It did, although the military versions didn’t use the same rotor wirings. By 1932 the Polish Cypher Bureau had made significant insights into the military ones, and by 1939 was operating the first six code breaking bombs.
Reportedly, France and Britain were quite surprised when they learned about that.
There aren’t a lot of Navajo in the US (170,000 or about 0.05% if the population), and very few non-native Americans would recognize the language even unencrypted.
I feel like the overlap between “stupidity” and “hubris” was a recurring theme in Nazi intelligence generally. They also didn’t seem able to figure out what was going on during the Battle of the Beams, even if it turns out to be sort of a coincidence that naming their radio direction system after a one-eyed god allowed the Allies to predict it was a single-beam system.
And of course the abysmal performance (or apathy, depending on how sympathetic you are to Canaris) of the counterintelligence service meant they never really had a good answer to the disinformation campaign waged by the Allies, particularly after Enigma was cracked.
As soon as a recording came back from the battlefield, I’m sure there were academics in Japan who could identify the language. My impression (having visited a museum near Monument Valley) is that the Navaho codetalkers weren’t broadcasting long distance about strategic deployments like the Enigma users were. They were talking to units over the next ridge using short range radio. Whatever Tokyo’s version of Bletchley was, wouldn’t have had time to act on that intel even if they could have decoded it.
I think you probably know this, but it should be pointed out to the casual reader:
The single beam system was called Wotan II (Wotan being Odin / Wodan). The predecessor system used multiple crossing beams and was called Wotan I.
Since the British only ever heard the second system being called Wotan, they assumed it would be a single beam system.
Therefore, the German name wasn’t meant to be very descriptive, and the British simply made a very lucky guess.
Actually that was probably the MAGIC decryptions.
Hiroshi Oshima was the Japanese ambassador to Nazi Germany. Hitler apparently saw him as a personal friend and somebody he could relax with because Oshima was outside of the German political system.
So Hitler would get together with Oshima and have long talks about what was going on with the war. And then Oshima, as a loyal Japanese, would write down everything Hitler had said and transmit it back to Tokyo. And the United States, which had broken the Japanese codes, would read it all.
The high level intelligence source the Allies had was Adolf Hitler.
The problem is not with adding a few extra keys, it’s with the mechanical computer that scrambled all the keys after each key press. I’m not an engineer, but my guess is that complexity of the mechanism increases closer to exponentially with additional keys than to linearly.
Wouldn’t adding more letters to the keyboard also require adding more “places” to each of the internal wheels, thereby requiring a whole new rewiring of the wheels?
I think you have a misunderstanding of the way the Engima works: The keys as such are not scrambled. The rotors, which accomplish the bulk of the encryption, are simply rotated by one position after a certain number of keypresses. The relative position of the rotors to each others as well as to the input pins determines which replacement letter is selected for each given input key. If I am not mistaken, the first rotor turns on each press, the second whenever the first has reached a certain position an so on. The details of that, however, don’t matter.
The upshot is that the complexity of turning rotors after keypresses scales at worst linearly with the number of keys and likely not at all.
It would require bigger wheels with more input contacts, more spring loaded output pins and more wires connecting them.
In other words, more of the same, something that had already been manufactured and could be manufactured again.
I’ve seen it in several documentaries, so it seems to be legit.
I understand that the second turns one place every time the first makes a full rotation.
Could you provide a cite?
It’s entire possible that the inclusion of the phrase might help sometimes, just as other common words/phrases would be, but the idea that it was used with great frequency and always at the beginning or end of messages strains credulity.
Apparently there were cases where a Navaho codetalker was talking in code on a frequency that was being listened into by both American soldiers who knew nothing about the Navajo code and by Japanese soldiers who were listening in because they knew that American soldiers would sometimes talk on that frequency. At some point, an American soldier heard the Navajo codetalker say something in a language he was completely unfamiliar with. He assumed it was Japanese. He said on that frequency, “Get off our frequency, you goddamned Jap.” The Navajo codetalker replied, “I’m not a goddamned Jap. I’m a Navajo.” (Excuse the nasty language, but that was how they talked back then.) The Japanese soldier listening in realized that this code has something to do with Navajo.
Navajo codetalking was not a perfect code. But then it only was used for three years. if the Japanese had tried harder and been able to spend more time, they would have cracked it.
There were also apparently several instances of Navaho being “taken prisoner” by US troops who couldn’t tell the difference between the Japanese and Native Americans. One was even bayonetted by fellow Marines. White bodyguards eventually had to be assigned to the codetalkers to prevent such mishaps, although that led to rumors that the bodyguards were really there to put a bullet in their charge’s head if they were in danger of being captured by the enemy.
There’s lot’s of information about it easily findable. What kind of cite would you accept?
Here’s one.
“The first problem to solve was the cribs. There were clues. Sometimes it was clear that some messages were weather reports. Sometimes the words ‘weather’ or Heil Hitler!’ were obvious. One signaller was in the habit of ending his signals ‘nothing to report’ (nicht zu melden). “
David Boyle is the author of Alan Turing: Unlocking the Enigma.
Although it was more likely that the bodyguards were told, “If you see an enemy or an American soldier about to shoot or stick a knife into the Navajo you’re guarding, throw yourself in front of the Navajo. It’s better than you die than the codetalker. We’ve got a lot more soldiers than codetalkers.”
Except with the Enigma, if you garble any single character, no matter what it is, the entire rest of the message will be garbled.
Yes, that’s fine and I accept that it was used as a crib at times.
But the fine distinction I was questioning was the contention in this thread that it was in most or all messages. Also the contention in this thread that it was commonly used as the first or last words in those messages. If those particular practices were widespread, rather than sometimes being found in random bits in the middle or by individually incautious users, they would strain credulity.
Thanks. I was thinking people were making the stronger claim that Enigma failed because the stupid Nazis always opened or closed messages with “Heil Hitler.” That is what I think is a myth. I have no objection to the idea that common phrases like “Heil Hitler,” “No change,” “Weather report,” etc. were useful cribs to try.
Are you claiming the Nazis weren’t stupid, or that they didn’t routinely say “Heil Hitler” in every message?
Both with one correction: the claim is they did not routinely begin or end their messages with “Heil Hitler”.
There’s no evidence I can find of the latter (though, no doubt it was a common phrase in many messages). The particular cite given does not even say it was a common phrase. Just that it was “sometimes” (the actual word in the article) used as a crib, i.e. a sufficiently common phrase to help with the codebreaking.
Likewise, little evidence of the former. The Enigma machine was a reasonably good encryption engine for the period. It had its weaknesses, many of which the Germans themselves were aware, but it also took a considerable effort and no small amount of luck for the Allies to have broken it as thoroughly as they did.
Evil and stupid are not synonymous. Yes, it is common practice to ascribe all manner of negative traits to people we don’t like, but this is supposed to be FQ.