Is Parseltongue Cryptography...?
DasFox
>>> Here lies the horcrux ;0), I don't know of anyone that has this level
>>> of expertise in international law. If they did, today's ever changing
>>> world, their advice would need to be summoned on a regular basis.
>>>
>>> To me, $1,000's to select a simple VPN provider would be Sirius Black
>>> overkill.
>>
>> LOL...watching Half Blood Prince...AGAIN...hierophant...?
>>
>> THANKS
>
> Sharp as a Fox you are, Das' ;0)
HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
Cryptography...?
THANKS
--
Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter
http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/reviews/potters-stick/big.jpg
https://ari.jottit.com/ YOU want to be next...? Fuck with 'FOX then...
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4157259&postcount=25
Anybody with an internet connection, 5 grand, an iq above room
temperature and basic literacy can grow outstanding cannabis.
hierophant
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:07:45 -0500, hierophant wrote:
>
>>>> Here lies the horcrux ;0), I don't know of anyone that has this level
>>>> of expertise in international law. If they did, today's ever changing
>>>> world, their advice would need to be summoned on a regular basis.
>>>>
>>>> To me, $1,000's to select a simple VPN provider would be Sirius Black
>>>> overkill.
>>>
>>> LOL...watching Half Blood Prince...AGAIN...hierophant...?
>>>
>>> THANKS
>>
>> Sharp as a Fox you are, Das' ;0)
>
> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
> Cryptography...?
Hm. I don't know, is there key sharing: ,0)>
Draco Malfoy
>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>> Cryptography...?
>
> Hm. I don't know, is there key sharing: ,0)>
PT is like a different language, hell if I know what crytography
is.lol
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/skaran/23299720/ Platform 9 3/4 today
http://www.evilwizardrock.com/
http://www.myspace.com/dracoandthemalfoysusa
VD
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:11:56 -0500, hierophant wrote:
>
>>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>>> Cryptography...?
>>
>> Hm. I don't know, is there key sharing: ,0)>
>
> PT is like a different language, hell if I know what crytography
> is.lol
DM, cryptography is the science of protecting and hiding information.
So is PT. I would say "Yes".
Draco Malfoy
Yeah, yeah I know what crypto is but parseltongue ain't no crypto. No
math.har
hierophant
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:17:00 -0500, VD wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:13:31 -0500, Draco Malfoy wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:11:56 -0500, hierophant wrote:
>>>
>>>>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>>>>> Cryptography...?
>>>>
>>>> Hm. I don't know, is there key sharing: ,0)>
>>>
>>> PT is like a different language, hell if I know what crytography
>>> is.lol
>>
>> DM, cryptography is the science of protecting and hiding information.
>> So is PT. I would say "Yes".
>
> Yeah, yeah I know what crypto is but parseltongue ain't no crypto. No
> math.har
Yes and No. ;) Modern cryptography is meshed with mathematics as Draco
Malfoy 0)> has pointed. Mr. Dix would also be accurate in that PT is
hiding communication information.
My vote? Yes! ;)
--
herem...@hushmail.com
http://heremypants.weebly.com/
DasFox
Tech here votes...YES...
Draco Malfoy
>>>>> PT is like a different language, hell if I know what crytography
>>>>> is.lol
>>>>
>>>> DM, cryptography is the science of protecting and hiding information.
>>>> So is PT. I would say "Yes".
>>>
>>> Yeah, yeah I know what crypto is but parseltongue ain't no crypto. No
>>> math.har
>>
>> Yes and No. ;) Modern cryptography is meshed with mathematics as Draco
>> Malfoy 0)> has pointed. Mr. Dix would also be accurate in that PT is
>> hiding communication information.
>>
>> My vote? Yes! ;)
>
> Tech here votes...YES...
Well "Tech" you got a problem because crypto as I knw it isn't
something that is accomplished on accident. Parseltongue is spoken to
and from snakes as if it is their natural language i.e. Potter wasn't
trying to talk PT it just came out.
hierophant
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:21:45 -0500, DasFox wrote:
>
>>>>>> PT is like a different language, hell if I know what crytography
>>>>>> is.lol
>>>>>
>>>>> DM, cryptography is the science of protecting and hiding information.
>>>>> So is PT. I would say "Yes".
