgIGcgLSIme3sgfC9CIH4+ST5LVUdX
TU8gaFlZIFpheHluIHUyCio5KSkgKV0oKC8gPz5DRyBrbiBQR0cgWFBQWmMgWGxpcW0gcjU3IHgm
Ji0iIiMgKyc8XUJDSDxQfFZOV1l7Ci5payd3IHZqNDggIjIyIHRndjIgJi9DLERGIFxHUE4gVVRV
UGhZY2tnIHduajUgeCEgMSQ5KCUgJyMgK1xcRC4uSwpFTVZKWmFmVm5AbXJqcnIlICIyMiVZCg==
Okay. I got:
SCOS2 13 34
g~O&sp 5 Ar~Zt ZR)K m+T y>R!' W{?d~u n=N7@YW-a ~Fz, 1-f%/o (B1}O1]h*<p- Tn= c3}c),r$E ]z/j2"V-a ( v(Ly' k8H Y"Og]ar<Sz Ie9 Ag?Zt ;d=Ft} O1{N8 | g)M +O Vr= d0;f% \r_Rs ~g% ?q+Qm(X w.i1Hn{D0&by<eT!o+42 :K!E m8\ Um:d +d)Co+ Er;T 5.a0Ie%Lm /OpB Y* <n&No .X wEj_Af]Kx,P!Bl6O>{Sp~S_ Hd8J|
Looks okay to me. Thanks.
When you get some free time to burn, can you email me the plaintext
as-is so I can see any possible errors?
Do you know why we have 'yas' (Yet Another SCOS) now? Because I also had problems when decoding with SCOS. :-D :-D :-D
SCOS does presume that the transport layer (usenet) *and* the client software does not modify the message in any way. The transport is
working fine, as I can retreive my own postings later and they decode
just fine.
What we are likely finding is what you reported, some client software
is "interpreting" certian character sequences and changing them to
something else, violating the presumption of "does not modify the
message in any way".
Chris' client software very well may be doing some similar "changes" to
what you earlier discovered.
Chris, instead of copy/paste, see if your client has a "save this
message to a file" option, if yes, try saving one of the scos messsages
to a file, then edit the file (notepad?) to remove all but the scos
portion, then decode from that file. I suspect you'll find that things
work right that way, whereas when you copy/paste from the reading view, things don't work right.
I do not have any client problems at all, because as a Usenet reader I
use flnews, which is stricly RFC conform.
The problem occurs when trying to decode small SCOS messages in bash
via echo.
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
Es schrieb einmal Chris M. Thomasson:
On 3/29/2025 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
SCOS2 69 96
MIe VRjmeqy v07" 93-8- )) |/B DEO MK CGHZjdk U PCRY" yt!%y78 '):{_ ^1*{U |DETLPf] Nee pgs06 u2y^!" "(.A]'A R ?JC e Na fglUil1 zqq
rs&*5 )$ '-*< }\EHNLSKTV-
Indeed. I still get a "T hat's", not sure why that space is in there
between T and h.
Thunderbird interprets the '>' at the beginning of a line as a quoting character and therefore inserts a space when quoting and copying the text.
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
Closer, but still not quite. There's some missing spaces, but at least nothing is garbled.
On 3/30/2025 1:15 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
Closer, but still not quite. There's some missing spaces, but at least
nothing is garbled.
Agreed. Humm... I feel Richard getting pissed because this thread has
moved into SCOS... Ummm... I should create a new thread.
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/30/2025 1:15 PM, Rich wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:[...]
Closer, but still not quite. There's some missing spaces, but at least
nothing is garbled.
Agreed. Humm... I feel Richard getting pissed because this thread has
moved into SCOS... Ummm... I should create a new thread.
From what I recall, he wasn't upset by organic thread drift (that
happens all the time).
What he got fed up with was threads about Y suddenly having you jump in
out of the blue with [...]
Stefan Claas <fgrsna.pynnf@vagrearg.eh> wrote:
I do not have any client problems at all, because as a Usenet reader I
use flnews, which is stricly RFC conform.
