24 minute read
Ultra Pac, Inc. Business Information, Profile, and History
21925 Industrial Boulevard
Rogers, Minnesota 55374-9575
U.S.A.
History of Ultra Pac, Inc.
Ultra Pac, Inc. ranked 12th among 48 U.S. thermoform manufacturers in the $1 billion plastic food packaging industry according to 1997 estimates. The majority of Ultra Pac sales were to bakery customers; a second sizeable market was among produce distributors. Ultra Pac also manufactured bakeable plastic products for the baking, home meal replacement, and delicatessen segments of the food industry.
Entry into the Plastics Industry: 1970s-80s
Calvin S. Krupa's entrepreneurial spirit led him to the plastics manufacturing business. "It happened in the process of trying to sell a little chemically activated hand-warmer he'd started manufacturing in the early 1970s while working as a traffic manager at Pillsbury," wrote Dick Youngblood. Krupa purchased equipment to make plastic packaging for the product but later expanded the enterprise.
Through his company Custom Thermoform, Krupa produced rigid plastic containers for products such as fishing tackle, cosmetics, and hardware from 1973 through 1984--the thermoforming process uses heat and pressure to mold plastic sheets into containers. But undercapitalization and the recession of the early 1980s compelled him to merge the business with Innovative Plastics, where as vice-president of marketing Krupa developed 25 packaging products for bakery supermarkets.
Innovative Plastics, like Krupa's earlier venture, was plagued by lack of capital funds which ultimately hampered the company's ability to bring new products to the marketplace. Krupa moved on and established Ultra Pac in February 1987 with Twin Cities businessman James A. Thole. Funds from two other investors and a public offering of $150,000 helped get the business off the ground.
Ultra Pac began production in an 8,000-square-foot facility in the Minneapolis suburb of Plymouth. The first product was packaging for compact disc (CD) recordings. Krupa had developed the 6x12 CD Blister Pack in 1983 for RCA Records; it became widely used by the industry. The company added a line of food packaging for bakery and delicatessen products toward the end of the year.
Expanded Food Packaging Operations: The Early 1990s
In 1989, CD packaging brought in 57 percent of Ultra Pac's $2.8 million in revenues. But by 1991 only about 10 percent of sales came from the CD package production. Food packaging had become the company's primary product. Ultra Pac produced about 80 different designs and held about five percent of the national plastic food packaging market. The company now operated out of a 60,000-square-foot facility in Rogers, Minnesota, northwest of Minneapolis.
In a January 1991 Corporate Report Minnesota article, Krupa attributed his company's early success in the food packaging market to the recyclability and durability of the product as well as Ultra Pac's rapid response to customers' requests for new designs. To ensure continued growth, Ultra Pac invested nearly $1 million in sheet extrusion equipment. The company expected to save up to $400,000 per year, by producing their own plastic sheets instead of buying them ready-made.
Ultra Pac placed 37th on Business Week's 1991 list of the top 100 small U.S. corporations based on sales growth, earnings growth, and return on investment capital. Fiscal 1991 revenues were $11.6 million, more than double the 1990 figure. Wall Street took note, and Ultra Pac's stock price began rising.
With the recording industry moving away from oversized CD packaging, Ultra Pac phased out its first product: CD packaging had contributed just 6.4 percent of fiscal 1992 net sales. In line with environmental concerns of the time, Ultra Pac actively promoted the recycling of its food packaging products. The polyethylene terephthalate (PETE) used in production was a high-quality material which was the most widely recycled plastic in the world. Ultra Pac also used post-consumer PETE in the production of some of its containers--federal government regulated the use of recycled plastic for food items.
Plastic packaging companies used generally the same technology, so companies attempted to distinguish themselves from competitors with product design which was granted some limited patent protection. According to Youngblood, "Thus, the Ultra Pac line now includes some 300 items ranging from party platters for supermarket delis, buckets for McGlynn's cookies and hinged clamshells for berries to compartmentalized tubs for candy, casserole lookalikes for carryout chicken, even a platter molded in the shape of a sombrero for nachos and salsa." In addition to the bakery, supermarket, and deli products, Ultra Pac was expanding their product line to include packaging for fruit and produce distributors and florists.
According to Youngblood, Ultra Pac had 18 production lines mid-year 1992 and was adding two more. The equipment cost about $300,000 per line. Molds were $50,000 to $100,000, and mold inserts used to vary designs could run up to $10,000. Three private placements and a secondary offering, all made during the previous five years, raised $7 million to help finance the growth.
