Canary Trap
John Ings
Canary Trap to his hero Jack Ryan. That's balderdash of course.
Surely the ploy has been used in espionage circles for generations.
But perhaps those who own those wonderful dictionaries of colloquial
and slang usage can tell me when the term 'Canary Trap' was first seen
in print?
Donna Richoux
As far as I'm concerned, I first saw in it print (or pixels) January 22,
2005.
Cassell's Dictionary of Slang has no entry for "canary trap". It has a
dozen different entries for "canary" -- what are we talking about, here?
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
John Ings
wrote:
If a government agency is experiencing leaks of secret information,
and it is certain that these leaks must be coming from say, one of six
offices, a Canary Trap is set to see who is singing. Choice bits of
information are given to each office, each morsel different. The
information can be true or false, it doesn't matter. When one of the
morsels shows up in enemy hands, you've trapped your canary.
Robin Bignall
wrote:
Is this the same as a "honey trap"? If so, Le Carre was using it
decades ago. Fleming used the concept, maybe even the expression, in
his James Bond novels.
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Hertfordshire
England
John Ings
<docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 06:15:19 -0800, John Ings <noda...@spam.org>
>wrote:
>
>>Tom Clancy, in his novel "Red Rabbit", attributes the invention of the
>>Canary Trap to his hero Jack Ryan. That's balderdash of course.
>>Surely the ploy has been used in espionage circles for generations.
>>But perhaps those who own those wonderful dictionaries of colloquial
>>and slang usage can tell me when the term 'Canary Trap' was first seen
>>in print?
>>
>Is this the same as a "honey trap"?
No, the "honey trap" was a good lookin' broad,
a-la the Profumo scandal.
Robin Bignall
<docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
John, I've seen your explanation (quite a different sort of trap) and
seen the ploy used in books, but never seen it named as a 'canary
trap'.
Bob Cunningham
I suppose it would be sorta interesting to know when it
first appeared, but of much greater interest to me would be
an explanation of the reason for it.
Google has places to find out what a canary trap is, but I
haven't seen any explanation of the reason for the term.
Wikipedia has the unequivocal statement
The term was coined by Tom Clancy in his novel
_Patriot Games_.
If that's true, Tom Clancy is one to ask for a rationale.
I wonder if it's true, though. Maybe the Wikipedia folks
could tell us how they determined that Tom Clancy was the
first to use it.
I had never heard of a canary trap until I read it here a
few minutes ago, and I didn't have any idea what it meant
until I found an explanation on the Web. In case anyone
else is wondering, here's one explanation from
http://www.stentorian.com/antispam/canary.html :
What is a canary trap?
A canary trap is a counterintelligence technique that
is used for exposing spies. Suppose you have four
people in positions of trust, and you think one is
betraying you. You entrust each with secret
information, but you give each a unique version of
the information. If the information later shows up in
the possession of the enemy, you know who to put on
trial for treason.
Miners used to take a canary with them into a mine to detect
bad air. If the canary died, the air was bad. Could there
be a connection between that and "canary trap"?
John Dean
http://www.stentorian.com/antispam/canary.html
"A canary trap is a counterintelligence technique that is used for
exposing spies. Suppose you have four people in positions of trust, and
you think one is betraying you. You entrust each with secret
information, but you give each a unique version of the information. If
the information later shows up in the possession of the enemy, you know
who to put on trial for treason."
http://www.ie.lspace.org/games/afpdip/files/canary.htm
"The canary trap was a computer generated piece of a document, unique to
a numbered copy of that document. Should a copy of the document ever
appear in print, it could be matched up to the numbered version and the
canary caught. I believe that Terry Pratchett uses a similar method to
keep track of proof copies of books in progress. "
or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_trap
Stuff on-line suggests Clancy coined the term in "Patriot Games" (1987).
I remember such a technique from Len Deighton's "Game Set and Match"
trilogy (1983-1985) but I don't remember *which* novel. Deighton doesn't
use the term, but has an official in the Cabinet office describe how
limited edition documents are word-processed in such a way that there
are slight differences in each version - nothing that would jump out at
the reader, just slightly different spacing, different mishy-phening, a
word at the end of a line in one doc appearing at the beginning of a
line in another. The idea being that, if a document is leaked, there
should be clues in the leak which will identify *which* original copy
(can I say that?) was passed on.
I doubt very much Clancy invented the technique but he seems to get
credit for the term. Why "canary trap"? I can see no logic to the
phrase. Was it once "Canaris trap"?