Ok, so your client works properly.
The problem occurs when trying to decode small SCOS messages in bash
via echo.
Now I have to ask, why would you use echo in bash to decode?
If your scos decoder reads from standard input (which it must if you
use echo to feed it a SCOS message), then just run it in a terminal, it
will wait for input from standard input (which is now the terminal, and
no 'character changes' will occur, that is unless you've reconfigured
your terminal quite a lot from its standard settings).
Then paste in the SCOS message into the waiting standard input in the terminal, and hit ctrl+d (end of file) to signal the end of file.
Your scos decoder will then receive your pasted data, unaltered, do the decode, and print its output.
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8 umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8 umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8 umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:5, yes.
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~
]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD
#6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8
umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
I guess the question is: are there 541 characters in the plaintext?
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8 umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
On 31/03/2025 14:47, Richard Harnden wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:-a5, yes.
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9 >>>> ;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8 umg' (l
C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
I guess the question is: are there 541 characters in the plaintext?
4, no.
1, no.
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8 umg' (l C^2 >>> b> (iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
It is of course the 100th such number, a fact of arguable importance but nonetheless a fact.
On 3/31/2025 7:27 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:47, Richard Harnden wrote:
I guess the question is: are there 541 characters in the plaintext?-a5, yes.
4, no.
1, no.
LOL! :^D
I tried decoding them (the digits) as pairs for ASCII codes and got a
result that kind of reminded me of SCOS. So, well, shit happens! :^o
ro#roCroCroCroCro> ro#roCroCroCro> ro#roCro> ro#roCro> ro#roCroCroCroCro> ro#roCroCroCroCroCroCro> ..67..--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
On 3/31/2025 7:27 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:47, Richard Harnden wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:-a-a5, yes.
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~
]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD
#6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8
umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
I guess the question is: are there 541 characters in the
plaintext?
4, no.
1, no.
LOL! :^D
I tried decoding them (the digits) as pairs for ASCII codes and
got a result that kind of reminded me of SCOS. So, well, shit
happens! :^o
On 3/31/2025 7:06 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~
]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD
#6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8
umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
It is of course the 100th such number, a fact of arguable
importance but nonetheless a fact.
;^)
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/31/2025 7:06 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~ ]{^XC* 9uI{!9 >>>>> ;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD #6mD^0b])n2 >>>>> zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J :~%n8
umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
It is of course the 100th such number, a fact of arguable importance
but nonetheless a fact.
;^)
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
$ factor 247
247: 13 19
You need a new perspective.
On 3/31/2025 3:10 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
You need a new perspective.
I know that 247 is not prime, but the sum of it's digits are equal to
13? Prime? Damn.... going off into the damn weeds.
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
2 + 4 + 7 = 13 :-)
On 3/31/2025 3:10 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/31/2025 7:06 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 14:16, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
SCOS2 42 66
x9a|V.8 s0c C$jA #nI|9h P^kS 1 "i.4w V{t R>7iS; md |yfN~
]{^XC* 9uI{!9
;(g N@3Y ~- tG( 0fD%rPg rb [9YL (oS= 6W H8pK's a: &f :paD
#6mD^0b])n2
zzN@3 eE{ vW/t W/ j aL ^mc.6kC @y b'z qK+tL <9V. "hT-J
:~%n8 umg' (l C^2
(iK( tTAM N\&o T-!WF9t H:G E:ykG~D ^V\
SCOS2 42 66
q 9g:$eR; tT<('
@(nZ] vl< <!g =0X\{v" G_p >_ a O@uX' "rI"nZq
Marcel :-)
It is of course the 100th such number, a fact of arguable
importance but nonetheless a fact.
;^)
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
$ factor 247
247: 13 19
You need a new perspective.
I know that 247 is not prime, but the sum of it's digits are
equal to 13?
Prime?
Damn.... going off into the damn weeds.
On 31/03/2025 23:43, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
2 + 4 + 7 = 13 :-)
Ah, I take it all back. :-)
So that gives us a whole new class of primes:
12, 14, 16, 20, 21, 25, 30, 32, 34...
