Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Decrypting Kryptos

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the free-tshirt-to-the-winner dept.

235

angkor writes "Kryptos is a sculpture located on the grounds of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Installed in 1990, its thousands of characters contain encrypted messages, of which three have been solved (so far). There is still a fourth section at the bottom consisting of 97 or 98 characters which remains uncracked."

cancel ×

235 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first post!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449514)

got it!!!!

Re:first post!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449799)

Great; I'm really impressed. You are now entitled to conduct the title "Official Asswhore Of Robert Malda"

Crack? (5, Funny)

theluckyleper (758120) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449516)

Dynamite oughtta crack it...

Re:Crack? (5, Funny)

slAckEr Of dOOm (818662) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449567)

Typical gamer - "if you don't understand it, blow it up"

Re:Crack? (3, Funny)

theluckyleper (758120) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449653)

But a slacker of doom, on the other hand, would spend years working out a way to decipher it? :P

Re:Crack? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449660)

you say that like its a bad thing...

Re:Crack? (-1, Flamebait)

IdleTime (561841) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449717)

You mean "typical American"... If you don't understand it, blow it up...

Re:Crack? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449751)

If by typical, you mean 51% of us...

Re:Crack? (0, Offtopic)

theluckyleper (758120) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449766)

I'm Canadian, eh.

Blow up statues, not people!

Re:Crack? (0, Offtopic)

tomjen (839882) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449930)

I Though taliban blow up statues.

In Bush's USA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449677)

CIA cracks you!

Re:Crack? (1)

Alby (755413) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450064)

You do know where it is, right? I'd like to see you try and get near it with a stick of dynamite!

Dupe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449521)

Dupe?

first post (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449522)

first post

Is this news? or a wikipedia entry? (0, Troll)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449531)

Yeah a lovely link, but what happened?

They got kryptos running linux? Microsoft patents kryptos? apple sell mini-kryptos?

is this a dupe? what is the relevance in my life!!! aaaaaaaargh :-)

heh, it would own if kryptos was just a public key... maybe I should make a sculpture out of my public key... but when it expires... bah...

Re:Is this news? or a wikipedia entry? (1)

ambienceman (721763) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449684)

From what I can tell, Slashdot is a place for "news for nerds, stuff that matters". Why does everything have to be related to Linux? Is a nerd necessarily running a Linux box, encoding his music in .OGG, worshipping Linus in the morning, etc..?

And from what I can tell, cryptography isn't exactly common sense. It can be classified as a science, or branch of mathematics. Those both sound like nerdy subjects to me.

Re:Is this news? or a wikipedia entry? (2, Informative)

servoled (174239) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449807)

Technically, I think its "News for nerds, Stuff that was posted on Fark.com yesterday", but others may disagree.

Re:Is this news? or a wikipedia entry? (1)

Ajmuller (88594) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450048)

Yeah, Basically.

I'll bet it says... (5, Funny)

mr_burns (13129) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449533)

"Stop goofing off. Get back to work"

Re:I'll bet it says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449635)

1990? How about "BSD is dying!"

Re:I'll bet it says... (1)

mikiN (75494) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450000)

Nah, it says:

"Nothing to see here, move along..."

Re:I'll bet it says... (1)

Scott7477 (785439) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450106)

"This is CNN!"

Oh yeah I saw that once (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449536)

And if you decrypt it all, dark suited men show up at your door and demand a kidney, or worse.

Mercury Rising anyone?

El Saladhead

I have always been curious (1)

hyu (763773) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449539)

What is the methodology behind code cracking? Many codes I figure eventually get solved due to something like the Rosetta Stone, but how is even that point reached?

