[Spooks] Automated Spy Numbers Loggings

[Martin Potter]

Mark,

I agree with you, but only in cases where the cut number is to 
interpreted literally, as in group counts, addresses, or cipher 
discriminants, etc, as you mentioned.  In the enciphered text 
itself, which is usually where the cut numbers appear, it matters 
not a tinker's fart whether you represent a digit 1 by "A", "+" 
sign, or "your Uncle Bob".  The cut number has meaning only with 
reference to the key to be applied to it.

I would be very careful basing any TA on the interpretation of 
cut numbers unless I had independent verification of the number 
itself, like in a group count.  If the numbers station didn't use 
cut numbers for their group counts, I wouldn't touch it.  (Just 
wait till I get a job running a spy numbers station  -  I would 
use a cut number system that would confound everyone.  After all, 
only the addressees have to know what you are doing   HI)

As for our RST signal reports being sent as 5NN or ENN, they are 
mostly meaningless anyway.  I have worked guys who gave me a 599 
report but had to ask me twice to repeat their serial number.  So 
much for "strong signal" and "perfect copy".

... Martin    VE3OAT


mslaten wrote:
> Visit http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/spooks to unsubscribe from this list
> 
> Hi List:
> 
>     Martin, it matters greatly which table of Cuban cut numbers are the
> correct ones.  The letter "T" = 0.  If you used the incorrect table, "T" =
> 9.  If the recipient of the coded message should use the incorrect table,
> he/she would never be able to decode the message, as all the numbers would
> be wrong.
>     In reality, cut numbers are actual numbers.  CW stations use them as a
> sort of shorthand to speed up the transmissions.  It is quicker to send "T"
> or "-" for "0" than it is to send "- - - - -" for the morse character "0".
>     The correct table is thus:
> 
>     A    =    1
>     N    =    2
>     D    =    3
>     U    =    4
>     W    =    5
>     R    =    6
>     I     =    7
>     G    =    8
>     M    =    9
>     T    =    0
> 
>     The old (pre-1996) M8 stations used to send the group count of the
> message with the callup to the addressee.  The standard 150 group count was
> always sent as AWT.  By the above table you can see that AWT = 150.  If any
> other combinations of letters were sent, that would not equal 150.
> The same for the addressee sent.  If WIUNN (equal to 57422) was sent, then
> that agent (57422) would know he was the intended recipient.  If the
> transmitting station instead, just randomly picked any other combination of
> cut numbers, nobody would  know who the message is intended for.
>     When I submit my logs, I always send in the addressees in the actual
> number that it is.  This is how it is intended to be copied.  It is just a
> matter of learning the meaning of 10 number equivalents.  Also, for
> analytical purposes, this helps to determine information about a network and
> it's characteristics and make up.
>     I hope this cleared things up.  If there are any other questions, I
> would be happy to comment if I can.
> 
> 73's
> Mark
>