(Let's hope it catches on, because it'll certainly make cracking RSA a
damn sight easier.)
On 3/31/2025 10:57 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 23:43, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
2 + 4 + 7 = 13 :-)
Ah, I take it all back. :-)
So that gives us a whole new class of primes:
12, 14, 16, 20, 21, 25, 30, 32, 34...
(Let's hope it catches on, because it'll certainly make
cracking RSA a damn sight easier.)
Ahhh:
https://oeis.org/search?q=12%2C+14%2C+16%2C+20%2C+21%2C+25%2C+30%2C+32%2C+34&language=english&go=Search
On 01/04/2025 07:58, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/31/2025 10:57 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 31/03/2025 23:43, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 31/03/2025 22:17, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
247 ; 2 + 4 + 7 ; ahh a prime? lol.
247 is not a prime.
2 + 4 + 7 = 13 :-)
Ah, I take it all back. :-)
So that gives us a whole new class of primes:
12, 14, 16, 20, 21, 25, 30, 32, 34...
(Let's hope it catches on, because it'll certainly make cracking RSA
a damn sight easier.)
Ahhh:
https://oeis.org/search?
q=12%2C+14%2C+16%2C+20%2C+21%2C+25%2C+30%2C+32%2C+34&language=english&go=Search
Truly is it said that there is nothing new under the sun.
I am not sure how to parse your digits.
On 04/04/2025 06:25, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
I am not sure how to parse your digits.
parse: To split (a file or other input) into pieces of data that can be easily manipulated or stored.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
-a const char *n = "2848946260538157918367000863848772571624155941440309147181104105973715236751171631344619365840571789679960410281613417934986777121883758077560638903472467639058855049200348722101154699044086248542415920664015225727415899850657037735752534925855988988353704308168166863736592675374332918563267446593496370465749720916683750171432485759516454914993922696517880445639301838174305259484964231962391422203389205533519311439222811085530388606270980794008927920197026957965757301408456000582523271531688939279895920555612097719886773783452558708547";
-a printf("The number is %s\n", n);
-a return 0;
}
Job done.
The digits are digits. The number is a number. What is it that you think
you need to parse?
On 4/3/2025 11:35 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 04/04/2025 06:25, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
I am not sure how to parse your digits.
parse: To split (a file or other input) into pieces of data that can
be easily manipulated or stored.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
-a-a const char *n =
"2848946260538157918367000863848772571624155941440309147181104105973715236751171631344619365840571789679960410281613417934986777121883758077560638903472467639058855049200348722101154699044086248542415920664015225727415899850657037735752534925855988988353704308168166863736592675374332918563267446593496370465749720916683750171432485759516454914993922696517880445639301838174305259484964231962391422203389205533519311439222811085530388606270980794008927920197026957965757301408456000582523271531688939279895920555612097719886773783452558708547";
-a-a printf("The number is %s\n", n);
-a-a return 0;
}
Job done.
The digits are digits. The number is a number. What is it that you
think you need to parse?
I was thinking about taking the digits in pairs and just dumping
printable character at first. Then I thought well, kind of looks like
SCOS, ahhh shit. Need more time. Then I thought of adding up all of the digits just for fun, then I got lost in the weeds. Not sure how the
digits relate to one another. Again, lost in the god damn forest.
wandering around, thinking out loud. then I had to get back to work on
other things.
Not sure how the digits relate to one another.
The lost key makes me think of brute forcing SCOS.
On 04/04/2025 07:54, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
<snip>
The lost key makes me think of brute forcing SCOS.
You remind me of a general --- always ready to fight the last war.
From the OP: "I lost my key, so it's not locked."
Clearly, if it's not locked there isn't a key (because it's lost), so
what precisely are you going to brute force?
On 04/04/2025 07:53, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
Not sure how the digits relate to one another.
The relationship between the digits is much simpler than you think. It's
a relationship you've been using since you were 5 years old.
On 4/4/2025 12:35 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 04/04/2025 07:54, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
<snip>
The lost key makes me think of brute forcing SCOS.
