# WWII carrier pigeon message discovered in Surrey chimney



## v2 (Nov 2, 2012)

Do the remains of a carrier pigeon found in a Surrey chimney hold the secrets to a WW2 mystery? Codebreakers are working on deciphering the message now.
BBC News - WWII carrier pigeon message discovered in Surrey chimney


----------



## T Bolt (Nov 3, 2012)

Will be interesting to see what it says


----------



## meatloaf109 (Nov 3, 2012)

The world deadliest joke perhaps?


----------



## clinton78 (Nov 3, 2012)

T Bolt said:


> Will be interesting to see what it says



Hopefully nothing that was that important....


----------



## Capt. Vick (Nov 3, 2012)

meatloaf109 said:


> The world deadliest joke perhaps?



Hahahahahaha!


----------



## Crimea_River (Nov 3, 2012)

"Cancel Arnhem - too far. Montgomery"


----------



## Airframes (Nov 4, 2012)

"Hey, Ike. I can see my house from here".


----------



## meatloaf109 (Nov 4, 2012)

From Monty to Ike, 
Sure do like that Bradley chap, perhaps we could all have dinner sometime? And bring that fellow Patton, I hear he does an excellent rendition of "Lilly Marlene"; Can't get enough of that song!


----------



## Wayne Little (Nov 5, 2012)

Jolly Jokers....


----------



## Airframes (Nov 5, 2012)

Seriously though, this might be a hard one to crack. It's been done using a 'one time pad', where the sender and recipient have a pad of identical letter sequences used once only for each message, then destroyed. Possibly the hardest code to crack, unless in possesion of the original pad(s).


----------



## A4K (Nov 5, 2012)

Hard alright, Terry. My grandmother had a bit to do with codes and said they were changed constantly.


----------



## stona (Nov 5, 2012)

Airframes said:


> It's been done using a 'one time pad', where the sender and recipient have a pad of identical letter sequences used once only for each message, then destroyed. Possibly the hardest code to crack, unless in possesion of the original pad(s).



If that's what it is and was done properly (no lazy repetition etc) then it actually is impossible.

Steve


----------



## Airframes (Nov 5, 2012)

Exactly - which was the whole reason for the one time pad. In terms of freqeunt use, it was (and still is) slow and cumbersome, as a user had to have a supply of the pads, which were printed, in duplicate, in huge numbers. Encoding and decoding took time of course, and the users _had_ to have the correct, identical pair of pads. 
The identification for which pad was being used was given at the start of the message, or in the first letter group - for example EXGHL, which might mean PAD 12. Each pad had pages of code groups, each page being for one message, or part of a message. Once a message had been encoded, the page was torn from the pad and destroyed.
Even if today's 'computer power' can break into this message, there is absolutely no way it can be certain that any 'translation' is accurate and correct and, in addition, any actual code words used in the message, and then re-coded using the pad, would be impossible to identify.
The beauty of the system, still in use today, is that it is a simple code, but only used once, so therefore foolproof.


----------



## Night Fighter Nut (Nov 6, 2012)

If its like several of the cartoons I saw growing up it will probably say... "Hitler is a stinker"


----------



## T Bolt (Nov 6, 2012)

I've heard a one time pad code can be broken if the message is long enough by matching letters to figures in the coded message based on the frequency of use of letters in the English language and matching it up with the frequency of use of symbols in the message, but the message has to be quite long. Don't think they will get this one.

And yes I read Tom Clancy


----------



## fubar57 (Nov 6, 2012)

Geo


----------



## v2 (Nov 7, 2012)

The pigeon that saved a World War II bomber crew: BBC News - The pigeon that saved a World War II bomber crew


----------



## stona (Nov 7, 2012)

T Bolt said:


> I've heard a one time pad code can be broken if the message is long enough by matching letters to figures in the coded message based on the frequency of use of letters in the English language and matching it up with the frequency of use of symbols in the message, but the message has to be quite long. Don't think they will get this one.
> 
> And yes I read Tom Clancy



If Tom Clancy (who I haven't read) wrote that then he is wrong.
The frequency of letters in the encrypted message has no mathematical relationship with the frequency of letters in the original in the "one time pad" system.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Capt. Vick (Nov 7, 2012)

For those interested in codes and codebreaking during WWII, I recommend the book "Between Silk and Cyanide". A good read.