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, yeah I know what crypto is but parseltongue ain't no crypto. No
>>>> math.har
>>>
>>> Yes and No. ;) Modern cryptography is meshed with mathematics as Draco
>>> Malfoy 0)> has pointed. Mr. Dix would also be accurate in that PT is
>>> hiding communication information.
>>>
>>> My vote? Yes! ;)
>>
>> Tech here votes...YES...
>
> Well "Tech" you got a problem because crypto as I knw it isn't
> something that is accomplished on accident. Parseltongue is spoken to
> and from snakes as if it is their natural language i.e. Potter wasn't
> trying to talk PT it just came out.
Truly? I had always thought Harry spoke PT because he chose it. Hm!
--
herem...@hushmail.com
http://heremypants.weebly.com/
VD
No, DM is correct. When Harry first spoke "serpent mouth" it was at
the zoo in SS/PS. It wasn't until pre-Christmas '92 when he spoke
directly and purposefully to the snake unleashed on him by none other
than our own Draco Malfoy!
Draco Malfoy
>>>>> My vote? Yes! ;)
>>>>
>>>> Tech here votes...YES...
>>>
>>> Well "Tech" you got a problem because crypto as I knw it isn't
>>> something that is accomplished on accident. Parseltongue is spoken to
>>> and from snakes as if it is their natural language i.e. Potter wasn't
>>> trying to talk PT it just came out.
>>
>> Truly? I had always thought Harry spoke PT because he chose it. Hm!
>
> No, DM is correct. When Harry first spoke "serpent mouth" it was at
> the zoo in SS/PS. It wasn't until pre-Christmas '92 when he spoke
> directly and purposefully to the snake unleashed on him by none other
> than our own Draco Malfoy!
heh slick move it was.
hierophant
Kudos Malfoy! Although you did get a severe arse kicking later if I
recall ;)
TECHnically, as our DasFox would have it, cryptography can be "on
accident". There are several ways to automate the hiding, sending and
retrieving of data. A case could be made that without consent,
accidentally, or with consent, but without knowing or remembering, you
have used cryptographic means. ;0)
--
herem...@hushmail.com
http://heremypants.weebly.com/
DasFox
TECH can be auto and non-auto...so CRYPTO can be auto and
non-auto...Parseltongue can be auto and non-auto...
ANSWER...PT = CRYPTO...
hierophant
I have nothing more to add to that! Well spoken, 'Fox! ;)
--
herem...@hushmail.com
http://heremypants.weebly.com/
Draco Malfoy
>>> No, DM is correct. When Harry first spoke "serpent mouth" it was at
>>> the zoo in SS/PS. It wasn't until pre-Christmas '92 when he spoke
>>> directly and purposefully to the snake unleashed on him by none other
>>> than our own Draco Malfoy!
>>
>> Kudos Malfoy! Although you did get a severe arse kicking later if I
>> recall ;)
Comes with the territory, pay is great and I get closeups of Emma's
legs and hiney.
>> TECHnically, as our DasFox would have it, cryptography can be "on
>> accident". There are several ways to automate the hiding, sending and
>> retrieving of data. A case could be made that without consent,
>> accidentally, or with consent, but without knowing or remembering, you
>> have used cryptographic means. ;0)
>
> TECH can be auto and non-auto...so CRYPTO can be auto and
> non-auto...Parseltongue can be auto and non-auto...
>
> ANSWER...PT = CRYPTO...
Out of the mouth of babes.................
VD
> Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter
> http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/reviews/potters-stick/big.jpg
Humorous, DasFox, anytime you can put one over on a Malfoy. As an
aside, has anyone ever wondered why the broomstick? Wizards and
witches cannot fly regardless of charming (two notable exceptions)
and to keep those darn Muggles guessing, they picked a common
household item. I wonder if it had been today would they have chosen
Swiffers?
Enter the broomstick! Add a Disillusionment Charm and off they go! (no
need to shout "up" either).
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Is Parseltongue Cryptography...?
No more or less than when my wife and I speak in Hungarian to each other
in front of (English speaking) car salesmen.
The question is not a question of substance, but of definition. One
could pull out competing definitions to get different answers. If we
insist that the shared secret generally be smaller than the message,
then things like this would not be cryptography (and neither would a one
time pad be). But by other definitions the answer is "yes". But in
neither case does it tell us anything interesting about Parseltongue.