You remind me of a general --- always ready to fight the last war.
-aFrom the OP: "I lost my key, so it's not locked."
Clearly, if it's not locked there isn't a key (because it's
lost), so what precisely are you going to brute force?
Don't tell me the ciphertext _is_ the plaintext? ;^o
On 04/04/2025 09:51, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:35 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 04/04/2025 07:54, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
<snip>
The lost key makes me think of brute forcing SCOS.
You remind me of a general --- always ready to fight the last war.
-aFrom the OP: "I lost my key, so it's not locked."
Clearly, if it's not locked there isn't a key (because it's lost), so
what precisely are you going to brute force?
Don't tell me the ciphertext _is_ the plaintext? ;^o
As I said in my OP:
ciphertext: f5dfacff56e1494715ead7028fc288b5
plaintext : 2f682c420d4f5cd443719f33050eac67
Clearly they are not the same, or their md5sums would be the same.
There are 541 ciphertext characters. Since they're all digits, you'd
expect 54 of each.
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
There are 541 ciphertext characters. Since they're all digits,
you'd expect 54 of each.
Ugg... Dizzy tired now, by why would I expect 54 of each digit?
ciphertext: f5dfacff56e1494715ead7028fc288b5
plaintext : 2f682c420d4f5cd443719f33050eac67
49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
88014 62537 57226 67942 02279 11222 83272 33087 91158 48501
09615 42543 84952 73270 39572 98038 34607 47046 36754 18980
96003 19919 57379 69646 97733 28314 47189 13149 85410 66892
14352 72354 54878 99203 83529 76828 48888 34297 32004 74696
95175 20008 68832 50418 50199 66118 03832 02685 85915 66530
87229 67358 22807 87911 13097 81292 15038 18694 70789 10253
98636 03149 8
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:[...]
49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:
[...]49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
OK
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
ACK
The five-groups remind me of the "number stations" from the
Cold Ware era.
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:
[...]49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
OK
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
ACK
The five-groups remind me of the "number stations" from the
Cold Ware era.
On 4/6/2025 3:41 AM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:[...]
49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
OK
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
ACK
The five-groups remind me of the "number stations" from the
Cold Ware era.
Shit. I was not paying attention to the five groups. For some reason 3+8+8+1+1 = 21, is that mapping to an alphabet?
65216 = 20
66401 = 17
I just don't know. Argh! I need to get back to fractal work now. Damn.
The only time I have to work on it is late at night when I am dead
tired. Ugggg. Sorry Richard. ;^o
On 4/6/2025 3:41 AM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:[...]
49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
OK
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
ACK
The five-groups remind me of the "number stations" from the
Cold Ware era.
Shit. I was not paying attention to the five groups.
For some
reason 3+8+8+1+1 = 21, is that mapping to an alphabet?
On 06/04/2025 21:14, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/6/2025 3:41 AM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:[...]
49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
OK
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
ACK
The five-groups remind me of the "number stations" from the
Cold Ware era.
Shit. I was not paying attention to the five groups.
And why should you?
For some reason 3+8+8+1+1 = 21, is that mapping to an alphabet?
No doubt it could be made to be if one were determined enough... but no,
I was just trying to make it easier on the eye than a great wodge of
digits, and there is no need to read anything more into it than that.
I will be posting a (very small) hint tomorrow.
On 06/04/2025 21:14, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/6/2025 3:41 AM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 06/04/2025 02:26, Marcel Logen wrote:[...]
49184 87069 85461 51598 38286 31222 99049 92521 48220 18433
38811 65216 66401 68566 71607 88766 30093 20785 13788 66768[...]
53109 21508 67876 04651 44198 09199 66939 09980 53449 11974
77016 06674 253
OK
(Quite a practical little cipher as it turns out.)
ACK
The five-groups remind me of the "number stations" from the
Cold Ware era.
Shit. I was not paying attention to the five groups.
And why should you?
For some reason 3+8+8+1+1 = 21, is that mapping to an alphabet?
