New Cryptology Variant?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.diplomacy (More info?)

Anyone interested in cryptology/cryptic messages? (Many apologies if this
repicates the rules of CryptoDiplomacy I & II but I couldn't find any rules
other than a mention of the name in variant bank)

Although diplomacy mirrors the situation circa 1901 re diplomacy, it doesn't
mimic the true format in which messages would have been sent. The worry of
interception would have meant meassage would have to coded to stop enemies
intercepting the transmission and altering their plans.

How best to replicate this in PBEM Diplomacy? Here are a bried set of rules
I have put together:

1. All rules as Standard Diplomacy except where altered below
2. The game will be gunboat to stop any OOG contact.
3. All press is broadcast, and is white or grey.
4. Press can be coded (before sending) with any cryptology system available
to the sender.

The key to doing well at this variant is to design ways to encode press so
that only a few key powers (who are clever enough) can decode it. One would
also have to decide when to reveal that you have cracked a cipher and when
not, deciphering press from other powers when they are unaware it is being
intercepted may well be a great advantage, more so than actually conversing
and revealing you can intercept the messages being transmitted.

My main concern here is that it would simply detiorate into a broadcast only
game because codes were either a) So easy anyone could decode them, or b)
no-one could be bothered decoding the codes.

Another thought - whats to stop me using this tactic in a standard broadcast
only game? It would really throw things into the mix if the others could see
two powers speaking in code (Would this be within the rules? I expect so,
assuming the key wasn't transmitted OOG. It might be best to clear with the
GM first though).

If anyone is interested in a game they should decode the message below using
a Vignere cipher (plenty of websites offer simple decoding forms) and a
simple key (i couldn't make it too difficult!) to find my real email
address:

Picj Htapiv ndc rqcqblvv evus ocvaprs, utu erws ec eeg kb bxxs iaul'w
epdhqd. K jrwz qcdwcpg bd ssmrklj ngza kow qrwc, tt kow yum xyhqrgqwms
pbauif ww spqadg rkqh xsesceh Q pdggmg wrc pcs unvcumhesp epmxow ec fra y
jibp cr scgg dpcwmnv. Nompds qmcgo ut lbp wg'jo ote cze ucw ce -
nvdiu.jrdthoftu@lwtlzfxd.emp
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.diplomacy (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:14:19 GMT, Chris Love wrote:

> Although diplomacy mirrors the situation circa 1901 re diplomacy, it doesn't
> mimic the true format in which messages would have been sent. The worry of
> interception would have meant meassage would have to coded to stop enemies
> intercepting the transmission and altering their plans.

Did you read "Codebreakers" from David Kahn? The book lists, which major
powers were able to read which other's ciphers during WW1. In short:
most powers could read most other power's messages.

> 4. Press can be coded (before sending) with any cryptology system available
> to the sender.

This would very fast tend to become a usual game: using public key
cryptography you can easily ensure that nobody but the intended power
can read the message. Although there's a slight problem at the beginning
where the public keys are distributed, this would get resolved very
fast, when it turns out, who's who.

> My main concern here is that it would simply detiorate into a broadcast only
> game because codes were either a) So easy anyone could decode them, or b)
> no-one could be bothered decoding the codes.

Using contemprary cryptography the game would be just the same as all
other's with just a unnecessary bunch of overhead.

> Another thought - whats to stop me using this tactic in a standard broadcast
> only game?

Usually, the GM should stop you.

> Picj Htapiv ndc rqcqblvv evus ocvaprs, utu erws ec eeg kb bxxs iaul'w
> epdhqd. K jrwz qcdwcpg bd ssmrklj ngza kow qrwc, tt kow yum xyhqrgqwms
> pbauif ww spqadg rkqh xsesceh Q pdggmg wrc pcs unvcumhesp epmxow ec fra y
> jibp cr scgg dpcwmnv. Nompds qmcgo ut lbp wg'jo ote cze ucw ce -
> nvdiu.jrdthoftu@lwtlzfxd.emp

This was too easy, the key is <rot13>qvcybznpl</rot13>. But I could've
told that without breaking the cipher...

Regards,

Lexi

--
W="Wanze" ; M="Mauer" ; L="Lauer" ; for I in 5 4 3 2 1 0 ; do echo "Auf der
${M:0:$I}, auf der ${L:0:$I} liegt ne dicke ${W:0:$I}" ; done
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.diplomacy (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:14:19 GMT, Chris Love wrote:

> 3. All press is broadcast, and is white or grey.

Oh, I've missed this one: with white press there are no more problems:
distribute a public key with your true identity and every crypto is
beyond computational infeasability for mortal humans.

Maybe you should restrict the crypto in this variant to methods that
were developed before 1918? But even they include some very nasty
methods to encrypt.

Sorry to destroy your illusion :-( but otherwise I like your idea :eek:)

Regards,

Lexi

--
W="Wanze" ; M="Mauer" ; L="Lauer" ; for I in 5 4 3 2 1 0 ; do echo "Auf der
${M:0:$I}, auf der ${L:0:$I} liegt ne dicke ${W:0:$I}" ; done
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.diplomacy (More info?)

Thanks for the reply.

I was thinking the variant would be used as a fun "simple" codebreaking
exercise, for those of us who like crossword puzzles and codes puzzles in
the newspaper, and also to add some meaning to breaking the codes and tap
into "enemy" intelligence.

It would give those willing to spend a couple of minutes (or hours depending
on skill) an advantage in the game.

I think you are right, trying to simulate the state of affairs
cryptographically in 1913 would be impossible.

"Lexi Pimenidis" <usenet.23@satans-keksdose.de> wrote in message
news:f8qlh2-b6e.ln1@aachen.homeip.net...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:14:19 GMT, Chris Love wrote:
>
>> 3. All press is broadcast, and is white or grey.
>
> Oh, I've missed this one: with white press there are no more problems:
> distribute a public key with your true identity and every crypto is
> beyond computational infeasability for mortal humans.
>
> Maybe you should restrict the crypto in this variant to methods that
> were developed before 1918? But even they include some very nasty
> methods to encrypt.
>
> Sorry to destroy your illusion :-( but otherwise I like your idea :eek:)
>
> Regards,
>
> Lexi
>
> --
> W="Wanze" ; M="Mauer" ; L="Lauer" ; for I in 5 4 3 2 1 0 ; do echo "Auf
> der
> ${M:0:$I}, auf der ${L:0:$I} liegt ne dicke ${W:0:$I}" ; done
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.diplomacy (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 17:59:08 GMT, Chris Love wrote:

>
> I was thinking the variant would be used as a fun "simple" codebreaking
> exercise, for those of us who like crossword puzzles and codes puzzles in
> the newspaper, and also to add some meaning to breaking the codes and tap
> into "enemy" intelligence.
>
> It would give those willing to spend a couple of minutes (or hours depending
> on skill) an advantage in the game.
>
> I think you are right, trying to simulate the state of affairs
> cryptographically in 1913 would be impossible.

Modern computing power solves all problems of that time within seconds,
unfortunately.

But have a look at
http://www.variantbank.org/results/rules/c/cryptodiplomacy1.htm

Lexi

--
W="Wanze" ; M="Mauer" ; L="Lauer" ; for I in 5 4 3 2 1 0 ; do echo "Auf der
${M:0:$I}, auf der ${L:0:$I} liegt ne dicke ${W:0:$I}" ; done