Comments on: Fifth phone numbers station: 613-686-3106

By: Krusty

Krusty — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:42:01 +0000

If this was a code sent using a “one-time-pad” then there is no way to crack it (unless they reused the same pad on the different messages).

Obviously the recepient/sender wasn’t worried about being marked since a transmission over a phone line can be traced.

Had this been a covert opp, they would have received the message via a shortwave numberstation.

By: logiczero

logiczero — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:27:37 +0000

This may have been brought up in comments in one of the other posts, but has anyone considered that this is one of those clever Google job postings, where the person who solves is clearly intelligent enough to work at Google?

By: SKYWALKER107

SKYWALKER107 — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:12:59 +0000

hey IPDB you gonna add these 2 new groupings to your website for checking diffeent cyphers?

By: b

Mon, 24 Jul 2006 10:01:35 +0000

ok, i get the point. ;P

By: ipdb

ipdb — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:45:16 +0000

pi holds no relevance to this. ;)

By: acoward

acoward — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 06:06:04 +0000

If my math is correct, the probability of not finding a 5 digit sequence in the first million digits of PI with the assumption that PI’s digits are uniformally distributed, is ~1:22000
You’d have a hard time finding such a sequence.

By: Deezy

Deezy — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 05:42:46 +0000

Yea someone should call CNN and let them know about this ;)

By: Winston

Winston — Sun, 23 Jul 2006 23:19:59 +0000

If you try just about any series of 5 numbers, you’ll find them in PI to a million places.

By: b

Sun, 23 Jul 2006 19:48:19 +0000

so i went back and checked the others. same thing. almost every sequence of five digits appears in pi. for those that don’t appear, moving the fifth digit to the first place produces a sequence that does appear in pi.

now the bad news: the same patterns emerge in the fake fourth phone message, so i guess this is all just coincidence.

it was a nice theory while it lasted.

By: b

Sun, 23 Jul 2006 19:30:21 +0000

Here’s what I can tell you. Every grouping of five here, with the exception of 17000, shows up in the value of pi taken to 1 million places. See http://turner.faculty.swau.edu/pi/pi1000000.html

By: Anarchyx67

Anarchyx67 — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 22:15:04 +0000

The music containing an encoded keyword? Like how? It’s the same musical loop everytime. Or do you mean something deeper?

I know the “sender” won’t respond, but I did send an email tot he Craigslist address the “spy” used asking them to at least drop a hint that this is a fake, or if it is legit, or whatever.

I have a few other ideas that might help get a “response” but am not going to publically share them. Just some ideas I’m coming up with. Mainly because these messages are starting to irritate me. :-) I mean seriously…

I do hope the NSA is working on these as well, to put a stop to them.

By: Brian Knowles

Brian Knowles — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 16:42:59 +0000

Is anyone working on the idea that the music constitutes an encoded keword? It’s pretty obvious, but I thought I’d ask..

By: Anarchyx67

Anarchyx67 — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:29:47 +0000

I still think the “3″ sounds odd, more like “T”. I know it’s probably just the guys voice used for that number. But it does still sound odd compared to the rest of the numbers.

It’s 8:30 AM CST and the phone # is still active…

By: Bunsen

Bunsen — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 05:37:05 +0000

Also, I think that the spacing of these messages procludes the possibility that this is a Guerrilla advertising campaign as some others have claimed – if it were, I think that we would have seen them more frequently than five messages in almost two months. Maybe, obviously, I’m wrong – but my official stance on this is that these are either legitimate, and uncrackable because we have no pad, or more likely copy-cats or attention whoring, and uncrackable because they aren’t a real code.

However, I am very taken by erithid’s work on the binary frequency graphs, and am interested in seeing whether or not he can make anything out of this new message if it works out for him.

By: Bunsen

Bunsen — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 05:29:36 +0000

I’m going to go with my previous belief that I stated with #4?/#3, maybe? that whether or not we feel it may be legitimate, we should consider the attention these messages have gotten and assume that any message after #1 is most likely “tainted,” either as a copycat or a misdirection.