Krupa received recognition for his entrepreneurship in 1992, and Ultra Pac was ranked 23rd among the 100 best small companies in the nation by Business Week. Richard S. Teitelbaum wrote in an August 1992 Fortune article, "When its competitors are the mammoth plastic container units of Mobil and Tenneco, a bantamweight like Ultra Pac (fiscal 1992 sales: $18.3 million) had better bring something special to the deli counter." Teitelbaum said Ultra Pac set themselves apart with their PETE products which kept foods fresher than the less flexible oriented polystyrene (OPS) typically used by the big plastic container makers. In addition, the big manufacturers offered pre-made packaging while Ultra Pac emphasized its custom-made capabilities and customer service.
But the banner year ended with a big drop in earnings: $270,000 in 1993 versus $1.3 million in 1992. The drop was due to costs related to the new packaging lines and a second plastic extruder, plus the introduction of new products. Net sales, on the other hand, continued to rise. For a second year in a row, Ultra Pac exceeded a 50 percent growth rate. Fiscal year 1993 revenues reached $27.6 million.
Ultra Pac entered the international marketplace through a joint venture with Minneapolis-based floral retailer Bachman's Inc. to sell and market plastic containers in 17 countries in the Middle East. In a November 1993 Twin Cities Business Monthly article by Kane Webb, Krupa said the company was "laying the ground work for the future." He went on to say, "We're growing like crazy, and I don't refuse many offers." Although sales continued to grow, earnings fell again in fiscal 1994.
Ultra Pac introduced products made from oven and microwave tolerant plastic, cellular PETE or C-PET, in fiscal 1995. The company also entered into a licensing agreement with a New Zealand company for the manufacturing and marketing of PETE packaging. Net earnings for the year rebounded back above the million mark.
Increased Competition and Costs: Mid-1990s
Fiscal 1996 marked Ultra Pac's first unprofitable year since 1987. Losses were $3.2 million. The company said significantly higher raw material costs, higher fixed overhead costs, and higher labor costs were major contributors to the deficit. Prices on PETE resin, which accounted for about 50 percent of total manufacturing costs, were driven up by increased demand in the market. New sales did not keep pace with Ultra Pac's expanded production capacity; increased competition, especially from companies making lower cost non-PETE products, hurt the important bakery and deli sales. Other factors such as the trend toward low-fat food items and adverse weather conditions in California's berry producing region added to the pressure on the company.
Ultra Pac responded by trimming its 600-person work force and strengthening the management team. The company moved to improve efficiencies and reduce costs in the thermoforming and extrusion operations and in distribution. Long-term debt that had been in default during the year was restructured.
Aided by lower raw material costs, reduced labor costs, and improved manufacturing efficiencies, Ultra Pac returned to profitability in fiscal 1997. Capital expenditures had been cut to about $500,000, down from about $9 million the previous year. The number of stock products was trimmed to 230 from more than 600. Net earnings were $1.8 million, but net sales for the year declined due to the emphasis on margin improvements rather than growth and the continuing pressure from competition.
Ultra Pac introduced a dual-ovenable product line named the RESERVATIONS Series for the home meal replacement and kitchen-ready food segments of the market in February 1997. With Americans spending more and more money on take-home prepared food, grocers began offering products in direct competition with chains such as Boston Market. Ultra Pac tapped into the trend with sturdy, attractive packaging which could also be used to reheat food in the microwave or oven.
According to the Wall Street Transcript interview with Krupa in April 1997, in addition to developing products for the home meal replacement market, the company planned to concentrate more on bakeable type containers for bakery and deli use. Ultra Pac said the baking industry was demanding more bakeable plastic trays which they used in place of aluminum or solid metal baking pans.
In September 1997, Ultra Pac announced plans for distribution facilities in California and Florida in order to serve the produce markets there more efficiently. Third quarter earnings, announced in November, were at a record pace for the first nine months of fiscal 1998; analysts expressed optimism about the company's short-term future. But when the company announced fiscal year figures were to be moderately below estimates, Ultra Pac's stock price dropped 20 percent.
Future Plans for Plastic Packaging
The huge U.S. market produced most of Ultra Pac's sales, but the company continued to develop its international market. Ultra Pac held a 49 percent interest in a produce container manufacturing operation in Chile in addition to licensing and distribution agreements in New Zealand and Australia. The company wanted to expand its southern hemisphere markets to help balance out the seasonality of fruit and produce production. A European market was also being developed.
Future capital expenditures over the next year or two were expected to be $1 million or less and earmarked for introducing new products and improving manufacturing efficiencies. Ultra Pac's aggressive expansion had allowed the company to produce all of its PETE plastic sheets, despite periodically operating the extrusion equipment at less than full capacity. Krupa and Ultra Pac were banking on greater use of plastic food packaging due to advantages in presentation, sanitation, and labor saving when compared to other containers on the market.