Although different (human) languages differ in grammar, we can really
think of these as codes instead of ciphers.
Now when my wife and I use Hungarian, we are using a code which about 15
million people know, but not one that we expect the car salesman to
know. This is also very much a "battle field" usage. We only need to
keep the secret for a few minutes (typically, we are just discussing
what our real maximum price is and what extras are valuable to us).
If I recall correctly there are a few instances in the Harry Potter
series where Parseltongue is used this way. I think Tom Riddle's
maternal grandfather used it when talking to his family when a visitor
arrived.
But I think that it was used more for authentication than for secrecy.
The ability to speak and understand Parseltongue communicated
information about how the person was. This played a big roll in the
Chamber of Secrets if I remember.
Again, natural languages have been used this way. In terms of accents
and dialects they this happens every day as people identify themselves
as belonging to some group through their speech.
So irrespective of whether we define cryptography in a way that includes
spoken language this way, Parseltongue is no different than any other
language except that it is spoken by far fewer people (leaving the
snakes out of it). But while my example used Hungarian with 15 million
speakers, there are languages with only a few dozen speakers remaining.
The only thing that distinguishes Parseltongue from real languages in a
way that matters for this discussion is how it is acquired. It isn't
learned the same way that English, or Hungarian or Dyirpal is learned.
So it can play a more interesting role for authentication.
Yet it is still possible for someone who doesn't have the gift of
Parseltongue to fake it well enough to authenticate, as Ron did in
Deathly Hallows. So it can, to some extent, be learned by outsiders. So
I maintain that for the question you ask it, it is no different then
asking it about any spoken language.
Cheers,
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg http://goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts
Reply-To address is valid
LCC
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:07:45 -0500, hierophant wrote:
> >>> Here lies the horcrux ;0), I don't know of anyone that has this level
> >>> of expertise in international law. If they did, today's ever changing
> >>> world, their advice would need to be summoned on a regular basis.
>
> >>> To me, $1,000's to select a simple VPN provider would be Sirius Black
> >>> overkill.
>
> >> LOL...watching Half Blood Prince...AGAIN...hierophant...?
>
> >> THANKS
>
> > Sharp as a Fox you are, Das' ;0)
>
> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
> Cryptography...?
>
> THANKS
> --
> Anybody with an internet connection, 5 grand, an iq above room
> temperature and basic literacy can grow outstanding cannabis.
A bit off of the Harry Potter theme, but see me on Dec 6 at :
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.crypt/browse_thread/thread/b914a4bb490cb162?hl=en
Cryptography has been around far longer than computers, as readers of
this newsgroup are well aware. Furthermore, the mathematical
techniques of today are just elaborations of a basic concept old as
smoke signals - coding of information. Implicit in the coding is a
shared agreement between sender and recipients. To the extent that
those outside the agreement are blocked from understanding, even the
most basic words of a language are "cryptographic" to "foreigners".
For the astute, messages can be buried in seemingly innocuous text in
a practically unbreakable code. With words treated as context
sensitive acronyms, recognition of a coded sentence can be triggered
by unusual word choice, apparent grammatical or spelling errors,
sentence structure, etc. etc. The easiest way to initiate a message is
through the title line, or in the old days a newspaper headline...
Selection of the word to be assigned to each letter of the acronym
stream is so dependent upon shared culture and agreements made at face
to face meetings that outsiders are completely blocked. The more text
available in a block, the less ambiguous it becomes. I want to
emphasize that of course I have no idea whatsoever WHO might be able
to decode the messages which I encode. I make a habit of not examining
things too closely, except for the responses to my own messages...
Anybody remember the hilarious jokes about the spastic who tried to
clap his hands? When he finally managed the trick, the teacher gave
him an ice cream cone, which he promptly smacked into his nose when
attempting to bring it up to his mouth. My communications launch
technique is like that spastic, missing the mark 99.999 % of the
time...
Lonnie Courtney Clay
VD
> On 11-02-10 5:54 PM, DasFox wrote:
>
>> Is Parseltongue Cryptography...?
>
> No more or less than when my wife and I speak in Hungarian to each other
> in front of (English speaking) car salesmen.