--
John Dean
Oxford
Bob Cunningham
<john...@frag.lineone.net> said:
[...]
> I doubt very much Clancy invented the technique but he seems to get
> credit for the term. Why "canary trap"? I can see no logic to the
> phrase. Was it once "Canaris trap"?
Miners used to take a canary with them into a mine to detect
Robert Lieblich
Canaries "sing." So do those who spill the beans. I think that's
all there is to it.
--
Liebs
CDB
"Bob Cunningham" <exw...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:no05v0dhhglkvllh8...@4ax.com...
one that's singing is a canary. CDB
John Ings
<exw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Miners used to take a canary with them into a mine to detect
>bad air. If the canary died, the air was bad. Could there
>be a connection between that and "canary trap"?
No, the term 'canary' for a traitor who gives away secrets goes at
least as far back as the 1930s in American criminal slang. Abe 'Kid
Twist' Reles, a really nasty piece of work who was one of the members
of the board of Murder Incorporated, turned states evidence at the
end of his career. He was being held under guard on 12th November,
1941, but before he could testify against Albert Anastasia, he fell or
was pushed from the 6th floor window of a hotel. It was afterwards
claimed that Reles accidentally fell while trying to escape from the
hotel. Later, Joseph Valachi, a well-known criminal, claimed that
Reles had been murdered with the help of his police guard.
Anyhow, the joke going around at the time was that Reles was
"the canary who sang but couldn't fly!"
Sara Lorimer
It sounds more Hollywood than federal government.
--
SML
Richard Chambers
John Ings wrote
>
> No, the term 'canary' for a traitor who gives away secrets goes at
> least as far back as the 1930s in American criminal slang. Abe 'Kid
> Twist' Reles, a really nasty piece of work who was one of the members
> of the board of Murder Incorporated, turned states evidence at the
> end of his career. He was being held under guard on 12th November,
> 1941, but before he could testify against Albert Anastasia, he fell or
> was pushed from the 6th floor window of a hotel. It was afterwards
> claimed that Reles accidentally fell while trying to escape from the
> hotel. Later, Joseph Valachi, a well-known criminal, claimed that
> Reles had been murdered with the help of his police guard.
>
> Anyhow, the joke going around at the time was that Reles was
> "the canary who sang but couldn't fly!"
To "sing like a canary" = to provide incriminating evidence to the police
about a fellow criminal. Usually under duress, but not necessarily so.
The Oxford Dictionary of Euphemisms has no entry for "canary", so I looked
up "sing" instead. This contained a quote from Diehl (never heard of him,
but 1978).
" . . . had him under the lights all fuckin' night ... and about nine
this morning he starts singin' like Frank Sinatra".
Still no mention of canaries, but despite this absence in the dictionary
"sing like a canary" is a well known expression.
Richard Chambers Leeds UK.
Mike Lyle
[...]
> The Oxford Dictionary of Euphemisms has no entry for "canary", so I
> looked up "sing" instead. This contained a quote from Diehl (never
> heard of him, but 1978).
>
> " . . . had him under the lights all fuckin' night ... and about
> nine this morning he starts singin' like Frank Sinatra".
>
> Still no mention of canaries, but despite this absence in the
> dictionary "sing like a canary" is a well known expression.
Funny, but this sense of 'sing' isn't in Partridge's Historical Slang
either. I must say I'd expected to find it, and from quite an early
date.
Mike.
Donna Richoux
Cassell's has, as the third meaning of the eighth entry for "canary" as
a noun,
1930s+ (UK/US/S.Afr. Underworld) an informer
Related references, in chronological order:
SING 17th C+ l. to make a confession to the
authorities. 2. To inform against, to betray.
Proverbial phr, 'he that sings once, weeps all his
life after.'
SING OUT (early-mid-19C) of a villain, on being
arrested, to betray one's accomplices
CHIRP mid-19C+ to inform
NIGHTINGALE 3rd meaning: (20C Underworld) an
informer
SING LIKE A CANARY 1950s+ (Und.) to make a full
confession to the police
So if the point of a canary trap is to identify who's been squealing on
you (to the authorities, or to your enemies) then the name makes sense.
lightbulb
"John Ings" <noda...@spam.org> wrote in message
news:22n4v0d712m3qag17...@4ax.com...