----------



## R Pope (Nov 12, 2012)

Probably says, "Screw Poland, we're staying out of this one..."


----------



## wheelsup_cavu (Nov 18, 2012)

They have a name of the sender and in the video at 2:40 it shows that 2 messages were sent of it so maybe the other message made it?


Wheels


----------



## fubar57 (Nov 23, 2012)

Here's an update.
BBC News - WWII pigeon message stumps GCHQ decoders

Geo


----------



## Gnomey (Nov 24, 2012)

Interesting story guys! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## stona (Nov 24, 2012)

"The experts believe there are two ways the message might have been coded.
One is with a so-called one-time pad where a random "key" is applied to a message. If the key is truly random and known only to sender and recipient, the code can be unbreakable"

I refer the honourable gentlemen to my earlier post. If this was the method used to encrypt this message then encrypted it will remain.

Steve


----------



## Wayne Little (Nov 24, 2012)

Your right Hugh, interesting, sure enough!


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 24, 2012)

I agree!


----------



## Airframes (Nov 24, 2012)

As both Steve and I mentioned in our earlier posts, if a 'one time' pad was used, that message is likely to stay encrypted for ever. Looking at the photo of the message form, and the letter groups, it _is_ a 'one time' pad message, so not a lot of chance methinks !


----------



## gumbyk (Nov 26, 2012)

They _could_ break the code, if they were willing to devote enough (super)computer time to it, using a "Brute-force" attack, where every possible combination is tried, one at a time. But, really, its nice to leave some things a mystery though.


----------



## stona (Nov 27, 2012)

No they couldn't
Steve


----------



## Airframes (Nov 27, 2012)

I agree with Steve. The use of a 'super computer' _might_ provide a legible message decrypt, but it would be highly doubtful if this was the original message.


----------



## Crimea_River (Dec 17, 2012)

BBC News - Has World War II carrier pigeon message been cracked?


----------



## fubar57 (Dec 17, 2012)

Beat me to it Andy. Cracked or just someone making it up? Hoping for cracked.

Geo


----------



## Crimea_River (Dec 17, 2012)

I guess we won't know until the experts analyze the results. It will be tough for them to admit they were foiled by an amateur if that's indeed the case.


----------



## Airframes (Dec 17, 2012)

I might be wrong, but I doubt the message is as shown in the apparent decrypt. 
First, the codes alluded to, from WW1, were long out of use. Two, ranks and names would not be stated in a coded message of this nature. Three, the dates, apparent locations and the content of the message don't seem to make logical 'sense' - it's very doubtful that tactical info of this nature would be sent by carrier pigeon, on what appears to be a battlefront, in Normandy, post D-Day, especially when a serving NCO, _if_ in such a forward position, would more likely use radio transmission.
If I'm wrong, then congratulations to the chap concerned - but the use of the 'One Time Pad', and the requirement to have the correct duplicate pad in order to decode the message, points to it being extremely unlikely, as hinted at by the specialists at GCHQ.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Dec 17, 2012)

I'm with you, a "One time pad" is just that. Even if this guy comes up with words, the odds are, it won't make sense. It would have to be relevent to a set situation, as in, a cookie recipe would be readable, but wrong.


----------



## N4521U (Dec 17, 2012)

It was a cookie recipe?????
Prob for Anzac biscuits!


----------



## N4521U (Dec 17, 2012)

It was a cookie recipe?????
Prob for Anzac biscuits!


----------



## Airframes (Dec 18, 2012)

Maybe it was solving the puzzle as to what was the difference between 'Biscuits, Sweet, A' and 'Biscuits, Plain, B', found in British 24 Hour ration packs. If he's solved _that_ mystery, he's brilliant !!


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 18, 2012)

Would it not stink if it was a message from a squad of soldiers needing help, and they are still waiting????


----------



## Airframes (Dec 19, 2012)

It would indeed David, but this type of code, and the 'One Time' pad were not normally used by line troops. It was a system employed by the covert services, such as SOE and OSS, where messages, using the pad, could be transmitted in Morse, or, as a last resort, as a back-up, by carrier pigeon. Think 'secret agent' and 'French resistance', for example.
The message could have been a report on troop movements, for example, or even just a routine situation report.


----------