>
> The question is not a question of substance, but of definition. One
> could pull out competing definitions to get different answers. If we
> insist that the shared secret generally be smaller than the message,
> then things like this would not be cryptography (and neither would a one
> time pad be). But by other definitions the answer is "yes". But in
> neither case does it tell us anything interesting about Parseltongue.
This was the conclusion of the participants in this thread, Jeffrey, a
matter of definition.
> Although different (human) languages differ in grammar, we can really
> think of these as codes instead of ciphers.
I suppose I could argue that all language is ciphering as it is heard
and extrapolated as thought.
> Now when my wife and I use Hungarian, we are using a code which about 15
> million people know, but not one that we expect the car salesman to
> know. This is also very much a "battle field" usage. We only need to
> keep the secret for a few minutes (typically, we are just discussing
> what our real maximum price is and what extras are valuable to us).
>
> If I recall correctly there are a few instances in the Harry Potter
> series where Parseltongue is used this way.
Parseltongue has no relation to any spoken language as we know them.
It is a hissing, tonal, inflective (forget what you see in the
movies). PT can be learned but only through extensive study by
extremely bright wizards (Dumbledore). Not by teaching or
environmental forces. It can be ingrained from birth (Harry and
Riddle). Both qualities separate it from, say, Hungarian.
> I think Tom Riddle's maternal grandfather used it when talking to
> his family when a visitor arrived.
Marvolo Gaunt. Very good! All the Gaunt family were Parselmouths.
> But I think that it was used more for authentication than for secrecy.
> The ability to speak and understand Parseltongue communicated
> information about how the person was. This played a big roll in the
> Chamber of Secrets if I remember.
Both. Authentication that one Parselmouth was in the presence of
another (Dark Art practitioner) and secrecy - between practitioners.
> The only thing that distinguishes Parseltongue from real languages in a
> way that matters for this discussion is how it is acquired. It isn't
> learned the same way that English, or Hungarian or Dyirpal is learned.
> So it can play a more interesting role for authentication.
Yes!
> Yet it is still possible for someone who doesn't have the gift of
> Parseltongue to fake it well enough to authenticate, as Ron did in
> Deathly Hallows.
To open the Chamber of Secrets.
> So it can, to some extent, be learned by outsiders.
One can mimic any language without learning it.
> So I maintain that for the question you ask it, it is no different
> then asking it about any spoken language.
The OP DasFox asked "Is Parseltongue Cryptography...?". This
discussion leaves that determination to the reader.
Again, I vote "Yes" because PT has the same underlying reason for use
as cryptography. Hide and exchange data only between those who have
the keys.
DasFox
> Anybody remember the hilarious jokes about the spastic who tried to
> clap his hands? When he finally managed the trick, the teacher gave
> him an ice cream cone, which he promptly smacked into his nose when
> attempting to bring it up to his mouth. My communications launch
> technique is like that spastic, missing the mark 99.999 % of the
> time...
GOT that right...Sheesh...
THANKS
--
Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter
http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/reviews/potters-stick/big.jpg
https://ari.jottit.com/ YOU want to be next...? Fuck with 'FOX then...
DasFox
Ron was BRUTE FORCING the Chamber Of Secrets...Tech says "Yes"...
LCC
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 22:21:20 -0800 (PST), LCC wrote:
> > Anybody remember the hilarious jokes about the spastic who tried to
> > clap his hands? When he finally managed the trick, the teacher gave
> > him an ice cream cone, which he promptly smacked into his nose when
> > attempting to bring it up to his mouth. My communications launch
> > technique is like that spastic, missing the mark 99.999 % of the
> > time...
>
> GOT that right...Sheesh...
>
> THANKS
> --
> Anybody with an internet connection, 5 grand, an iq above room
> temperature and basic literacy can grow outstanding cannabis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_G._Rosner
The movers and shakers of the world are a bunch of LOSERS. Joy is
being a super genius, but employing yourself as a male stripper LOLOL.
Usenet and Google are a way of communicating up to the future, where
the average person (through enhancements and genetic selection) will
be the equivalent of today's super genius. I have a fan club, they are
just not yet born LOL.
"GOT that right... Sheesh"
Get off this topic. Have another topic, request identity. Governments
HATE this, stupid! Have enough encoded subtext here?