Well, since nobody else has mentioned it...the movie industry has been doing
similar things with movies. That way they can track any pirated copies that
illegally make it to the internet back to their source. The same goes for
scripts too, I guess. Many years ago I saw a guy on TV who was on a lot of
mailing lists. When he gave his name and address out he would always do it
differently and record what name he gave to which company so he could track
who was selling his name and to where. I had a loan from a certain bank a
few years ago. They used my middle initial in all their mailings.
Actually, they used the wrong letter for my middle initial. I asked them to
change it, but apparently the paperwork never made it through. I can always
tell when I get junk mail from people who bought mailing lists from that
bank because they use that same incorrect letter for my middle initial.
Mike
Bob Cunningham
Thank you. That's quite reasonable as far as it goes.
However, as I understand the slang word "sing", it fits the
action of a member of a criminal organization who tells on
other members as part of a deal to minimize his own
punishment. Or one of a pair of criminals who rats on his
partner to obtain a favorable plea.
But it seems to me it's only by analogical extension that it
can be applied to a spy who infiltrates a government
organization for the purpose of obtaining secrets to deliver
them to another country. I wouldn't have thought to apply
"sing" to that case, but I see the analogy.
An example from
http://www.stentorian.com/antispam/canary.html seems even
more remotely related to the idea of singing:
This technique also might be usable for privacy issues.
Suppose you give your address to organizations or
companies A, B, C, and D, each of which promises not
to share the information with junk mailers. Your real
address is 123 Pine Road, Anytown PA 17002. But you
give organization A the additional line, "Attention
Department 1," Organization B "Attention
Department 2," or something similar.
Then if you get junk mail addressed to "Department
2," you know that Organization B has not respected
your privacy and has sold your address to junk
mailers. You can treat Organization B accordingly
(discontinuing purchases from them if they're a
business, quitting if they're an organization, and
possibly warning everyone you know about their
practices).
By another remote extension, I think a dictionary publisher
putting intentional mistakes into a dictionary to see who is
copying its work could be called a canary trap. (Someone
who may have been speaking for a dictionary publisher has
told us they don't need to do that, because there are plenty
of unintentional mistakes to serve the purpose.)
Bob Cunningham
Yes, but -- again -- it's only by a stretch that it explains
the apparently common use of "canary trap" -- as found by
Google -- for activities that have nothing to do with
ratting on accomplices.
Bob Cunningham
The _Oxford English Dictionary_ has citations starting in
1612:
d. Criminals' slang (now chiefly U.S.). = sing out
(sense 5c). Also to sing like a canary. Orig. in
proverbial phr. he that sings once, weeps all his
life after and varr.
1612 T. SHELTON tr. Cervantes' Don-Quixote I.
III. viii. 193 Here it is quite contrary, quoth the
slave, for He that sings once, weepes all his life
after.
1710 S. PALMER Moral Essays on Proverbs lxxii.
197 He that Sings in Disaster, shall Weep all his
Life-time After. 'Tis generally suppos'd, that this
Proverb was born in a Jail. Sing..is, when one of
the Gang Tattles, Confesses, and Accuses the Rest.
John Ings
<exw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>But it seems to me it's only by analogical extension that it
>can be applied to a spy who infiltrates a government
>organization for the purpose of obtaining secrets to deliver
>them to another country. I wouldn't have thought to apply
>"sing" to that case, but I see the analogy.
The canary isn't necessarily a spy. He may well be just an official
with a big mouth. (remember loose lips sink ships?) Or a traitor who a
spy has bribed or blackmailed. Or just a fool who has been duped by a
honey trap and doesn't even realize he's revealed secrets.
don groves
Cunningham at exw...@earthlink.net hath writ:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:00:06 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
> <mike_l...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> said:
>
> > Richard Chambers wrote:
> > [...]
> > > The Oxford Dictionary of Euphemisms has no entry for "canary", so I
> > > looked up "sing" instead. This contained a quote from Diehl (never
> > > heard of him, but 1978).
> > >
> > > " . . . had him under the lights all fuckin' night ... and about
> > > nine this morning he starts singin' like Frank Sinatra".
> > >
> > > Still no mention of canaries, but despite this absence in the
> > > dictionary "sing like a canary" is a well known expression.
> >
> > Funny, but this sense of 'sing' isn't in Partridge's Historical Slang
> > either. I must say I'd expected to find it, and from quite an early
> > date.
