[tptacek]

Do I understand part of the complexity of the situation is that Kryptos is in some sense "crackable" (unlike real cryptography), and these two people sleuthed their way to the answer book without solving it? Which is not quite exactly the same thing as them independently working out a solution; it's more like a nicer and more legal version of breaking into the guy's house and stealing it out of his desk drawer?

[sgustard]

Can we even determine if what they found is the key, or just the plaintext? The article mentions they recognized bits of plaintext (Berlin clock) in the archives.

[codeduck]

Technically what they accomplished is a successful side channel attack.

[HPsquared]

"What we think intelligence agencies do" vs "what intelligence agencies actually do"

[moron4hire]

At the state level, it's a method that is in bounds.

[tptacek]

I don't have an opinion! As a cryptography pentester, Kryptos has always kind of set my teeth on edge (Wikipedia had editors covering cryptography topics whose expertise was rooted in Kryptos puzzle-crypto). But one of the smartest people I know is also a Kryptos enthusiast so this is all very complicated for me.

[irjustin]

Yes, but all things considered, that's outside the bounds of this cypher - which is why "we all" feel cheated.