LOLOL Foxy is smarter than the average BARE, and oh yeah, THANKS
lolol...
Lonnie Courtney Clay
Dennis J Green
"Jeffrey Goldberg" <nob...@goldmark.org> wrote in message
news:8rk247...@mid.individual.net...
There is a movie (can't remember the title) which is about how during wwii
native americans were enlisted to use their very esoteric language
to pass along sensitive data that really couldn't be cracked like ciphers.
Greg Rose
Dennis J Green <deng...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>There is a movie (can't remember the title) which is about how during wwii
>native americans were enlisted to use their very esoteric language
>to pass along sensitive data that really couldn't be cracked like ciphers.
The movie is "Windtalkers" but it has very little
to do with the code talkers. They are just a plot
device for a lot of special effect bombs and
stuff. See Wikipedia "code talkers" for some real
details.
Greg.
--
Tom St Denis
> In article <Ur2dnVV-SeCG9cjQnZ2dnUVZ_gydn...@earthlink.com>,
> Dennis J Green <dengr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >There is a movie (can't remember the title) which is about how during wwii
> >native americans were enlisted to use their very esoteric language
> >to pass along sensitive data that really couldn't be cracked like ciphers.
>
> The movie is "Windtalkers" but it has very little
> to do with the code talkers. They are just a plot
> device for a lot of special effect bombs and
> stuff. See Wikipedia "code talkers" for some real
> details.
Not like Hollywood is known for its historical accuracy *cough*
*cough* U-571 *cough* ...
BTW I'm still sorry about Angels and Demons ... :-)
Tom
Greg Rose
They just got the accents wrong... :-)
>BTW I'm still sorry about Angels and Demons ... :-)
One day I'll forgive you. But if they ever make a movie
of Digital Fortress, don't come near me.
Greg.
--
Tom St Denis
> In article <a23ca934-92d1-4c51-90b7-dde7014be...@s28g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
> Tom St Denis <t...@iahu.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Feb 11, 12:38 pm, g...@nope.ucsd.edu (Greg Rose) wrote:
> >> In article <Ur2dnVV-SeCG9cjQnZ2dnUVZ_gydn...@earthlink.com>,
> >> Dennis J Green <dengr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >> >There is a movie (can't remember the title) which is about how during wwii
> >> >native americans were enlisted to use their very esoteric language
> >> >to pass along sensitive data that really couldn't be cracked like ciphers.
>
> >> The movie is "Windtalkers" but it has very little
> >> to do with the code talkers. They are just a plot
> >> device for a lot of special effect bombs and
> >> stuff. See Wikipedia "code talkers" for some real
> >> details.
>
> >Not like Hollywood is known for its historical accuracy *cough*
> >*cough* U-571 *cough* ...
>
> They just got the accents wrong... :-)
I'm surprised they didn't bring on Spielberg and add aliens or
something to the movie.
> >BTW I'm still sorry about Angels and Demons ... :-)
>
> One day I'll forgive you. But if they ever make a movie
> of Digital Fortress, don't come near me.
You should check out Hackers 3 [the Mitnick movie] if you really want
to experience a bad movie [related to computers].
Tom
Jeffrey Goldberg
>>> Yet it is still possible for someone who doesn't have the gift of
>>> Parseltongue to fake it well enough to authenticate, as Ron did in
>>> Deathly Hallows.
> Ron was BRUTE FORCING the Chamber Of Secrets...Tech says "Yes"...
I would think that someone with technical knowledge of cryptography
would know the difference between a brute force attack and a replay
attack. Ron may have needed several attempts at the replay attack, but
the essence was a replay, not brute force.
Jeffrey Goldberg
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:09:10 -0600, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>> I think Tom Riddle's maternal grandfather used it [to keep secrets] when talking to
>> his family when a visitor arrived.
>
> Marvolo Gaunt. Very good! All the Gaunt family were Parselmouths.
Thanks! I forgot his name and was too lazy to take the key strokes to
look it up.
>> Yet it is still possible for someone who doesn't have the gift of
>> Parseltongue to fake it well enough to authenticate, as Ron did in
>> Deathly Hallows.
>
> To open the Chamber of Secrets.