>
> The _Oxford English Dictionary_ has citations starting in
> 1612:
>
> d. Criminals' slang (now chiefly U.S.). = sing out
> (sense 5c). Also to sing like a canary. Orig. in
> proverbial phr. he that sings once, weeps all his
> life after and varr.
If a perp refuses to sing, he's sent to Sing Sing where he's
forced to listen incessently to Benny Goodman's "Sing, Sing,
Sing" until he cracks.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster)
Donna Richoux
> tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) said:
>
> > Cassell's has, as the third meaning of the eighth entry for "canary" as
> > a noun,
> >
> > 1930s+ (UK/US/S.Afr. Underworld) an informer
> >
> > Related references, in chronological order:
> >
> > SING 17th C+ l. to make a confession to the
> > authorities. 2. To inform against, to betray.
> > Proverbial phr, 'he that sings once, weeps all his
> > life after.'
> >
> > SING OUT (early-mid-19C) of a villain, on being
> > arrested, to betray one's accomplices
> >
> > CHIRP mid-19C+ to inform
> >
> > NIGHTINGALE 3rd meaning: (20C Underworld) an
> > informer
> >
> > SING LIKE A CANARY 1950s+ (Und.) to make a full
> > confession to the police
> >
> > So if the point of a canary trap is to identify who's been squealing on
> > you (to the authorities, or to your enemies) then the name makes sense.
>
> Yes, but -- again -- it's only by a stretch that it explains
> the apparently common use of "canary trap" -- as found by
> Google -- for activities that have nothing to do with
> ratting on accomplices.
Sorry, if you or someone described such Googled uses I haven't seen the
posts yet. I do see descriptions here of how the "canary trap" was
supposed to work (subtle differences on similar documents, to allow for
identification). I'm aware that sort of technique has been used for
years in all sorts of settings.
(Why are people so quick to say that somebody "invented" or "coined"
something when maybe all they did was "name" it? Or popularize it? I
guess to a lot of people, "Tom Clancy invented the name 'canary trap'"
and "Tom Clancy invented the 'canary trap'" are simply the same sentence
twice.)
I see two different elements here. One is the overall purpose: "This
trap is designed to catch canaries, i.e. those who have been leaking (or
informing or whatever)." Therefore the trap is called a "canary trap."
The other element is to look at the technique of how the trap works.
Take the mousetrap. A mousetrap can work with a spring, it can work as
a humane cage, it can be baited with peanut butter or cheese (please
let's not discuss how to build a better mousetrap). Good mousetrap
technology might inspire others who wish to trap other things to copy
that method. But that is different from the question, "Why is it called
a mousetrap?"
...I've glanced at the first twenty or so Google hits for "canary trap".
Some are not comprehensible from the hit summary alone, but the ones
that are seem consistent with the meaning under discussion -- subtle
markings of some sort to track improper usage.
Bob Cunningham
Yes, and in many of those settings, as I've said, the
application of "sing" is a stretch from its most
understandable slang meaning, to rat on accomplices.
Note that all of your definitions, quoted above, fit either
the "ratting" meaning or confessing to a crime. None of
them fit the idea of planting clues to plagiarism,
identifying sellers of e-mail addresses who have said they
wouldn't do that, and other analogical uses. Espionage may
come closest to being a good analogy, but even in that case
there's nothing like informing on an accomplice or
confessing to a crime.
> (Why are people so quick to say that somebody "invented" or "coined"
> something when maybe all they did was "name" it? Or popularize it? I
> guess to a lot of people, "Tom Clancy invented the name 'canary trap'"
> and "Tom Clancy invented the 'canary trap'" are simply the same sentence
> twice.)
Not really the same at all. "Tom invented the 'canary
trap'" means Tom devised the idea of performing the trick
that is, as shown by the quotes, referred to here as a
canary trap, and he was the first to use the idea.
"Tom invented the name 'canary trap'" has no implication
that Tom was the first to think of the idea of performing
the trick.
> I see two different elements here. One is the overall purpose: "This
> trap is designed to catch canaries, i.e. those who have been leaking (or
> informing or whatever)."
Leaking and informing are two quite different concepts, but
I suppose leaking as compared to espionage comes closer to
the slang idea of singing.
> Therefore the trap is called a "canary trap."
> The other element is to look at the technique of how the trap works.
> Take the mousetrap. A mousetrap can work with a spring, it can work as
> a humane cage, it can be baited with peanut butter or cheese (please
> let's not discuss how to build a better mousetrap). Good mousetrap
> technology might inspire others who wish to trap other things to copy
> that method. But that is different from the question, "Why is it called
> a mousetrap?"