Re:I have always been curious (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449605)

It depends on the code. Often it involves looking for patterns, knowledge of letter frequencies, a bit of luck, and a while lot of skill. It helps if you know the type of cryptography being used. For example, if there is a known algorithm being used, such as RSA, one can do a brute force attack and test every possible decryption key (a very computationally intensive task, but feasable for small, older keys). Since many codes are based upon "hard math problems" such as RSA whose security is derived from the fact that it is easy to multiply prime numbers, but hard to factor composite numbers into primes, some codes are broken by find fast solutions to hard math problems. This is kind of the idea behind Shor's Quantum Computer algorithm which allows one to quickly factor large integers and thus could, if implemented, completely screw over RSA.

Re:I have always been curious (3, Interesting)

The Only Druid (587299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449632)

As a wonderful sci-fi connection, I suggest reading Cryptonomicron, by Neal Stephenson. Besides providing an excellent story (like all his books), it provides an extensive discussion of how code-breaking works, and how historically it evolved.

Re:I have always been curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449708)

And if you want a good laugh, read Digital Fortress by Dan Brown.

Re:I have always been curious (1)

Nicholas Evans (731773) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450156)

Hey, I got that book for christmas!

I opened it up, started reading, found two typos on the first page, and just put it back on my nightstand...

Re:I have always been curious (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449718)

I cannot believe how stupid you are.

Re:I have always been curious (2, Informative)

belmolis (702863) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449731)

There's a classic book on the history of codes and codebreaking called The Codebreakers, by David Kahn [david-kahn.com] . A revised edition came out recently. There is even a Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] about him.

Kryptos? (4, Funny)

MikeXpop (614167) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449542)

Superman must be shaking in his boots right about now.

Re:Kryptos? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449805)

Doubtful, considering he's now dead!

Is there a solution? (4, Interesting)

mistersooreams (811324) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449551)

Forgive me for being cynical, but how can we be sure that this final piece is actually crackable? I mean, it would be a cruel joke by Jim Sanborn (the structure's creator) to just include a load of junk, but who's to say he didn't? The fact that the other parts have been deciphered suggests that this last part will give way eventually, but maybe that's just to make the final joke even crueler?

I hope I'm wrong because that would make this story a lot less interesting, but I just thought it should be mentioned.

Re:Is there a solution? (5, Insightful)

ncurses (764489) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449679)

of course not, it's just some random chars generated by the Arethusa cipher, seeded with the string COMSTOCK.

Re:Is there a solution? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449952)

Parent should be +5 Obscure Cryptonomicon Reference

Re:Is there a solution? (2, Funny)

theluckyleper (758120) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449686)

Yes, he could've used ye olde book of random numbers [amazon.com] , for a laugh.

If so, he'll get what's coming to him in the geek afterlife: An eternity of this [neowin.net] .

Re:Is there a solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449935)

I dunno about anyone else, but if I'd made that thing I certainly would've included a random block of gibberish. It would provide a lot of amusement for me watching the possible solutions that people came up with. Granted, it would suck for a lot of other people and make them really angry, but since I'm a selfish bastard, I wouldn't really care.

Re:Is there a solution? (3, Interesting)

iabervon (1971) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450040)

It's certainly possible that the area people call "part 4" is actually random junk stuck in to fill up that section of the sculpture (the width of that portion is determined by the first two parts, and the height by the table on the right), and that the final solution to the sculpture uses entirely different elements.

If the end of the text is part 4, there's probably at least a part 5, because there's a bunch of other stuff in the installation not yet used in any solutions (including, for example, a compass that points the wrong way).

I wouldn't be surprised, from the known decryptions, if you had to stand with a candle at a certain point and notices the letters cut in the shadow cast by the sculpture at particular points. It seems to me like the bottom rows would be most likely as the letters for this, so it may be that some of the letters are important, but that there's no way to solve it by just looking at a transcript.

Re:Is there a solution? (1)

uncoveror (570620) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450185)

Sanborn is probably having a laugh at the pros trying to decrypt what is really only jibberish. It is just like the joke Magic Eye [magiceye.com] poster that doesn't have a hidden image.

OT: Johnny Carson dead at 79. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449556)

I always saw these, and wondered if any were truthful. Here is one that is.

