|
|
 | | From: | James Vanns | | Subject: | Enigma - The Ring Setting | | Date: | 23 Jan 2005 09:10:43 -0800 |
|
|
 | I have read much material on Enigma albeit material from the NET and
not books. This is my problem; I have read quite a few articles over
the past 6 months that I had googled for and unfortunately some seem to
contradict others or at least omit important details!
I am confused about the ring setting mainly. I was to understand that
each rotor (I-VIII) had a single notch (actually VI-VIII being an
exception as they had two) in a fixed position (according to _all_
rotor wiring descrptions I've found):
Wheel Wiring Notch Window
ETW ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
I EKMFLGDQVZNTOWYHXUSPAIBRCJ Y Q
II AJDKSIRUXBLHWTMCQGZNPYFVOE M E
III BDFHJLCPRTXVZNYEIWGAKMUSQO D V
IV ESOVPZJAYQUIRHXLNFTGKDCMWB R J
V VZBRGITYUPSDNHLXAWMJQOFECK H Z
VI JPGVOUMFYQBENHZRDKASXLICTW H,U Z,M
VII NZJHGRCXMYSWBOUFAIVLPEKQDT H,U Z,M
VIII FKQHTLXOCBJSPDZRAMEWNIUYGV H,U Z,M
beta LEYJVCNIXWPBQMDRTAKZGFUHOS M4 only
gamma FSOKANUERHMBTIYCWLQPZXVGJD M4 only
An example: Rotor I has its notch at Y, II at M, III at D and so on.
So now I discover that the ring setting actually means these notches
are positionable. Is this true? If so whats the significance of the
above? Why associate Y with I if it's a variable? If indeed the ring
setting positions the notches relative to A-Z then when the ring
setting is set to 1,1,1 does this mean that the notch is at a, a and a?
Or does it refer to the above table - y, m and d?
So now this has also confused my understanding of the message key -
what exactly is that?
Can someone actually clear this up for me and avoid any further
confusion?
Regards
Jim
|
|
| | From: | David Hamer | | Subject: | Re: Enigma - The Ring Setting | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:31:20 -0500 |
|
|
| James Vanns wrote:
>
> I have read much material on Enigma albeit material from the NET and
> not books. This is my problem; I have read quite a few articles over
> the past 6 months that I had googled for and unfortunately some seem to
> contradict others or at least omit important details!
>
> I am confused about the ring setting mainly. I was to understand that
> each rotor (I-VIII) had a single notch (actually VI-VIII being an
> exception as they had two) in a fixed position (according to _all_
> rotor wiring descrptions I've found):
>
> Wheel Wiring Notch Window
>
> ETW ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
>
> I EKMFLGDQVZNTOWYHXUSPAIBRCJ Y Q
> II AJDKSIRUXBLHWTMCQGZNPYFVOE M E
> III BDFHJLCPRTXVZNYEIWGAKMUSQO D V
> IV ESOVPZJAYQUIRHXLNFTGKDCMWB R J
> V VZBRGITYUPSDNHLXAWMJQOFECK H Z
> VI JPGVOUMFYQBENHZRDKASXLICTW H,U Z,M
> VII NZJHGRCXMYSWBOUFAIVLPEKQDT H,U Z,M
> VIII FKQHTLXOCBJSPDZRAMEWNIUYGV H,U Z,M
>
> beta LEYJVCNIXWPBQMDRTAKZGFUHOS M4 only
> gamma FSOKANUERHMBTIYCWLQPZXVGJD M4 only
>
> An example: Rotor I has its notch at Y, II at M, III at D and so on.
>
> So now I discover that the ring setting actually means these notches
> are positionable. Is this true? If so whats the significance of the
> above? Why associate Y with I if it's a variable? If indeed the ring
> setting positions the notches relative to A-Z then when the ring
> setting is set to 1,1,1 does this mean that the notch is at a, a and a?
> Or does it refer to the above table - y, m and d?
>
> So now this has also confused my understanding of the message key -
> what exactly is that?
>
> Can someone actually clear this up for me and avoid any further
> confusion?
Jim...
The turnover notch is integral with the index ring and in Wheel I is
fixed at position Y. However the index ring can be rotated to any one
of 26 positions relative to the inner, wired core of the wheel - this
function is the ringsetting [Ringstellung]. To put this in the terms you
use above - the notch is fixed with respect to the index ring itself but
is 'positionable' relative to the wired component of the wheel.
--
David Hamer
dhamer@cryptogram.org
|
|
|