> ...I've glanced at the first twenty or so Google hits for "canary trap".
> Some are not comprehensible from the hit summary alone, but the ones
> that are seem consistent with the meaning under discussion -- subtle
> markings of some sort to track improper usage.
And, again, "subtle markings of some sort to track improper
usage" isn't covered by any of the definitions you gave.
It's an analogical extension of the singing concept. Only
the betrayer of accomplices or the confessor to a crime can
be strictly said to be singing in the slang sense.
Someone who lets the cat out of the bag through idle and
irresponsible chatter is a blabbermouth, not a singer.
John Dean
I had a similar thing. Someone (forget who) sent me stuff wrongly
addressed to "Mr H Dean". For about three years after I was getting
mailshots from firms who had clearly (and foolishly) paid for a mailing
list with "Mr H Dean" on it. After three years it stopped, never to
start again.
--
John Dean
Oxford
Maria Conlon
[...]
> And, again, "subtle markings of some sort to track improper
> usage" isn't covered by any of the definitions you gave.
> It's an analogical extension of the singing concept. Only
> the betrayer of accomplices or the confessor to a crime can
> be strictly said to be singing in the slang sense.
>
> Someone who lets the cat out of the bag through idle and
> irresponsible chatter is a blabbermouth, not a singer.
But once you think of "sing" as "giving information when you shouldn't
for some/any reason" (based on the criminal "ratting" on his buddies),
then "sing" can mean any communication that gives information (that the
giver shouldn't have given for some/any reason).
And once you know the canary reference ("he sang like a canary"), then
the giver of information (that shouldn't have been given for some/any
reason) can be a "canary."
And a "trap" is a "trap." ("Gotcha!")
I haven't read the books mentioned in this thread, and had never heard
the term "canary trap" until this evening. However, I've read a lot of
murder mysteries and crime novels in my day. That may account for the
fact that "canary trap" was immediately clear to me: a way to "trap"
(learn the identity of) anyone who "sings" (gives information they
shouldn't for some/any reason).
(Can you turn the word "canary" into the word "betray" in 8 steps? I
can't. So how about "sing" into "tell"?)
Maria Conlon
Mark Brader
>>> Tom Clancy, in his novel "Red Rabbit", attributes the invention of
>>> the Canary Trap to his hero Jack Ryan. That's balderdash of course.
Unclear on the concept of "fiction", I see.
>>> Surely the ploy has been used in espionage circles for generations.
Unclear on the concept of the Canary Trap, too. It's not just the
idea of providing someone with information he thinks other people
also have, so that he'll be willing to reveal it if so inclined and
thereby be caught. The actual trap is something that would have
required considerable labor before the days of word processors --
see below.
John Dean quotes <http://www.ie.lspace.org/games/afpdip/files/canary.htm>:
> "The canary trap was a computer generated piece of a document, unique to
> a numbered copy of that document. Should a copy of the document ever
> appear in print, it could be matched up to the numbered version ...
And adds:
> I remember such a technique from Len Deighton's "Game Set and Match"
> trilogy (1983-1985) but I don't remember *which* novel. Deighton doesn't
> use the term, but has an official in the Cabinet office describe how
> limited edition documents are word-processed in such a way that there
> are slight differences in each version - nothing that would jump out at
> the reader, just slightly different spacing, different mishy-phening...
But that's not the Canary Trap as described in Clancy's fiction either.
Here's the relevant passage from the earlier novel "Patriot Games",
where Ryan describes it. (Published earlier, that is; it takes place
later in Ryan's life than "Red Rabbit". I don't remember offhand what
"Red Rabbit" says about the Canary Trap.)