>
>> So it can, to some extent, be learned by outsiders.
>
> One can mimic any language without learning it.
In this case, mimicking the language allowed a successful replay attack.
I am not saying that Parseltongue is like a human language in general.
Of course it isn't. What I am saying is that with respect to whether it
should be considered cryptography it is like natural languages. The
things that make Parseltongue unlike human languages don't seem to play
a role in deciding whether it can be consider cryptography.
If it were impossible for a non-Parsalmouth to authenticate this way,
then it would be different from human languages with respect to
something that matters to the question of cryptography. I would have
preferred for it to have worked that way, but the Deathly Hallows was
already long enough without having to write an episode about retrieving
the basilisk fang that made more sense.
[Note regarding spoilers: I figure everyone here has read all the books
or doesn't care enough to be bothered by spoilers.]
> Again, I vote "Yes" because PT has the same underlying reason for use
> as cryptography. Hide and exchange data only between those who have
> the keys.
Again, I won't vote because I haven't settled on a definition of
"cryptography" that I'm fully happy with and would be decisive. So as I
said up top, the question as asked isn't interesting, but the question
of whether Parsaltongue differs from natural languages in its
cryptographic properties does seem meaningful. To that question, I think
that there is no relevant difference.
DasFox
> On 11-02-11 1:08 AM, DasFox wrote:
>
>>>> Yet it is still possible for someone who doesn't have the gift of
>>>> Parseltongue to fake it well enough to authenticate, as Ron did in
>>>> Deathly Hallows.
>
>> Ron was BRUTE FORCING the Chamber Of Secrets...Tech says "Yes"...
>
> I would think that someone with technical knowledge of cryptography
> would know the difference between a brute force attack and a replay
> attack. Ron may have needed several attempts at the replay attack, but
> the essence was a replay, not brute force.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -j
FINE lINE drawing to ATTACK the Tech...DISENGENUOS...at best...
YOU are seen for what you are NOW...
DasFox
Rumor has it this is where TONTO came from...LONE RANGER's sidekick...
hierophant
> On 11-02-11 1:08 AM, DasFox wrote:
>
>>>> Yet it is still possible for someone who doesn't have the gift of
>>>> Parseltongue to fake it well enough to authenticate, as Ron did in
>>>> Deathly Hallows.
>
>> Ron was BRUTE FORCING the Chamber Of Secrets...Tech says "Yes"...
>
> I would think that someone with technical knowledge of cryptography
> would know the difference between a brute force attack and a replay
> attack. Ron may have needed several attempts at the replay attack, but
> the essence was a replay, not brute force.
Is not a replay attack requirement that there be some style of capture
of the attacking mechanism (in this case specific Parseltongue from
Harry)? Ron was performing a mimicry, hissing sounds and tones
randomly but within a set of Parseltongue sounds he had to choose
from.
Sounds much like a brute force, dictionary-like attack to me. ;)
--
herem...@hushmail.com
http://heremypants.weebly.com/
VD
Add this to the list of oddities and characteristics of Parseltongue.
Harry's PT abilities were either inherent from birth or grew to their
level of practical use by age 10/11. Since we have little information
during the pre SS/PS period, it is open for speculation whether Harry
could have spoken in PT prior to the incident at the zoo.
However, once Harry was no longer a horcrux, he also was no longer
capable of speaking PT. We can draw an assumption, not a conclusion,
from this bit of evidence. Harry knew PT (only?) because of the Dark
Arts within him from his birth encounter with You-Know-Who.
Relating this to properties of crypto, the most basic property as I
understand is to pass information that is hidden (to everyone
including the transmitter) but can be used by the select. The select
being those with the keys, the ability to translate the hidden
information into something useful.
In this context, PT _might_ meet the criteria of an asymmetric
transmission. PT would be the public "key" or sounds everyone could
hear or see (hidden in meaning), the private "key" is the ability to
translate. Only the select have that key, it is self-generated and
exists within the select only.
Isn't this similar to a PGP/GnuPGP encrypted email for instance? With
the only difference being the keys are used by intelligent programs
instead of the intelligence of the individual?
Jeffrey Goldberg
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:33:07 -0600, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>> Ron may have needed several attempts at the replay attack, but
>> the essence was a replay, not brute force.
