I am publicly challenging the professional cryptological community to examine and verify (or refute) my decryption of the Beale Ciphers.

[johnnyrev]

I have time to work on decrypting the Beale Ciphers again. My decryption process produces a clear plaintext that includes direct instructions from Thomas Beale himself. I can demonstrate this with a one-page proof of concept, allowing anyone to see within five minutes how the ciphers were encrypted and how they can be decrypted. The ciphers have been broken since 2014. An NDA will be required, of course.

Thank you for your time,
Johnny Piper

 

[Tpmetal]

Why even post this? What benifit do you get by showing random people? And why would they need to sign a nda?.......

 

[DizzyDigger]

I am publicly challenging the professional cryptological community to examine and verify (or refute) my decryption of the Beale Ciphers.

The ciphers have been broken since 2014. An NDA will be required, of course.

Why? and...why?

How many members of the "professional cryptological community" do you believe are
on TNet?

 

[Carl-NC]

The ciphers have been broken since 2014.

There are two types of people: Those who have solved the Beale ciphers and can show us the recovered treasure, and those who haven't solved the Beale ciphers.

 

[pepperj]

There are two types of people: Those who have solved the Beale ciphers and can show us the recovered treasure, and those who haven't solved the Beale ciphers.

And without signing a NDA

 

[johnnyrev]

The first step is to have my key, which broke the Beale Ciphers, validated.
This will clearly demonstrate what I have been saying for the past few years.
The reason people haven't found the hidden items is that they are not looking at the true decrypted text, but instead are distracted by a red herring or misleading text designed to conceal the location of the items.

 

[Carl-NC]

The first step is to have my key, which broke the Beale Ciphers, validated.

Why? If you broke the ciphers, then the results should be self-evident.

 

[releventchair]

The International Association for Cryptologic Research

 

[souce19]

The first step is to have my key, which broke the Beale Ciphers, validated.
This will clearly demonstrate what I have been saying for the past few years.
The reason people haven't found the hidden items is that they are not looking at the true decrypted text, but instead are distracted by a red herring or misleading text designed to conceal the location of the items.

Are you looking at plaintext emergence from a book cipher? A surveyor traverse? A new perspective of reading the Beale Ciphers? Were the ciphers broke using AI or is it replicable by a human?

 

[chalkoutline]

The K

The first step is to have my key, which broke the Beale Ciphers, validated.

Is the KEY in a book cipher format similar to the KEY (DOI) that solves Cipher 2?

 

[johnnyrev]

Are you looking at plaintext emergence from a book cipher? A surveyor traverse? A new perspective of reading the Beale Ciphers? Were the ciphers broke using AI or is it replicable by a human?

AI is not going to work with the Beale cipher, but if you ask it about the Red Herring or a Honey-Encryption in the cipher that was decoded in the 1800’s. The AI will agree with me and tell you this is the most accurate description of what is going on with the original decoding. It is simply a false trail! Nothing more. The decryption I have for C1 tells you where to start at C2, and how to decrypt it! The incredible way this was encrypted will be the topic for many future generations of cryptological meetings of experts!

 

[johnnyrev]

The K

Is the KEY in a book cipher format similar to the KEY (DOI) that solves Cipher 2?

I would have to say if you were to memorize the DOI it would serve you the rest of your life. If you are American you should have done this in School. All I can say is, if you have the key, it’s not hard to follow Beale instructions to finish decoding the rest. Step by Step instructions are given as you decipher it!

 

[chalkoutline]

When i first saw your research i was convinced you had solved it! After learning more i don't think you have.

TB would have wanted Robert Morriss to decode the ciphers, locate the treasure and pass it on to the rightful heirs. That means to me, that all 3 KEYs would have the same book cipher format and the decoded text would be in the same dialect/style as the DOI.

I understand the the use of old English as added protection but to make the ciphers uncrackable all TB needed to do is randomly assign letters to numbers and use multiple numbers for the same letter. There is no need for two layers of encryption and then use old English.

Based on my research ive concluded the 22 alphabetical string at location 480 provides the needed protection but still maintains the KEY format of the DOI substitution cipher.

To demonstrate this method i used the 22 letter alphabetical string to redact, four miles from bufords.

I have deposited in the county of Bedford ABCDEFGHIIJKLMMNOHPP, in an excavation or
vault, six feet below the surface of the ground, the following articles, belonging jointly to the
parties whose names are given in number three herewith:

Now, if TB used the 22 letters to redact "five miles east to a rock", i contend you will never decode this action/instruction because these three variables; distance, direction and marker provide too many combinations/alternatives to narrow it down to the correct location.

There are three other shorter strings that could easily be used to redact any two of the three as well as single letters sprinkled around.

 

[johnnyrev]

When i first saw your research i was convinced you had solved it! After learning more i don't think you have.

TB would have wanted Robert Morriss to decode the ciphers, locate the treasure and pass it on to the rightful heirs. That means to me, that all 3 KEYs would have the same book cipher format and the decoded text would be in the same dialect/style as the DOI.

I understand the the use of old English as added protection but to make the ciphers uncrackable all TB needed to do is randomly assign letters to numbers and use multiple numbers for the same letter. There is no need for two layers of encryption and then use old English.

Based on my research ive concluded the 22 alphabetical string at location 480 provides the needed protection but still maintains the KEY format of the DOI substitution cipher.

To demonstrate this method i used the 22 letter alphabetical string to redact, four miles from bufords.