Re:OT: Johnny Carson dead at 79. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449721)

netcraft confirms : carson dead at 79.

RIP, carnak the magnificent. you will be missed.

How hard could it be? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449576)

?OBKR
UOXOGHULBSOLIFBBWFLRVQQPRNGKSSO
TWTQSJQSSEKZZWATJKLUDIAWINFBNYP
VTTMZFPKWGDKZXTJCDIGKUHUAUEKCAR

Oooh, I just figured it out using my calculator (4, Funny)

3770 (560838) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449936)

A priest, a doctor, and an engineer are playing a round of golf. They get behind a pair that is playing amazingly slow. After some time they realize that these two men are blind. "What a sad way to spend one's life," said the priest. "I will say a prayer for them." "I have a good friend that is an eye surgeon," said the doctor, "maybe I could get them some help." The engineer thought for a second, "Why don't these guys play at night?"

I don't get it though.

97 or 98? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449586)

If you can't tell how many characters it has, no wonder it's so hard to crack.

Re:97 or 98? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449674)

About a third of the way in, there's a mysterious character and experts disagree on whether the character is a goatse or a tubgirl.

Re:97 or 98? (1)

game kid (805301) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449750)

Someone please mod that up, although I personally hope said character's Lindsay Lohan [llrocks.com] and neither of those two horrors.

Re:97 or 98? (4, Informative)

Zocalo (252965) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449787)

From the FAQ:

All of the characters on the ciphertext side of Kryptos have been solved, except for 97 characters at the very bottom. There is also a question mark between parts 3 and 4. Some say the question mark is part of part 3 (since it ends with the question, "Can you see anything q"). However, it's possible that the question mark is part of part 4.

So, there you go. Having a question mark at the beginning is a little odd, unless it's a hint that you are meant to read it backwards like some of the other Kryptos puzzles.

Re:97 or 98? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11450073)

The first part actually isn't that hard to decipher; it took me about five minutes with a piece of scrap paper. Have a go at it yourself:

HTRAEEHTFOECAFEHTMORFDETANIMRETXEEBTSUMELPOEPHSIWE
JEHTSREREDRUMDNASLANIMIRCFOELPOEPASITILIVEDEHTFO EL
POEPEHTSIELPOEPHSIWEJEHT


Reason: Don't use so many caps. Reason: Don't use so many caps. Reason: Don't use so many caps.

Ahh noooO! (1)

Kentsusai (837912) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449588)

Don't crack that last part people!

If you do, the artist is gonna hunt you down and sue you! (Unless she is from Harvard...)

Maybe its time the artist brings out a patch to cover up all those past security flaws :-)

Re:Ahh noooO! (2, Funny)

sbrown123 (229895) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449918)

That is true. This appears to be covered under the DMCA. Unencrypting that last part of a proprietary work will wind you up in jail. Leave it alone for gods sake!!!

More Information (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449590)

Can be found here [gd-kun.net]

Keys... (1)

Antony-Kyre (807195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449595)

Wouldn't the key to cracking it lie in like a key inside of the code? That somewhere in the code, it explains how to decode itself. Also, by looking at the artwork itself, it looks like two semi-circles.

Re:Keys... (1)

Antony-Kyre (807195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449611)

One idea, and I'm sure others have thought of it, is to connect the two semi-circles then draw lines. How the lines are drawn, don't know. We could try common letters, vowels, sentences, alphabets, etc.

I think I got it.. (3, Funny)

The Journalist (844669) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449601)

There's a "W", then an "e", a space, "a", "r", "e"...

"We are"..."

There's more! "s", "o", "r", "r", "y"

"We are sorry"...We knew this!

"f", "p", "r" - "We are sorry for" - "t", "h", "e", - "We are sorry for the what!?!

"i", "n", "c", "o", "n", "v", "e", - almost got it - "n", "i", "e", "n", "c" "e".

"We are sorry for the inconvenience"? You bastard!!

*Apologies to DNA, who orignially used this idea as God's final message to the univers.