>
> Is not a replay attack requirement that there be some style of capture
> of the attacking mechanism (in this case specific Parseltongue from
> Harry)?
Yes. And that is exactly what Ron did.
"But how did you get in there?" [Harry] asked, staring from the fangs to
Ron. "You need to speak Parseltongue!"
"He did!" whispered Hermione. "Show him, Ron!"
Ron made a horrible strangled hissing noise.
"It's what you did to open the locket," he told Harry apologetically. "I
had to have a few goes to get it right, but," he shrugged modestly, "we
got there in the end."
Ron explicitly said that he was trying to repeat the sounds that Harry
had made in Parseltongue to open the locket.
> Ron was performing a mimicry,
Yes, he was mimicking (replaying) an transmission he'd intercepted
(overheard) that had been used to issue the "open" command in Parseltongue.
> hissing sounds and tones randomly but within a set of Parseltongue
> sounds he had to choose from.
He was not picking randomly from the entire domain of Parseltongue-like
sounds. He was trying to replicate a specific signal he'd heard which he
knew authenticates and authorizes one to open things.
It was a replay attack.
> Sounds much like a brute force, dictionary-like attack to me. ;)
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and acknowledge that you may
have mis-remembered the particular conversation from Deathly Hallows. I
hope that now it has been replayed, you see that this far better fits
the definition of a replay attack than a brute force one.
The only reason that I remembered it was because when I read it
initially I thought that Parseltongue should be such that a replay
wouldn't work.
In that conversation Harry should have heard Ron's imitation as "open".
That is, if Ron's imitation was good enough to open the Chamber of
Secrets, it should have been good enough to sound "real" to Harry.
hierophant
DasFox
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:07:45 -0500, hierophant wrote:
>
>>>> Here lies the horcrux ;0), I don't know of anyone that has this level
>>>> of expertise in international law. If they did, today's ever changing
>>>> world, their advice would need to be summoned on a regular basis.
>>>>
>>>> To me, $1,000's to select a simple VPN provider would be Sirius Black
>>>> overkill.
>>>
>>> LOL...watching Half Blood Prince...AGAIN...hierophant...?
>>>
>>> THANKS
>>
>> Sharp as a Fox you are, Das' ;0)
>
> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
> Cryptography...?
>
> THANKS
I posted this thread to the best of the BEST...the Chamber of Secrets
Forum...
http://www.cosforums.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=132
DasFox
LOL...great post, VD...
THANKS
--
Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter
http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/reviews/potters-stick/big.jpg
VD
Charm got your tongue?
Oh well.
DasFox
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:54:13 -0500, DasFox wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:07:45 -0500, hierophant wrote:
>>
>>>>> Here lies the horcrux ;0), I don't know of anyone that has this level
>>>>> of expertise in international law. If they did, today's ever changing
>>>>> world, their advice would need to be summoned on a regular basis.
>>>>>
>>>>> To me, $1,000's to select a simple VPN provider would be Sirius Black
>>>>> overkill.
>>>>
>>>> LOL...watching Half Blood Prince...AGAIN...hierophant...?
>>>>
>>>> THANKS
>>>
>>> Sharp as a Fox you are, Das' ;0)
>>
>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>> Cryptography...?
>>
>> THANKS
>
> I posted this thread to the best of the BEST...the Chamber of Secrets
> Forum...
>
> http://www.cosforums.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=132
>
> THANKS
Well BLOW ME over...they didn't allow the post...LOL...
Draco Malfoy
>>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>>> Cryptography...?
>>>
>>> THANKS
>>
>> I posted this thread to the best of the BEST...the Chamber of Secrets
>> Forum...
>>
>> http://www.cosforums.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=132
>>
>> THANKS
>
> Well BLOW ME over...they didn't allow the post...LOL...
Told you they wouldn't. Look, clue up, these guys may let you in to
read or whatever but they are not going to let you start a thread. Not
as long as you are active on Usenet.
Or try to bring a level of academic thought to Mugglenet. Emerson
Spartz is a full blown dweeb who is cuddled so tight into Rowling's
breasts that it is amazing that she can breathe.
VD
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:15:29 -0500, DasFox wrote:
>
>>>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>>>> Cryptography...?
