So thanks to Jasmine, we know confidently that there is no movement in K4 of Kryptos, at all.

-Her message and emails reposted with permission after removing email addresses and last names, I included some dashes to break the messages apart a little-

Hi Kryptosfan, I’ve been slogging away at Kryptos for a couple months without much luck.  Last May I’d noticed that people were still considering transposition as the 1st or 2nd component of K4 even though the NY Times article said that NYPVTT=BERLIN.  I had thought maybe I was misunderstanding the clue so I had emailed the NY Times author and James Sanborn for clarification.  Then I sort of forgot about the email until cleaning out my inbox recently.  I included my last response to Mr. Sanborn which he never responded to so I think it’s fair to say that transposition is out for K4.



Okayyyy…  I haven’t followed all of her links but it says pretty clearly on her website that NYPVTT becomes BERLIN which rules out my idea that things were moved around.  

Thank you so much for getting back to me!  It looks like she has a lot of info on her site but also links to other people’s sites and news.  I’m a little discouraged there are so many other folks are already so far ahead but I think I’ll poke around a little and see if I can maybe see something they’ve been missing.  Worth a shot!

Have a great rest of the weekend!


From: -Sanborn’s email from his art website-
Subject: Re: Just a quick tiny clarification about NY Times article?
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 15:57:21 -0400
To: -removed to keep her inbox empty-

see Elonka Dunins Kryptos website, best, j


On May 25, 2013, at 3:36 PM, Jasmine B- wrote:
I asked John Schwartz but he said he never clarified the difference.In the November 20th, 2010 article in the NY Times (which was awesome!), is the clue to the fourth part that the 64th-69th letters in the message are BERLIN or that the letters NYPVTT (#64-69) become BERLIN?Sorry to bug you on the weekend but the weather here is terrible and everyone is busy so I thought I’d dig into this whole Kryptos mystery a little.  Looks like I’m a couple of years behind everyone else so I’m playing catchup.  I’m a big Jennifer Garner fan (she’s awesome!) and have been re-watching old ALIAS episodes on my netflix account and re-visiting fan message boards and kind of stumbled into your sculpture (random right?).  She’s gotten me back into running – seems like every episode has her jogging through a mission but I don’t think I can do the wigs – and since I will never actually work for the CIA it seemed like fun to try and solve their mysterious message.  Okkkk, so it’s a little escapist but I don’t plan on actually telling anyone what I’m working on (keeping secrets already…).  I haven’t read a Nancy Drew for probably twenty years but it’s kind of the same feeling of trying to crack the mystery.  I almost need a wrinkled suit, trenchcoat and gross cigar and be all Bogart with the black and white (or was that Columbo?).  You should probably re-read my question but imagine we’re in a movie and I have that awesome accent.  I’m rambling, should probably cut it short!  It probably sounds dumb for a girl to be trying but I’m going to anyways – wish me luck!Oh and have an amazing weekend!  I know for some folks it’s sad but it’s always meant barbecues to me, weird right?


Thanks very much! I’m really looking forward to being able to write the story when this puzzle is finally cracked!

On May 24, 2013, at 3:40 PM, Jasmine B- <email removed> wrote:

Thank you for responding and so quickly.  =)

In case no one has said it before, you’re a good guy John and there’s at least one more person out there who really appreciates you.  Thank you.

I’m off to consider things a little more.  Have a good holiday weekend!


From: jswatz-at-nytimes-dot-com
To: -email removed-
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 15:12:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Just a tiny clarification request?

thanks for your note. 

 I do not believe that we discussed that possible distinction.
Best wishes,
John Schwartz
On May 24, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Jasmine B- <email removed> wrote:

Hi John!  I promise it’ll be quick, I’m sure you’re super busy.

In the article from November 20th, 2010: “A Crack In The Code Kryptos Is Keeping”, did Sanborn specifically say that the 64th-69th letters in the final text are BERLIN or that the letters NYPVTT (#64-69) are BERLIN?

The only reason I ask are that the difference would mean dramatically different possibilities for efforts at deciphering it (i.e. transposition vs. substitution).

Thank you!

Jasmine Baenver
What this means is that there is no transposition at all in K4, not after or before an additive.  Which sucks for me because that was my fondly held idea for what it was.  So this means that the two pieces to K4 are solely substitution effects.
I suppose it’s nice having confirmation of a sorts.  Yes, he could be playing it cagey to not release too many details but Elonka’s site doesn’t mention letter numbers of the message being BERLIN but that the actual CT letters NYPVTT are BERLIN.  If I remember rightly, he said something similar in the post-presentation talks after an ACA talk that Ed Scheidt gave last year.
So just to clarify, no transposition in K4.  At least almost pretty absolutely mostly sure there isn’t.