Re:I think I got it.. (1)

fsterman (519061) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449628)

Actually, that brings me a deep sense of closure and inner peace for some reason.

Re:I think I got it.. (1)

fembots (753724) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449633)

"f", "p", "r" - "We are sorry for"

I sincerely hope this Kyrptos thing doesn't have a typo, otherwise it'll take another 2000 years to crack.

Re:I think I got it.. (1)

The Journalist (844669) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449722)

Aye. I became aware of the typo after I submitted it...For some odd reason the preview function fails to work.

Re:I think I got it.. (2, Informative)

tukkayoot (528280) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449796)

Well, FTA:

The encrypted sections include spelling errors, which Sanborn said were intentional, possibly to throw off sleuths, and misaligned characters set higher on a line of text than characters around them.

So who knows. :)

Re:I think I got it.. (0, Redundant)

sahonen (680948) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449762)

I'm pretty sure that it's actually "We apologize for the inconvenience."

God I feel like a geek right now.

Re:I think I got it.. (1)

The Journalist (844669) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450074)

Blasted joke assassins...

damn (2, Funny)

2MuchC0ffeeMan (201987) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449618)

where that's kid from mercury rising when you need him.

no wonder its so tough to crack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449622)

Why would the CIA allow something that would be easy to crack on their property?!

I got it !! (4, Funny)

Dolphinzilla (199489) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449625)

Be Sure to drink your Ovaltine.

Re:I got it !! (1)

fizban (58094) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449648)

Ovaltine? A crummy commercial?

Re:I got it !! (1)

John3 (85454) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450060)

Talking Ralphie [funnytummy.com] (in case the joke was too obscure for some)

Good thing the CIA isn't about code breaking (1)

alhaz (11039) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449645)

The article says that the NSA failed as well, but, honestly, the NSA wouldn't say if they had.

They probably have, long ago, and just don't tell anybody. They're probably chuckling about it right now.

Similar to a Google entrance exam... [n/t] (1)

nuntius (92696) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450226)

FWIW, [n/t] meant there was "no text". Silly /.

the pink syntax. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449647)

what's the pink syntax all about? is it good or is it wack?

Frits Pr0st!1111!!1!11!one!@!11 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449658)

fristage postage.
pwnt3d.

E*A*T*Y*O*U*R*O*V*A*L*T*I*N*E (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449681)

stupid decoder ring

Re:E*A*T*Y*O*U*R*O*V*A*L*T*I*N*E (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449803)

I think you mean "Drink more ovaltine." Sheesh...stupid junior crypto-weenie.

Re:E*A*T*Y*O*U*R*O*V*A*L*T*I*N*E (1)

-kertrats- (718219) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449950)

how would one eat ovaltine?

Re:E*A*T*Y*O*U*R*O*V*A*L*T*I*N*E (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11450165)

Sub zero temperatures would congeal it enough, I bet. Perhaps even mix it with dirt. You could let it sit out until the water evaporates... then whatever is left is eatable.

Re:E*A*T*Y*O*U*R*O*V*A*L*T*I*N*E (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11450186)

With a spoon.

The solution: (1)

IO ERROR (128968) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449689)

It's a confession that Elvis isn't dead; that he's been working for the CIA all this time, in the disguise of an Elvis impersonator.

Re:The solution: (1)

Doctor Crumb (737936) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449823)

...fighting mummies in texas.

\dick (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449741)

Perhaps if they spent less time on this (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449760)

and more time doing real intelligence work, they could have prevented the horrible attacks on the mighty Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. I know I'll never forget.

Re:Perhaps if they spent less time on this (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449782)

hey fuck you man, not relevant!

All your base are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449783)

For great justice!

Curious Images... (1)

kenthorvath (225950) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449801)

I saw this article from Wired yesterday and looked at the image that was provided. They said it was given to them by Elonka Dunin. The thing is, if you look very closesly at the letters in an image window under magnification, there are intermittent red pixels occurring on certain letters on what should be a black and white only image. Could this be another code?