No doubt it could be made to be if one were determined enough... but no,
I was just trying to make it easier on the eye than a great wodge of
digits, and there is no need to read anything more into it than that.
I will be posting a (very small) hint tomorrow.
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
09147 18110 41059 73715 23675 11716 31344 61936 58405 71789
67996 04102 81613 41793 49867 77121 88375 80775 60638 90347
24676 39058 85504 92003 48722 10115 46990 44086 24854 24159
20664 01522 57274 15899 85065 70377 35752 53492 58559 88988
35370 43081 68166 86373 65926 75374 33291 85632 67446 59349
63704 65749 72091 66837 50171 43248 57595 16454 91499 39226
96517 88044 56393 01838 17430 52594 84964 23196 23914 22203
38920 55335 19311 43922 28110 85530 38860 62709 80794 00892
79201 97026 95796 57573 01408 45600 05825 23271 53168 89392
79895 92055 56120 97719 88677 37834 52558 70854 7
On 27/03/2025 19:25, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
09147 18110 41059 73715 23675 11716 31344 61936 58405 71789
67996 04102 81613 41793 49867 77121 88375 80775 60638 90347
24676 39058 85504 92003 48722 10115 46990 44086 24854 24159
20664 01522 57274 15899 85065 70377 35752 53492 58559 88988
35370 43081 68166 86373 65926 75374 33291 85632 67446 59349
63704 65749 72091 66837 50171 43248 57595 16454 91499 39226
96517 88044 56393 01838 17430 52594 84964 23196 23914 22203
38920 55335 19311 43922 28110 85530 38860 62709 80794 00892
79201 97026 95796 57573 01408 45600 05825 23271 53168 89392
79895 92055 56120 97719 88677 37834 52558 70854 7
Now that America has got itself up and out of bed, I promised you all a hint.
Hints are tricky. Too subtle, and they may serve only to confuse. Too blatant, and they spoil the game. I suppose I'm looking for a way to
provide the minimum nugget of information that will be genuinely useful.
Having thought long and hard about this, I've settled on something you
might not actually recognise as a hint, but I assure you that it is
possible to throw it into the pot along with the information you already have and deduce something extremely useful.
$ scos2 e 225 541 < hint.txt
K )h 8| >&neSx;)x
pYK )xVMAf%0f
On 4/7/2025 10:35 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Having thought long and hard about this, I've settled on
something you might not actually recognise as a hint, but I
assure you that it is possible to throw it into the pot along
with the information you already have and deduce something
extremely useful.
$ scos2 e 225 541 < hint.txt
K )h 8| >&neSx;)x
pYK )xVMAf%0f
I sent you an email. I have to get back to work, but I hope I am
getting a little bit closer wrt your "hint"... ;^o
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
On 07/04/2025 20:26, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 10:35 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
<snip>
Having thought long and hard about this, I've settled on something
you might not actually recognise as a hint, but I assure you that it
is possible to throw it into the pot along with the information you
already have and deduce something extremely useful.
$ scos2 e 225 541 < hint.txt
K )h 8| >&neSx;)x
pYK )xVMAf%0f
I sent you an email. I have to get back to work, but I hope I am
getting a little bit closer wrt your "hint"... ;^o
I see no evidence of it. Sorry. Where on Earth did you get 500 from?
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
A funny program for the ciphertext:
On 4/7/2025 1:16 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.[...]
A funny program for the ciphertext:
[...]
Well, how many times can I make a FOOL out of myself!?
YIKES!
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:16 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
A funny program for the ciphertext:
[...]
Well, how many times can I make a FOOL out of myself!?
YIKES!
Your are also famous on the Bitmessage Network for this.
