Convicted Terrorist Relied On Single-Letter Cipher

Hugh Pickens writes "The Register reports that the majority of the communications between convicted terrorist Rajib Karim and Bangladeshi Islamic activists were encrypted with a system which used Excel transposition tables which they invented themselves. It used a single-letter substitution cipher invented by the ancient Greeks that had been used and described by Julius Caesar in 55BC. Despite urging by the Yemen-based al Qaida leader Anwar Al Anlaki, Karim rejected the use of a sophisticated code program called 'Mujhaddin Secrets' which implements all the AES candidate cyphers, 'because "kaffirs," or non-believers, know about it so it must be less secure.'"

Re:More spreadsheet abuse

[somersault]

This is pretty damn hilarious. Though also, probably an April Fool's joke.

which proves once again

[brezel]

that extremists are usually complete idiots.

Two types of cryptography

[Karellen]

According to Bruce Schneier, there are two types of cryptography - that which will keep secrets safe from your little sister, and that which will keep secrets safe from your government.

I don't think this counts as either.

Fail.

Silly terrorists...

[the_raptor]

... everyone knows you don't roll your own crypto.

I guess this is further support for the theory that the ignorant have too much confidence in what they think they know.

Re:More spreadsheet abuse

[WWWWolf]

This is pretty damn hilarious. Though also, probably an April Fool's joke.

Weirder stuff has happened. There already was some Mafia guy who got caught because he was using Caesar cipher. <predictablejoke>And then there was that one Caesar-based encryption scheme in Adobe DRM. I have problems telling these Mafia guys apart.</predictablejoke>

Still, pretty hilarious. Even ignoring Kerckhoffs's Principle, there's still a big difference between using a cryptosystem the infidels developed, and a cryptosystem the infidels developed and then then abandoned centuries ago because they broke it and Muslim mathematicians no doubt helped cracking it. People who ignore history will only repeat it. This is also a good example of what happens when you play a high-stakes game of "I have a problem - let's throw a little bit of Excel at it to solve it once and for all".

Just goes to show...

[ZDRuX]

This just goes to show how the whole Patriot Act has nothing to do with catching terrorists. They can barely communicate effectively, most of them just set their underwear on fire, and the rest live in far off lands, yet the nanny state is always local, ever present, and ever watchful... give me a break!

Re:Two types of cryptography

[namgge]

There are two types of cyptography: one that allows the Government to use brute force to break the code, and one that requires the Government to use brute force to break you.

Re:which proves once again

[EdZ]

The ones holding the pointy end of the stick, yes. They're generally a bit lacking in cognitive faculties. Unfortunately, the ones handing out the sticks are often pretty clever, and rather ruthless in keeping their scam going.

Re:Kaffir != non believers.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

First principle in any war is "know thy enemy". One must understand the terminology they use and try to understand their world view. That does not mean we agree with them. Often times most effective counterattacks would come from talking their language and their imagery.

One of my pet peeves, for example. Saudi Arabia does not permit women to drive. Saudi Arabian government has a deficit and it has external debt. Yes it is true. It is so incomprehensible. The oil wealth of Saudi Arabia does not belong to the people of Saudi Arabia. It is considered to be personal wealth of King Saud, and his descendants, about 5000 sheiks and their families. All the rest get some kind of government dole, but pittance compared to what the sheiks are raking in. They have imported some 500,000 drivers from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Phillipines (that is in addition to 1.5 million domestic servants).

You can talk till you are hoarse about why women should be allowed to drive their cars, based on principles of equality, or economic implications. You will not make any progress. You cant reach them. They would shut you out.

But, if you knew that Mohammad has ordered all Muslim women to be able to ride horses and camels, you could argue that not allowing women to drive cars contradicts the Hadith, so it is un Islamic. Not that you are going to win. They will come back some argument or another. But they won't be able to shut you out. You will enable a few women there to make similar argument, and who knows, ten years from now, they might relax it a little bit and allow women to drive their sick children to hospitals.