Here is the image [akamai.net]

Re:Curious Images... (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450137)

more likely render aliasing errors.

after all, its a gif image with incorrect extension.

I have seen a pattern in the information... (3, Funny)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449808)

There seems to be a pattern emerging in Slashdot posts - it can be outlined by the following pseudo-code:
Program GoSlash;
CDate = Today - 1;
..For I = 1 to NumArticles(Fark(CDate));
....If SubjectScore((FarkArticle[I,CDate]) >= MildlyTechnical then
....begin
......NewArticle = Rehash(FarkArticle[I,CDate]);
......SubmitToSlash (NewArticle);
....end;
..next I;
end.
>

It's a trap! (4, Funny)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449809)

The people who solved the first 3 are currently in jail for DCMA violations. ;^)

Another option... (4, Funny)

krypt0s (72886) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449812)

Someone could've just asked me. I'm not THAT complicated.

Fark (1)

juaja (682026) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449819)

Ok, slashdot has officially become a mirror for www.fark.com, this was posted yesterday. Congrats!

Re:Fark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449873)

Yeah, and some poster originally got it from Wired. What's your point?

Re:Fark (1)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449982)

Not everybody reads all news websites, not everything is a race, you don't need to be first in everything.

Edwin

And so? (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450218)

Well, I think the same could be said with k5 and a lot of other sites as well. You see, Slashdot is a digest, with the exception of interviews and book reviews, I don't think they publish original material at all...

Took a while to crack but here's the answer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449821)

It decrypts to:

"all your base are belong to US."

Not sure why they didn't use proper English...

metaphorically solved section 4 (4, Interesting)

BierGuzzl (92635) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449827)

Weird. This guy apparently metaphorically solved section 4. But he got an email from Jim saying "Dear John, this is not the way" Did he cheat? :)

http://members.aol.com/scirealm/KryptosPart4.htm l

Re:metaphorically solved section 4 (1)

brouski (827510) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450180)

I went and looked at this link.

My head promptly exploded.

I am not a psycologist (1)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449832)

But reading the wired interview gave me the impression of the two mice pontificating about the answer...

I thikn that perhaps he (as an artist) has 'encrypted something' in a manner of:

what I want encrypted -> process -> result = somethign completely different, is this encryption?

I.e. perhaps he has done this type of encryption:

"apple" = "orange" which is impossible to crack... looking at the points where he makes too many clues, and builds something out of it, seems too vain, now I think he is worried about contradicting himself...

Perhaps he never wants it cracked, perhaps there is no solution...

Another reader idea of reading backwars, and the idea of CANDLE seem good, but again read wired interview [wired.com] and tell me it doesn't seem like he is a little too guarded... and 'deliberate mistakes' come on, you expect me to believe that! :-)

Well... lets give it a go...

Here be treasure... (1)

ozbird (127571) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449833)

Sanborn may be referring to something he buried on the CIA grounds, though he's not saying. The decrypted text mentions a burial and gives latitude and longitude coordinates (38 57 6.5 N, 77 8 44 W), which Sanborn said referred to "locations of the agency."

GlobeXplorer [globexplorer.com] shows some parkland adjacent to a collection of buildings (presumably CIA HQ), but no "X".
It's probably only a cache of Iraqi WMD, or an alien spacecraft... Move along, nothing to see here.

Decryption Texas style (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449856)

Now some of you like my good friend who does this sort of thing for a living know that there is very good chance the last piece of the puzzle was encrypted using a variation of Khufu [wikipedia.org] , which is a 64-bit Feistel network block cipher resistant to differential cryptanalysis and since a 512-bit key gives a complexity of 2^512 you can forget about trying to crack that mother! At least that's what my good friend tells me. I'm getting tired of seeing my good friend frustrated over this, so I swear by J. Edgar's garter hose that I shall have the solution by early morning (that's Texas time, y'all), so help me God almighty! I'm just gonna ask Sanborn real nice to give me the solution and if he doesn't, well I'm just gonna do some cracking. I'm no cryptomacologist but I'm handy with a crowbar, so y'all can rest easy, we'll know the secret by tomorrow morning. Now, anyone care to spring for my airfare to Langley? Anyone want me to bring back some tofu?