On 27/03/2025 19:25, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
28489 46260 53815 79183 67000 86384 87725 71624 15594 14403
09147 18110 41059 73715 23675 11716 31344 61936 58405 71789
67996 04102 81613 41793 49867 77121 88375 80775 60638 90347
24676 39058 85504 92003 48722 10115 46990 44086 24854 24159
20664 01522 57274 15899 85065 70377 35752 53492 58559 88988
35370 43081 68166 86373 65926 75374 33291 85632 67446 59349
63704 65749 72091 66837 50171 43248 57595 16454 91499 39226
96517 88044 56393 01838 17430 52594 84964 23196 23914 22203
38920 55335 19311 43922 28110 85530 38860 62709 80794 00892
79201 97026 95796 57573 01408 45600 05825 23271 53168 89392
79895 92055 56120 97719 88677 37834 52558 70854 7
Now that America has got itself up and out of bed, I promised you all a hint.
Hints are tricky. Too subtle, and they may serve only to confuse. Too blatant, and they spoil the game. I suppose I'm looking for a way to
provide the minimum nugget of information that will be genuinely useful.
Having thought long and hard about this, I've settled on something you
might not actually recognise as a hint, but I assure you that it is
possible to throw it into the pot along with the information you already have and deduce something extremely useful.
$ scos2 e 225 541 < hint.txt
K )h 8| >&neSx;)x
pYK )xVMAf%0f
On 4/7/2025 1:33 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:16 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.
I lost my key, so it's not locked.[...]
A funny program for the ciphertext:
[...]
Well, how many times can I make a FOOL out of myself!?
YIKES!
Your are also famous on the Bitmessage Network for this.
Well, that sucks! ;^o
I am not that good at cryptanalysis! I need to dedicate some days for
this. It took me a while to finally solve the SCOS challenge. Shit
happens.
n^ 3cR {40 oJ/i d eZ C}=5dR? }8zT|>6F
C K#;x uZG= 9nbQE [$fcM[^wk !tc
Rnh J-!mmA,9u sW K=2zU MC)qcYI Q"x iF]%5 oK:+"wc|+& 6WW,(0w5 5oX F
7 I@)8 &3mJ:$#fOAN23m
FV^tgP\=5oXG@%wf
W $thX eSB&x7MBKz0j
BS*uhP/=7lYG}%yd
!)zv Z,( 7tk ba5vpX C( zePD ?55ZGG ""h eD[&tZL'!6v_
({ j mhO#(5f RBW"x fJ]92eb & =31 thK 9xZZ:((lhRr
ou G P,#"xT \.'7eOC_ !zhP''r 3z@-^ ef\~"I xfW [" 5oWn
pzhH A& &jT,[ 92 veQd
obc -((lWMn] _4sS * 1tlEr
p8 sP> -yjj S@! -2i \: $xXK]b okJ I-0 6oX|" 2nNA*R ma ,/# 8Vc H'yigGm q2 dXE' t jPL:^@kQF&w.
~H+) 7gVB {2aRF.35k SC77s e|?5 h S|<^8YS ;#0 kcB D%7e G ./7q8P|)2@
{C*% 2bQ, 7zXS;&">P|+*oYU '}5g TH )- vXUD ~zbX vD]9 dJ<$9 oO 9j
h uVA,Y 2nZ> ?5hd S@68 YU? wLs b\:%1d OI :!t QL/_yeH';zh+
@#3zfW
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:33 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:16 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 3/27/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Here's a challenge for you.[...]
I lost my key, so it's not locked.
A funny program for the ciphertext:
[...]
Well, how many times can I make a FOOL out of myself!?
YIKES!
Your are also famous on the Bitmessage Network for this.
Well, that sucks! ;^o
I am not that good at cryptanalysis! I need to dedicate some days for
this. It took me a while to finally solve the SCOS challenge. Shit
happens.
I don't do cryptanalysis, because when made public people may also think
that one was a software cracker in the past or get job offers from folks working at LEA/TLAs.
On 4/7/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Harnden wrote:[...]
Good questions!
39 76
n^ 3cR {40 oJ/i d eZ C}=5dR? }8zT|>6F
On 4/7/2025 2:14 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Harnden wrote:[...]
Good questions!
39 76
nyyi<:&"/ ~ H_3rX P#7 odT.&"wQS< \yoP~^!% TM /)sfGudM OO<- _x
VPE92e L|-1s kH}]K
Humm...
