Real Simple Access

Tron · Post by **Tron** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 9:49 am

I calculated the other number. It is not expected as answer and I don't see anything interesting when interpreting the number in other ways. Am I missing the punchline?

satfreak666 · Post by **satfreak666** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:50 am

Hi Tron,

you're right. It's my challange. I messed up the challange by printing the cleartext instead of the cipher text. I've have send Adum an update right now (I also altered the cleartext). Maybe the 6 solvers should try again after fix has been applied.

Sorry for the inconvinience guys!

SF

Tron · Post by **Tron** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:03 am

The new encoded message is larger than the modulus. This does not make much sense.

satfreak666 · Post by **satfreak666** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:12 am

Hi Tron,

ok, the modulus is

18177463113985279014593768153541854004936176165294524057336890660730144311208729

Begginers fault again: I haven't completely updated the challange text, only the source code printing out the numbers. But you seem to be on the right track Tron ,)

SF

Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:56 am

I recommend to let one's challenge be beta-tested by (an)other person(s) before submitting it.

efe · Post by **efe** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:49 am

Hmmm.... I think that now Alice nor Charly can decrypt the message. The number must be smaller than the modulus as Tron said!

bsguedes · Post by **bsguedes** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:59 am

efe, you have to use this number as modulus (adum hasn't changed that yet):
13927286537254031626323670117308341421825250505042934290710960886577880641606495

but bloody hell, it's taking some time to extract that information from this number
60 digits was easy, but 80 it's not so simple with my method (perhaps i'm not using the best way to crack this)

efe · Post by **efe** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 10:13 am

Ok, now I solved it with the new modulus

bsguedes · Post by **bsguedes** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:12 am

Solved too

This one took some time to manipulate the modulus number.

satfreak666 · Post by **satfreak666** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:15 am

bsguedes wrote:efe, you have to use this number as modulus (adum hasn't changed that yet):
13927286537254031626323670117308341421825250505042934290710960886577880641606495

No this is the cipher text. Please use the modulus i have posted here.

bsguedes · Post by **bsguedes** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:19 am

satfreak666 wrote:
bsguedes wrote:efe, you have to use this number as modulus (adum hasn't changed that yet):
13927286537254031626323670117308341421825250505042934290710960886577880641606495
No this is the cipher text. Please use the modulus i have posted here.

Whoops, you're right !
Have you already contacted adum to correct the modulus too?

satfreak666 · Post by **satfreak666** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:19 am

efe wrote:Ok, now I solved it with the new modulus

At least it ... ,) Thx.

satfreak666 · Post by **satfreak666** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:21 am

bsguedes wrote:
satfreak666 wrote:
bsguedes wrote:efe, you have to use this number as modulus (adum hasn't changed that yet):
13927286537254031626323670117308341421825250505042934290710960886577880641606495
No this is the cipher text. Please use the modulus i have posted here.
Whoops, you're right !
Have you already contacted adum to correct the modulus too?

Yes, I wrote adum a mail 4 hours ago ... Probably this will soon be corrected.

Post by **adum** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:34 pm

beta testing challenges is not a bad idea, for some that might be malformed...

CodeX · Post by **CodeX** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:11 pm

I would suggest just doing a dry run from scratch at least once to check you haven't gone astray somewhere