# "Good. Now you know that all this remains in the family.
# What the devil is this Canary Trap?"
#
# "Well, you know about all the problems CIA has with leaks.
# When I was finishing off the first draft of the report, I came
# up with an idea to make each one unique."
#
# "They've been doing that for years", Holmes noted. "All one
# must do is misplace a comma here and there. Easiest thing in
# the world. If the newspeople are foolish enough to print a
# photograph of the document, we can identify the leak."
#
# "Yes, sir, and the reporters who public the leaks know that, too.
# They've learned not to show photographs of the documents they
# get from their sources, haven't they?" Ryan answered. "What I
# came up with was a new twist on that. 'Agents and Agencies'
# has four sections. Each section has a summary paragraph.
# Each of those is written in a fairly dramatic fashion."
#
# "Yes, I noticed that", Charleston said. "Didn't read like a
# CIA document at all. More like one of ours. We use people to
# write our reports, you see, not computers. Do go on."
#
# "Each summary paragraph has six different versions, and the
# mixture of those paragraphs is unique to each numbered copy of
# the paper. There are over a thousand different permutations,
# but only ninety-six numbered copies of the actual document.
# The reason the summary paragraphs are so -- well, lurid,
# I guess -- is to entice a reporter to quote them verbatim in
# the public media. If he quotes something from two or three of
# those paragraphs, we know which copy he saw and, therefore,
# who leaked it. They've got an even more refined version of
# the trap working now. You can do it by computer. You use a
# thesaurus program to shuffle through synonyms, and you can make
# every copy of the document totally unique."
(Ryan's reference to "two or three" is wrong, of course -- based on
what it says, three paragraphs would have to be quoted.)
--
Mark Brader | "...it's a characteristic ... of organizations that try
Toronto | to anticipate every possible failure: they easily
m...@vex.net | come to believe that they *have*..." --Henry Spencer
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Mark Brader
> (Why are people so quick to say that somebody "invented" or "coined"
> something when maybe all they did was "name" it? Or popularize it? I
> guess to a lot of people, "Tom Clancy invented the name 'canary trap'"
> and "Tom Clancy invented the 'canary trap'" are simply the same sentence
> twice.)
fictional character, Jack Ryan, inventing the Canary Trap."
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "It was too crazy to be true,
m...@vex.net | and too crazy to be false." --Tom Clancy
Donna Richoux
> And, again, "subtle markings of some sort to track improper
> usage" isn't covered by any of the definitions you gave.
> It's an analogical extension of the singing concept. Only
> the betrayer of accomplices or the confessor to a crime can
> be strictly said to be singing in the slang sense.
I think where you and I are disagreeing is whether the name focuses on
the subtle document markings (which I think is the technology, the
technique, the ink that stains the fingers) or the person who did the
leaking (who I think in this case is the "canary" who is to be
"trapped").
Now, to argue the other direction: in the case of the "copyright trap"
which is the name that's been given to, say, fictional towns on a road
map, the name applies to the items of the technique themselves. A
"copyright trap" does not trap copyrights. It's a method to spot those
who violate copyright laws.
Similarly, a "speed trap" does not trap speeds, it traps those who
violate the speed laws.
So an "X Trap" can be formed in at least two ways: a trap to catch Xes,
or a trap to catch those who violate the X policy.
There's probably also a third kind, a trap to catch Ys by means of
technique X, but I'm not much of a hunter. A spring trap, a box trap, a
pit trap, that sort of thing. Ah, the "honey trap" mentioned would be
one.
Steve Hayes
>Tom Clancy, in his novel "Red Rabbit", attributes the invention of the
>Canary Trap to his hero Jack Ryan. That's balderdash of course.
>Surely the ploy has been used in espionage circles for generations.
>But perhaps those who own those wonderful dictionaries of colloquial
>and slang usage can tell me when the term 'Canary Trap' was first seen
>in print?
What's a canary trap?
Something to detect toxuic gases in mines?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
John Dean
>
> And a "trap" is a "trap." ("Gotcha!")
"trap" can be lots of things.
>
>
> (Can you turn the word "canary" into the word "betray" in 8 steps? I
> can't.
Nope
So how about "sing" into "tell"?)
>
sing
sine
tine
tile
till
tell
--
John Dean
Oxford
Bob Cunningham
<john...@frag.lineone.net> said:
[...]
> So how about "sing" into "tell"?)
> sing
> sine
> tine
> tile
> till
> tell
"trap" into "sing":
trap tram team beam beat boat boot
soot sort sore sone song sing
That's Lewis Carroll's game. I've idled away many a while
with it. It's a great solitaire game because you can play
it anywhere with no cards, no pencil or paper, just thought.
It's handy for getting through a boring sermon while
appearing to be attentive.
I've spent a fair amount of time over the years looking for
a longest minimal string. That is, given that the least
number of steps you've found to get from A to B, can you
find a pair of words that takes one more step than that, and
so on.
A variant is to see how many steps you can subtract from a
previous solution. My "trap-sing" takes 12 steps. Can
anyone do it in fewer than that? Can anyone think of a pair
that can't be done in less than 13 or more steps?
