araver
-
Posts
1976 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Everything posted by araver
-
OK, that's exactly the problem with such an IF THEN 1 ELSE 0 rule, it kinda looks random for a small number of cases unless you stumble on a pattern. Regarding starting a new Crack the Code game: I'm up for it, regardless of the solution for this algorithm (We can leave it be for now and think between games or I can provide the solution in "spoilers") So who wants to start it?
-
abound
-
Sorry,
-
-
Or if you prefer more "standard" answers:
-
OK, then
-
I agree. I know the real-life problem is often solved with brute-attacks, no argument for me there. This however is a small scale model - 51/3=17 - at most 16 guessing rounds. I still would have liked to "patch" it up a little. I would have been much happier designing something that does not suggest a brute-force attack is feasible e.g. the algorithm in the first game. As I said, I was too anxious to start the game
-
-
-
Yes, it's not the intended algorithm but I think it would be an interesting valid rule for an algorithm in a different game as ABORT does not have separated consonants and falls on the most frequent branch. It might still raise some objections depending on each player's view on the game rules.
-
-
Later edit (decided this part does not need spoilers - it's open and open to discussion). I still think that such a rule - expressed as an IF(C(x)) THEN A(x) ELSE B(x) rule - contradicts (at least the spirit of) the original Game Rules if the B branch is less than 50% than the number of cases. If A(x) is constant I do not think that you can guess the algorithm B(x) due to a very small number of occurrences which is why I do not feel it is "practically" breakable in this game. The argument above holds with one exception - If by chance the ABORT command is on the most probable branch, it can still be guessed because guessing does not hurt *that much* in the game.
-
-
OK, since the discussion is heating up, I'll refrain from any hints. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- After stopping the system, the successful Hacker finds in the Evil Mastermind's abandoned lair an alphabetical list with some of the next passwords. As he tries to unravel the mystery of the algorithm, he shares the list with the community: ALABAMA - A0A4L2A5 ALASKA - A0K3L1S3 ARIZONA - I0A4R2I5 ARKANSAS - K1A3A3K4 CALIFORNIA - L1R5C0I5 DELAWARE - L0R4E3A4 FLORIDA - O1A3F2O4 GEORGIA - O1A4G2O5 ILLINOIS - L1I4I3L5 KANSAS - N1A2K1N3 KENTUCKY - N0K2E3T2 MASSACHUSETTS - S0S4A3S4 MICHIGAN - C1A3M3C4 MINNESOTA - N0O4I4N4 MISSISSIPPI - S0I4I1S5 MISSOURI - S0R4I3S4 MONTANA - N0A3O2N4 NEWHAMPSHIRE - W0R4E2H4 NEWJERSEY - W1S3N4J3 NEWMEXICO - W1I4N4W5 Some states are still missing, but maybe the critical mass of information has been reached?
-
Yes,
-
-
-
Password accepted, system shutting down. Oh, no, the former Evil Mastermind has cleverly regained control of the system and stopped it. The rest of the states are safe (... for now). P.S.: However, in order to reprogram the system, he needs to explain the algorithm so that the system recognizes its master.
-
Evil Mastermind's has gotten back to work as increased attacks on the system could possibly amount to a Denial-of-Service later ... better launch as soon as possible OKLAHOMA L0M4K3A4 OREGON E0O3R1G3 TEXAS X1S2T0A2
-
Command not recognized. Ignoring input.
-
Command not recognized. Ignoring input. (Maybe the coin was not fair? )
-
-
The Evil Mastermind selects new targets double-checking each password: CONNECTICUT N0T4O1N4 IDAHO A1O3I0H3 UTAH A1A2U4A3
-
Evil Mastermind opens the TV and sees live transmissions from South Carolina. This can't be! Oh, no, reading the logs it seems that the Evil Mastermind has entered a wrong password for South Caroline. Shame on him! The Evil Mastermind enters the correct password: SOUTHCAROLINA U0A6O3U7 And quickly checks if the rest of the passwords were correct. Indeed they are. ------------------------------------------ P.S.: Sorry about that! Beginner's mistake
-