On 4/7/2025 2:14 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Harnden wrote:
Good questions!
39 76
nyyi<:&"/ ~ H_3rX P#7 odT.&"wQS< \yoP~^!% TM /)sfGudM OO<- _x VPE92e
L|-1s kH}]K
Humm...
ro!roCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCro> roe roe ro!roCro< ro!roCroCroCro< ro#roCroCroCro< ro#roCro<roe ro!roCro> ro!roCroCroCro> roe ro#roCroCroCroCroCroCroCro> roe ro!roCroCro< ro!roCro> roe ro!roCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCroCro<
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
On 4/7/2025 2:14 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/7/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Harnden wrote:
Good questions!
39 76
nyyi<:&"/ ~ H_3rX P#7 odT.&"wQS< \yoP~^!% TM /)sfGudM OO<- _x VPE92e
L|-1s kH}]K
Humm...
No.
E. g. 3 and 19 are factors.
The prime number properties have no meaning here!
2490 is the sum.
Another hint:
225 * 8
But now I have to be careful not to give too much away.
If I haven't already done so ;-)
Marcel t733 (957539)
On 07/04/2025 23:12, Marcel Logen wrote:
2490 is the sum.
Okay, so meaningless.
On 08/04/2025 08:26, Richard Harnden wrote:
On 07/04/2025 23:12, Marcel Logen wrote:
2490 is the sum.
Okay, so meaningless.
Well, it threw me too when it first appeared in this thread, but it's
actually a step on the road to the digital root of the ciphertext:
2+4+9+0=15
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 08/04/2025 08:26, Richard Harnden wrote:
On 07/04/2025 23:12, Marcel Logen wrote:
2490 is the sum.
Okay, so meaningless.
Well, it threw me too when it first appeared in this thread, but it's
The mention had a reason. It was meant to be a small hint.
But I won't comment on it until after the end of the competition.
actually a step on the road to the digital root of the ciphertext: >>2+4+9+0=15
Marcel Logen in sci.crypt:
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 08/04/2025 08:26, Richard Harnden wrote:
On 07/04/2025 23:12, Marcel Logen wrote:
2490 is the sum.
Okay, so meaningless.
Well, it threw me too when it first appeared in this thread, but it's
The mention had a reason. It was meant to be a small hint.
But I won't comment on it until after the end of the competition.
actually a step on the road to the digital root of the ciphertext:
2+4+9+0=15
OK. I would still like to give you the hint. Consider the cipher-
text as a whole as a (large!) decimal number.
OK. I would still like to give you the hint. Consider the cipher-
text as a whole as a (large!) decimal number.
(This is what the sum of the digits refers to: 2490.)
--- read no further if you don't want to be told the method ---
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
[...]
--- read no further if you don't want to be told the method ---
Is anyone else still working on the task?
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
[...]
--- read no further if you don't want to be told the method ---
Is anyone else still working on the task?
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Marcel
On 5/26/2025 12:36 PM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Not really, unless I get some more free time. I have to admit I was
tempted to look at the answer from Richard.
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
On 5/26/2025 12:36 PM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Not really, unless I get some more free time. I have to admit I was
tempted to look at the answer from Richard.
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Should I wait a little longer?
On 5/31/2025 11:30 AM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
On 5/26/2025 12:36 PM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Not really, unless I get some more free time. I have to admit I was tempted to look at the answer from Richard.
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Should I wait a little longer?
Na. I am actually busy with other work, no joke. Perhaps you can put in
a note, Chris, do not read. A little flag? thanks. :^)
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
On 5/26/2025 12:36 PM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Not really, unless I get some more free time. I have to admit I was
tempted to look at the answer from Richard.
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Should I wait a little longer?
Na. I am actually busy with other work, no joke. Perhaps you can put in
a note, Chris, do not read. A little flag? thanks. :^)
The ciphertext is a decimal number which has to be transformed
(as Richard wrote here, too, some weeks ago, IIRC) to a 16-bit
or 256-bit coded plaintext.