Kryptos (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449877)

EMUFPHZLRFAXYUSDJKZLDKRNSHGNFIVJ
BETWEENSUBTLESHADINGANDTHEABSENC

YQTQUXQBQVYUVLLTREVJYQTMKYRDMFD
EOFLIGHTLIESTHENUANCEOFIQLUSION

VFPJUDEEHZWETZYVGWHKKQETGFQJNCE
ITWASTOTALLYINVISIBLEHOWSTHATPO

GGWHKK?DQMCPFQZDQMMIAGPFXHQRLG
SSIBLE?THEYUSEDTHEEARTHSMAGNET

TIMVMZJANQLVKQEDAGDVFRPJUNGEUNA
ICFIELDTHEINFORMATIONWASGATHER

QZGZLECGYUXUEENJTBJLBQCRTBJDFHRR
EDANDTRANSMITTEDUNDERGRUUNDTOANU

YIZETKZEMVDUFKSJHKFWHKUWQLSZFTI
NKNOWNLOCATIONDOESLANGLEYKNOWA

HHDDDUVH?DWKBFUFPWNTDFIYCUQZERE
BOUTTHIS?THEYSHOULDITSBURIEDOUT

EVLDKFEZMOQQJLTTUGSYQPFEUNLAVIDX
THERESOMEWHERWHOKNOWSTHEEXACTL

FLGGTEZ?FKZBSFDQVGOGIPUFXHHDRKF
OCATION?ONLYWWTHISWASHISLASTMES

FHQNTGPUAECNUVPDJMQCLQUMUNEDFQ
SAGETHIRTYEIGHTDEGREESFIFTYSE

ELZZVRRGKFFVOEEXBDMVPNFQXEZLGRE
VENMINUTESSIXPOINTFIVESECONDSNO

DNQFMPNZGLFLPMRJQYALMGNUVPDXVKP
RTHSEVENTYSEVENDEGREESEIGHTMINU

DQUMEBEDMHDAFMJGZNUPLGEWJLLAETG
TESFORTYFOURSECONDSWESTIDBYROWS


"Between subtle shading and the absence of light lies the nuance of iqlusion.
It was totally invisible Hows that possible? They used the Earths magnetic field
The information was gathered and transmitted undergruund to an unknown location
Does Langley know about this? They should Its buried out there somewhere
Who knows the exact location? Only WW This was his last message
Thirty eight degrees fifty seven minutes six point five seconds north
Seventy seven degrees eight minutes forty four seconds west ID by rows"


BTW Trying to bypass the Lameness filter was harder than cracking this puzzle. *hint* *hint* Slashdot fix your goddamn code!!

Important Stuff
Please try to keep posts on topic.
Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even
moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

No Langley, VA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11449926)

Just so everyone knows, "Langley, VA" is not the correct name. Langley is the term for the CIA place but it does not reside in Langley, VA. Its in McLean, VA.

Re:No Langley, VA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11450098)

i drive by it every day, and right as i do, every day, i temporarily lose cell phone coverage. anyone know why? is this a hot topic for local area residents? it's quite annoying.

Some news for this 'news' (1)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 9 years ago | (#11449928)

If you read HERE [aol.com] You will see on the 21st of Jan 2005 that Sanborn mentioned that his method is not the way (which might mean it is!!)

Update 21-Jan-2005: Finally got an email from Sanborn "Dear John, This is not the way, Jim"

http://members.aol.com/SciRealm/KryptosPart4.htm l

Ok, be honest (0, Offtopic)

nwbvt (768631) | more than 9 years ago | (#11450091)

Who when first reading this thought it was an article about some KDE application? Or am I the only one?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>