On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 07:38:28AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 07:28:39AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > I've known about ETAONRISHetc basically forever. Where is this new > > > order (ETSAORINDHLCPMUYFWGBVKXQZJ) coming from. > > > > > > Citation please? > > > > I'm just updating the man page to reflect the percentages in caesar.c > > which claims to get it's numbers from "some unix(tm) documentation". > > Is it possible you've got the fix backwards? I think ETAONRISHetc is > from some well-known research, but ETSAOR* is brand new and even google > cannot find a reference to that ordering. It seems there is a bug here, > but is it perhaps the other frequency table?
I certainly don't claim to know which frequencies are more accurate. Does anyone have a preferred source for which percentages to use? - Matthew Martin