>>>>
>>>> THANKS
>>>
>>> I posted this thread to the best of the BEST...the Chamber of Secrets
>>> Forum...
>>>
>>> http://www.cosforums.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=132
>>>
>>> THANKS
>>
>> Well BLOW ME over...they didn't allow the post...LOL...
>
> Told you they wouldn't. Look, clue up, these guys may let you in to
> read or whatever but they are not going to let you start a thread. Not
> as long as you are active on Usenet.
>
> Or try to bring a level of academic thought to Mugglenet. Emerson
> Spartz is a full blown dweeb who is cuddled so tight into Rowling's
> breasts that it is amazing that she can breathe.
I had a very interesting Trojan hit me from surfing into Mugglenet.
Actually, it was my niece who told me she clicked on a link that came
up that claimed she need to install another version of Silverlight.
Voila! Sys OS reload!
VD
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:15:29 -0500, DasFox wrote:
>
>>>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>>>> Cryptography...?
>>>>
>>>> THANKS
>>>
>>> I posted this thread to the best of the BEST...the Chamber of Secrets
>>> Forum...
>>>
>>> http://www.cosforums.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=132
>>>
>>> THANKS
>>
>> Well BLOW ME over...they didn't allow the post...LOL...
>
> Told you they wouldn't. Look, clue up, these guys may let you in to
> read or whatever but they are not going to let you start a thread. Not
> as long as you are active on Usenet.
>
> Or try to bring a level of academic thought to Mugglenet. Emerson
> Spartz is a full blown dweeb who is cuddled so tight into Rowling's
> breasts that it is amazing that she can breathe.
Now, now, Mugglenet took direct aim at Rowling when they enumerated
her copious mistakes in the book series.
DasFox
NOTHING loaded...wtf...?
VD
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:42:26 -0500, VD wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:30:31 -0500, Draco Malfoy wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:15:29 -0500, DasFox wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> HEY...that got me to THINKING...OUT LOUD...Is Parseltongue
>>>>>> Cryptography...?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> THANKS
>>>>>
>>>>> I posted this thread to the best of the BEST...the Chamber of Secrets
>>>>> Forum...
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.cosforums.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=132
>>>>>
>>>>> THANKS
>>>>
>>>> Well BLOW ME over...they didn't allow the post...LOL...
>>>
>>> Told you they wouldn't. Look, clue up, these guys may let you in to
>>> read or whatever but they are not going to let you start a thread. Not
>>> as long as you are active on Usenet.
>>>
>>> Or try to bring a level of academic thought to Mugglenet. Emerson
>>> Spartz is a full blown dweeb who is cuddled so tight into Rowling's
>>> breasts that it is amazing that she can breathe.
>>
>> Now, now, Mugglenet took direct aim at Rowling when they enumerated
>> her copious mistakes in the book series.
>>
>> http://www.mugglenet.com/books/mistakes/
>
> NOTHING loaded...wtf...?
>
> THANKS
<grin>
Draco Malfoy
Got me on that one too. Rowling had the page blanked I suppose.lol
Jeffrey Goldberg
On 11-02-11 4:48 PM, VD wrote:
> In this context, PT _might_ meet the criteria of an asymmetric
> transmission. PT would be the public "key" or sounds everyone could
> hear or see (hidden in meaning), the private "key" is the ability to
> translate. Only the select have that key, it is self-generated and
> exists within the select only.
Harry may not have known that he was speaking Parseltongue, but he
certainly understood what he said and heard in it. So I don't see the
asymmetry you describe. Harry, at times, didn't know that he was
speaking a "secret language" (think of the duel in Chamber of Secrets,
when he thought that everyone heard him trying to stop the snake). But I
don't see how this is analogous to public key encryption.
> Isn't this similar to a PGP/GnuPGP encrypted email for instance? With
> the only difference being the keys are used by intelligent programs
> instead of the intelligence of the individual?
As I said, just because Harry wasn't conscious of his knowledge or use
of Parseltongue, he still understand what he was saying and hearing. So
again, I'm afraid that as cool as I think Parseltongue is, with respect
to the question of cryptography it is no difference than an ordinary
(though obscure) human language.
I jumped into this thread hoping to come to a different conclusion. But
from code talkers to shibboleths, we've seen ordinary language used in
the same was a Parseltongue.