- subsequently use "bc" for transformation to 16-bit:
| cl@pc-731:/tmp$ echo "obase=16;$(cat two)" | BC_LINE_LENGTH=0 bc
| A353230322F332F373220686A722E2E2E0A0A2E2E2E656E6F64206C6C65570A0A3F7468676972202C676E696874656D6F732073277461687420747562202E2E2E656772656D6520747865747265687069632065687420676E69656573206D6F72662074656720756F79206E6F6974636166736974617320666F20676E696C6565662065687420796C6E6F207369202C73616C61202C657A6972702072756F59202E74786574726568706963206568742064657470797263656420796C6C756673736563637573206576616820756F592021534E4F4954414C55544152474E4F43
| cl@pc-731:/tmp$
- the text then has only to be reversed
On 01/06/2025 07:26, Marcel Logen wrote:
- the text then has only to be reversed
Curiouser and curiouser!
I asked ChatGPT to have a look at this, and it too had to reverse
the text, but...
I didn't!
Did the entire universe change endianness while I wasn't looking?
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 01/06/2025 07:26, Marcel Logen wrote:
- the text then has only to be reversed
Curiouser and curiouser!
I asked ChatGPT to have a look at this, and it too had to reverse
the text, but...
I didn't!
Did the entire universe change endianness while I wasn't looking?
With "dc" the same result here:
| cl@pc-731:/tmp$ dc -e "$(cat two) P" | hexdump -Cv
On 01/06/2025 08:15, Marcel Logen wrote:[...]
Richard Heathfield in sci.crypt:
On 01/06/2025 07:26, Marcel Logen wrote:
- the text then has only to be reversed
Mystery solved.
It turns out that my bignum library (which is little-endian)
doesn't bother to switch to or from big-endian before file
operations. In 25 years, this is the first time it's ever mattered.
On 31/05/2025 19:30, Marcel Logen wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson in sci.crypt:
On 5/26/2025 12:36 PM, Marcel Logen wrote:
Not really, unless I get some more free time. I have to admit I was
tempted to look at the answer from Richard.
Otherwise I would like to present my way to the solution
in the next couple of days.
Should I wait a little longer?
Don't let him hold you up, Marcel.
He's had two months to work on it,
and I've even shipped him a bunch of known-plaintext ciphertexts by
email (see below).
Right now, your cryptanalytical insight[1] is likely
to be more valuable than such play value as continues to attach to a two-month-old puzzle.
[1] No pressure. :-) It is what it is.
Here are some known plaintexts...
Mary had a little lamb. 249642037231470881923129657878710443174674059193977299277
The speckled cow flies through cloud. 1296219512136417102041151365021966785966292502184153733849634190981154439667161581794715732
ATTACK AT DAWN
53511909583457111643755322407146561 (since you ask)
They're onto you.
886931946673165125143854800083895292618836
Now is the winter of our discontent. 5063478677434937090482194981960272477858560856990308950588523342378065621259627087228750
If you cut infinity in half, you get twice as much. 6730396140179628122839581352770372803272827783463566750354458875168453153194032901228983947915930090302862087808746841466441
This data has an odd number of hex digits, so prepend a "0";
then you can use the Linux tool "xxd" for transformation to
readable text:
On 4/4/2025 12:30 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 04/04/2025 07:53, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
Not sure how the digits relate to one another.
The relationship between the digits is much simpler than you think.
It's a relationship you've been using since you were 5 years old.
Shit. I can't stop yawning right now. Time for sleep. For some damn
reason when I look at the digits in the ciphertext, I start to think of
all these types of possible relationships... Then think of the following game that I remember having trouble with a very long time ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Nord_and_Bert_Couldn%27t_Make_Head_or_Tail_of_It
Shit!
Just a test of a new experimental DE I have been developing, and
some of my MIDI music tests...
On 10/06/2025 07:39, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
<snip>
Just a test of a new experimental DE I have been developing, and some
of my MIDI music tests...
Struggling to spot a connection between that and the thread topic.
Topic drift it ain't. Topic drift is when the back end slides out and
you just make the corner. This is more like hitting a tree.