It's also fun to find words that seem impossible to get
anywhere from. Like "acre". In the past I've been able to
do it only by allowing a two-word step. ("acre acne aone
... ", "a one" being two words.) But I see now for the
first time that "aire" is in the _New Shorter Oxford_ (=
"aerie"). It's obsolete, though.
Graeme Thomas
<m...@vex.net> writes
>But that's not the Canary Trap as described in Clancy's fiction either.
>Here's the relevant passage from the earlier novel "Patriot Games",
>where Ryan describes it. (Published earlier, that is; it takes place
>later in Ryan's life than "Red Rabbit". I don't remember offhand what
>"Red Rabbit" says about the Canary Trap.)
I've had a brief exchange of email with Mark about this. The action in
_Patriot Games_ is earlier than that in _Red Rabbit_, and Mark now
agrees that he was in error about this.
--
Graeme Thomas
jerry_f...@yahoo.com
> > SING LIKE A CANARY 1950s+ (Und.) to make a full
> > confession to the police
> >
> > So if the point of a canary trap is to identify who's been
squealing on
> > you (to the authorities, or to your enemies) then the name makes
sense.
>
> Yes, but -- again -- it's only by a stretch that it explains
> the apparently common use of "canary trap" -- as found by
> Google -- for activities that have nothing to do with
> ratting on accomplices.
Sure. These stretches happen all the time. People don't grab
handlebar mustaches, cranes for lifting things don't fly, free-lance
writers aren't jousting in tournaments, and so on and so forth.
--
Jerry Friedman
Bob Cunningham
<jerry_f...@yahoo.com> said:
Okay, but if we had never heard of the slang,
ratting-on-accomplices meaning of "sing" and had to start
from scratch, it wouldn't be apparent why "canary trap"
would have any meaning with respect to detecting plagiarism
by planting mistakes.
If you had never heard "handlebar" used for something to
hold onto, would you know why a handlebar mustache is called
that? If you didn't know that a crane was a bird ... and so
on.
In order to stretch, you have to start with something to
stretch.
Bob Cunningham
<exw...@earthlink.net> said:
[...]
> "trap" into "sing":
> trap tram team beam beat boat boot
> soot sort sore sone song sing
[...]
> A variant is to see how many steps you can subtract from a
> previous solution. My "trap-sing" takes 12 steps. Can
> anyone do it in fewer than that?
Nine steps:
trap tram team ream read
reed rend rind ring sing
John Dean
Seven:
trap tram team teat tent tint ting sing
--
John Dean
Oxford
Bob Cunningham
Congratulations.
I never knowed dere was a ting called a ting, but now my big
red dictionary tells me a ting is "a single, light, ringing
sound, as of a small bell being struck".
Richard Lederer's _The Miracle of Language_ has a piece
about Lewis Carroll and this game, which Carroll called
"doublets".
Lederer poses the problem "Evolve man from ape". At the end
of the chapter he has the answer
"ape-are-ere-err-ear-mar-man". It has six steps, but I've
found a way to do it in five, which will be left as an
exercise for the reader.
jerry_f...@yahoo.com
In Vladimir Nabokov's novel _Pale Fire_, it's called "word golf". I
don't know whether he invented that or got it somewhere.
--
Jerry Friedman
Bob Cunningham
<kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> said:
> Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net> writes:
> > Lederer poses the problem "Evolve man from ape". At the end of the
> > chapter he has the answer "ape-are-ere-err-ear-mar-man". It has six
> > steps, but I've found a way to do it in five, which will be left as
> > an exercise for the reader.
> My first try was
> ape-apt-ept-eat-mat-man
> but MWCD11 doesn't like "ept" (back-formation from "inept").
_The New Shorter Oxford_ accepts it without deprecatory
comment:
ept /Ept/ a.M20. [Back-form. f. INEPT.] Adroit,
competent; appropriate, effective.
> So
> ape-apt-opt-oat-mat-man
That was my solution, which I scribbled on an end paper of
the book sometime after 1991, the year of its copyright..
> It only takes one more to get you:
> ape-apt-opt-oat-bat-bot-Bob
Evolution weaves tortuous paths: a cereal grain, a flying
mammal, a parasitic worm, then me.
"Ape" could be somewhat challenging as a starting point
because there are so many possible first steps to examine:
"ace", "age", "ale", "ane", "apt", "are", "ate", "ave",
"awe", "axe", "aye", and "ope".