Related information about Ultra
A British security classification (the very highest) given
during World War 2 to intelligence gathered from the breaking of
the key German military codes used with their ‘Enigma’ encryption
device. ‘Ultra’ intelligence was available to the British high
command from the outset of the war, and was of crucial importance
during the Battle of Britain and the Battle of the Atlantic.
For other usages, see Ultra
(disambiguation).
Ultra (sometimes capitalized ULTRA) was the name used
by the British
for intelligence resulting from decryption of German communications in World War II. The term eventually became the
standard designation in both Britain and the United States for all
intelligence from high-level cryptanalytic sources. The name arose because the
code-breaking success was considered more important than the
highest security classification available at the time (Most
Secret) and so was regarded as being Ultra secret.
Much of the German cipher traffic was encrypted on the Enigma machine, hence the
term "Ultra" has often been used almost synonymously with "Enigma
decrypts."
Until the name "Ultra" was adopted, there were several cryptonyms for intelligence
from this source, including Boniface.
Later the Germans began to use several stream cipher teleprinter systems for
their most important traffic, to which the British gave the generic
code-name FISH. Several distinct systems were used, principally
the Lorenz SZ
40/42 (initially code-named TUNNY) and Geheimfernschreiber
(code-named STURGEON).
These also were broken, particularly TUNNY, which the British
thoroughly penetrated. It was eventually attacked using the
Colossus,
considered to be the forerunner of the electronic programmable
digital computer. Although the volume of messages read from this
system was much smaller than that from the Enigma, they more than
made up for it in their importance.
F.W.
Winterbotham, in The Ultra Secret (1974), quotes the
western Supreme Allied Commander, Dwight D. These
messages were generated on several variants of an
electro-mechanical rotor machine called "Enigma." The Enigma machine was
widely thought to be in practice unbreakable in the 1920s, when a variant of the
commercial Model D was first used by the German Navy. The German Army, Navy, Air Force, Nazi party, Gestapo, and German diplomats
all used Enigma machines, but there were several variants (eg, the
Abwehr used a four-rotor machine without a plugboard, and Naval
Enigma used different key management from that of the Army or Air
Force, making its traffic far more difficult to cryptanalyze).
Dilly Knox,
of GC&CS, is said to
have broken it during the 1920s.
Breaking the cipher
-
Main article: Cryptanalysis
of the Enigma
The fundamental break into the Enigma systems that were to be
used by Nazi
Germany was made in Poland in 1932, just on the eve of Adolf Hitler's accession to
power, by Marian
Rejewski. The 27-year-old mathematician used advanced
mathematics (group
theory, particularly permutation theory) and cracked the Enigma system.
Together with two colleagues at the Polish General Staff's
Cipher
Bureau (Polish: Biuro Szyfrów), he went on to develop practical
methods of decrypting Enigma traffic. They designed working
"doubles" of the Enigmas and developed equipment and techniques
which helped in finding the keys needed for decryption (including
the "grill," "clock," cyclometer, cryptologic
bomb, and perforated sheets). Well before 1938, much German Enigma traffic was being
routinely decrypted by the Poles; This happened during the famous
meeting at Pyry, in the
Kabaty Woods south of
Warsaw, on July 25, 1939. Since neither the French nor the British had
succeeded in breaking Enigma traffic, this was a major
cryptanalytic windfall for Poland's western allies.
Armed with this Polish assistance, the British began work on
German Enigma traffic. Work on Enigma after the outbreak of World
War II in France, at PC
Bruno outside Paris, was done by Polish Cipher Bureau
cryptologists who had escaped Poland. Early in 1939 Britain's
secret service had installed its Government Code and Cypher
School (GC&CS) at Bletchley Park, 50 miles (80 km) north of London, to work on enemy message
traffic. They also set up a large interception network to collect
enciphered messages for the cryptologists at Bletchley and at five
near-by off-site outstations at Adstock, Gayhurst, Wavendon, Stanmore, and Eastcote. Strict rules were established to restrict the
number of people who knew of Ultra (and its origins) in the hope of
ensuring that nothing (e.g., leaks, actions) would alert the
Axis powers that the
Allies were reading any of their messages. Such was the secrecy
surrounding reports from "Boniface" that "his" reports were taken
directly to Prime Minister Winston Churchill in a locked box to which he
personally held the key.
The Bletchley Park workers included a mix of crossword enthusiasts,
chess mavens, mathematicians and pioneer
computer
scientists. Amongst the latter was Alan Turing, one of the
founders of modern computing. By 1943, a large proportion of intercepts (over 2,000 daily at the height of
operations) were routinely read, including some from Hitler
himself. 31, 58.)