I have deposited in the county of Bedford ABCDEFGHIIJKLMMNOHPP, in an excavation or
vault, six feet below the surface of the ground, the following articles, belonging jointly to the
parties whose names are given in number three herewith:

Now, if TB used the 22 letters to redact "five miles east to a rock", i contend you will never decode this action/instruction because these three variables; distance, direction and marker provide too many combinations/alternatives to narrow it down to the correct location.

There are three other shorter strings that could easily be used to redact any two of the three as well as single letters sprinkled around.

Time Will Tell!

 

[Captain Donger Sullivan]

Time will tell? I always found that line by Beale to be intriguing…”The papers enclosed herewith will be unintelligible without the key, which will reach you in time, and be found merely to state the contents of our depository, with its exact location, and a list of the names of our party with their places of residence, etc.” In my humble opinion, I believe Beale is referring to the key(s) in this line. Think about it…would you leave the fate of this entire operation on the chance that your friend remembers to mail a letter that you left with them ten years prior, before disappearing? And if your friend was still alive 10 years later, stayed true to their word and mailed the envelope to Robert Morriss in 1832, how could you be so sure that it would even reach him? It seems to me, that if I were to create such an elaborate plan to ensure that the rightful beneficiaries received the shares of the men who died securing them, I would have the foresight to imagine every possible threat to my plans success. That being said, if there truly was a key, I don’t believe it would’ve been left to chance as described in the letter(s). …unless maybe he’s talking about Francis Scott. But back to what Beale said…is he referring to the Papers > ciphers plaintext or is he referring to the Key > ciphers plaintext? TTFN

(Post edited for rules. )

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Capt Donger, please post by our rules, no insults directed towards members.

 

[johnnyrev]

Time will tell? I always found that line by Beale to be intriguing…”The papers enclosed herewith will be unintelligible without the key, which will reach you in time, and be found merely to state the contents of our depository, with its exact location, and a list of the names of our party with their places of residence, etc.” In my humble opinion, I believe Beale is referring to the key(s) in this line. Think about it…would you leave the fate of this entire operation on the chance that your friend remembers to mail a letter that you left with them ten years prior, before disappearing? And if your friend was still alive 10 years later, stayed true to their word and mailed the envelope to Robert Morriss in 1832, how could you be so sure that it would even reach him? It seems to me, that if I were to create such an elaborate plan to ensure that the rightful beneficiaries received the shares of the men who died securing them, I would have the foresight to imagine every possible threat to my plans success. That being said, if there truly was a key, I don’t believe it would’ve been left to chance as described in the letter(s). …unless maybe he’s talking about Francis Scott. But back to what Beale said…is he referring to the Papers > ciphers plaintext or is he referring to the Key > ciphers plaintext? TTFN

(Post edited for rules. )

The lawyer he had hired to send the letter was affected by the flood that impacted the area in 1826. However, like many important treasures, there were several backup keys in addition to the one that was intended for Morris. These are very complex ciphers, unlike the original red herring, which was decoded in the late 1800s. The complexity of these ciphers indicates the significant value of what they are meant to protect. More than 10 tons of gold, if it has not been found yet!

 

[souce19]

Time will tell? I always found that line by Beale to be intriguing…”The papers enclosed herewith will be unintelligible without the key, which will reach you in time, and be found merely to state the contents of our depository, with its exact location, and a list of the names of our party with their places of residence, etc.” In my humble opinion, I believe Beale is referring to the key(s) in this line. Think about it…would you leave the fate of this entire operation on the chance that your friend remembers to mail a letter that you left with them ten years prior, before disappearing? And if your friend was still alive 10 years later, stayed true to their word and mailed the envelope to Robert Morriss in 1832, how could you be so sure that it would even reach him? It seems to me, that if I were to create such an elaborate plan to ensure that the rightful beneficiaries received the shares of the men who died securing them, I would have the foresight to imagine every possible threat to my plans success. That being said, if there truly was a key, I don’t believe it would’ve been left to chance as described in the letter(s). …unless maybe he’s talking about Francis Scott. But back to what Beale said…is he referring to the Papers > ciphers plaintext or is he referring to the Key > ciphers plaintext? TTFN

(Post edited for rules. )

I’ve always found that quite interesting. If cipher 1 is the locality, Cipher 2 is the contents, and cipher 3 is the heirs, why does he mention the contents first? That happens to be the one that’s decoded first. Next is the locality (B1). That will get you to the exact location of the vault. The second cipher solve states that exact thing about cipher 1. Then, there is the Jan 5 letter that only speaks about the heirs. I have a wild theory that cipher 2 was an engineered solve. It was already given to Ward. Cipher 1 will get you to the treasure if you can crack it. Then the actual names of the heirs and their addresses will be inside the vault. I believe this fits the design best.

 

[johnnyrev]

I’ve always found that quite interesting. If cipher 1 is the locality, Cipher 2 is the contents, and cipher 3 is the heirs, why does he mention the contents first? That happens to be the one that’s decoded first. Next is the locality (B1). That will get you to the exact location of the vault. The second cipher solve states that exact thing about cipher 1. Then, there is the Jan 5 letter that only speaks about the heirs. I have a wild theory that cipher 2 was an engineered solve. It was already given to Ward. Cipher 1 will get you to the treasure if you can crack it. Then the actual names of the heirs and their addresses will be inside the vault. I believe this fits the design best.

The C2 is merely a distraction from the true planet text. Someone discovered it and put all the eggs in one basket. That is why no one else can decode 1, 2, 3 but me!

 

[souce19]

So it’s gone?! The C2 solve is a bogus one??