Tangentially, I don't much like the name "doublets" for the
game. I would have been more likely to call it
"conversions" or "transforms" or maybe "evolutions".
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Lederer poses the problem "Evolve man from ape". At the end of the
> chapter he has the answer "ape-are-ere-err-ear-mar-man". It has six
> steps, but I've found a way to do it in five, which will be left as
> an exercise for the reader.
My first try was
ape-apt-ept-eat-mat-man
but MWCD11 doesn't like "ept" (back-formation from "inept"). So
ape-apt-opt-oat-mat-man
It only takes one more to get you:
ape-apt-opt-oat-bat-bot-Bob
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The purpose of writing is to inflate
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning,
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and inhibit clarity. With a little
|practice, writing can be an
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |intimidating and impenetrable fog!
(650)857-7572 | Calvin
William R Ward
> This technique also might be usable for privacy issues.
> Suppose you give your address to organizations or
> companies A, B, C, and D, each of which promises not
> to share the information with junk mailers. Your real
> address is 123 Pine Road, Anytown PA 17002. But you
> give organization A the additional line, "Attention
> Department 1," Organization B "Attention
> Department 2," or something similar.
I sometimes do something like this - I subscribe to magazines with
different middle initials in my name sometimes, so I can track if they
sell my info to junk mailers.
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bi...@wards.net http://bill.wards.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help save the San Jose Earthquakes - http://www.soccersiliconvalley.com/
John Ings
>I sometimes do something like this - I subscribe to magazines with
>different middle initials in my name sometimes, so I can track if they
>sell my info to junk mailers.
The problem is, often it's not "they" who did it, but a lone employee
in the computer room who duplicated a tape containing subscribers
names and addresses and sold it. Industrial espionage is more common
than most people realize.
Bob Cunningham
[Bad quote here. I didn't write what it says I wrote. The
text should never have been quoted without making it clear
that I was quoting another source.]
> Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net>
[didn't write but quoted from
http://www.stentorian.com/antispam/canary.html :]
> > This technique also might be usable for privacy issues.
> > Suppose you give your address to organizations or
> > companies A, B, C, and D, each of which promises not
> > to share the information with junk mailers. Your real
> > address is 123 Pine Road, Anytown PA 17002. But you
> > give organization A the additional line, "Attention
> > Department 1," Organization B "Attention
> > Department 2," or something similar.
It's not good to say that someone wrote what was actually
written by someone else.
William R Ward
Well, you did post it. Sorry for any offense caused.
Bob Cunningham
<bi...@wards.net> said:
> Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net> writes:
> > On 24 Jan 2005 15:30:49 -0800, William R Ward
> > <bi...@wards.net> said:
> > [Bad quote here. I didn't write what it says I wrote. The
> > text should never have been quoted without making it clear
> > that I was quoting another source.]
> > > Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net>
> > [didn't write but quoted from
> > http://www.stentorian.com/antispam/canary.html :]
> > > > This technique also might be usable for privacy issues.
> > > > Suppose you give your address to organizations or
> > > > companies A, B, C, and D, each of which promises not
> > > > to share the information with junk mailers. Your real
> > > > address is 123 Pine Road, Anytown PA 17002. But you
> > > > give organization A the additional line, "Attention
> > > > Department 1," Organization B "Attention
> > > > Department 2," or something similar.
> > It's not good to say that someone wrote what was actually
> > written by someone else.
> Well, you did post it. Sorry for any offense caused.
If I posted the Gettysburg Address, properly attributed,
would you quote me as having written it without mentioning
that Abraham Lincoln had a hand in it?
Mike Lyle
>>> [Bob wrote:] It's not good to say that someone wrote what was
actually
>>> written by someone else.
>
>> Well, you did post it. Sorry for any offense caused.
>
> If I posted the Gettysburg Address, properly attributed,
> would you quote me as having written it without mentioning
> that Abraham Lincoln had a hand in it?
Well, I thought you _were_ one of his speech-writers, Bob.
Mike.
Donna Richoux
> Bob Cunningham wrote:
> > If I posted the Gettysburg Address, properly attributed,
> > would you quote me as having written it without mentioning
> > that Abraham Lincoln had a hand in it?
>
> Well, I thought you _were_ one of his speech-writers, Bob.
>
Naw, everyone knows ol' Abe wrote the Gettysburg Address while riding
from Washington to Pennsylvania on the back of an envelope.
Frances Kemmish
Trains were too slow even then?