One mode of attack on the Enigma relied on the fact that the
reflector (a patented feature of the Enigma machines) guaranteed
that no letter could be enciphered as itself, so an A could not be
sent as an A. With a probable plaintext fragment and the knowledge
that no letter could be enciphered as itself, a corresponding
ciphertext fragment
could often be identified.
Use of Ultra
Usable Ultra information came too late to be of great help
during the Battle
of Britain.
The Allies were seriously concerned with the prospect of the Axis
command finding out that they had broken into the Enigma traffic.
This was taken to the extreme that, for instance, though they knew
from intercepts the whereabouts of U-boats lying in wait in mid-Atlantic, the U-boats often
were not hunted unless a "cover story" could be arranged — Ultra
information was used to attack and sink many Afrika Korps supply ships
bound for North Africa;
In the summer of 1940, British cryptanalysts, who were successfully
breaking German Air Force Enigma-cypher variants, were able to give
Churchill information about the issuing of maps of England and
Ireland to the Sealion invasion forces.
From the beginning, the Naval version of Enigma used a larger
selection of rotors than did the Army or Air Force versions, as
well as operating procedures that made it much more secure than
other Enigma variants. Different and far more difficult methods had
to be used to break into Naval Enigma traffic, and with the U-boats
running freely in the Atlantic after the fall of France, a more direct
approach recommended itself.
On 7 May 1941 the Royal Navy deliberately
captured a German weather ship, together with cipher equipment and
codes; and 2 days later U-110 was captured, together with an Enigma machine,
code book, operating manual and other information that enabled
Bletchley Park to break submarine messages until the end of June.
And it was done again shortly afterwards.
Naval Enigma machines or settings books were captured from a total
of 7 U-boats and 8 German surface ships. These included U-boats
U-505 (1944)
and U-559
(1942) and a number of German weather boats and converted trawlers
such as the Krebs, captured during a raid on the Lofoten Islands off
Norway. More fantastic
scenarios were contemplated, such as Ian Fleming's James Bondian suggestion to "crash" captured German
bombers into the sea near German shipping, hoping they would be
"rescued" by a ship's crew, which would be taken captive by
Commandos concealed in
the plane who would capture the cryptographic material
intact.
In other cases, the Allies induced the Germans to provide them with
cribs. Charting decrypted Enigma traffic against British shipping
losses for a given month shows a strong pattern of increased losses
when Naval Enigma was blacked out, and vice versa. From this point
on, Naval Enigma messages were being read constantly, even after
changes to the ground settings.
However, the new tricks only reduced the number of possible
settings for a message. Karl Dönitz received reports of "impossible" encounters
between U-boats and enemy vessels which made him suspect some
compromise of his communications. In one instance, three U-boats
met at a tiny island in the Caribbean, and a British destroyer promptly showed up.
The more so, since his counterintelligence B-Dienst group, who had
partially broken Royal Navy traffic (including its convoy codes
early in the war), supplied enough information to support the idea
that the Allies were unable to read Naval Enigma.
In 1941 British intelligence learned that the German Navy was about
to introduce M4, a new version of Enigma with 4 rotors
rather than 3. Realizing the error, the U-boat retransmitted the
same message using the 3-rotor Enigma, giving the British
sufficient clues to break the new machine soon after it became
operational on February
1, 1942. Its traffic
was routinely readable.
It is commonly claimed that the breaks into Naval Enigma resulted
in the war being a year shorter, but given its effects on the
Second
Battle of the Atlantic alone, that might be an
underestimate.
Breaking of some messages (not in German Enigma) led to the
defeat of the
Italian Navy at Cape Matapan, and was preceded by another
"fortuitous" search-plane sighting. British Admiral Cunningham also did some fancy footwork at
a hotel in Egypt to prevent Axis agents from taking note of his
movements and deducing that a major operation was planned. Ultra
information was of considerable assistance to the British (Montgomery being
"in the know" about Ultra) at El Alamein in Western Egypt in the
long-running battle with the Afrika Korps under Rommel and Intelligence from
signals between Adolf Hitler and General Günther von Kluge
was of considerable help during the campaign in France just after
the Allied D-Day landings, particularly in regard to estimates of
when German reserves might be committed to battle. The Red Army was
well aware of the German buildup, locations and attack time
precisely, prior to the battle of Kursk due to Ultra information provided to
them.
By 1945 almost all German Enigma traffic (Wehrmacht, Navy,
Luftwaffe, Abwehr, SD, etc.) could be decrypted within a day or
two, yet the Germans remained confident of its security. Rommel's
intentions just prior to the Battle of the
Kasserine Pass in North Africa in 1942 had been suggested by
Ultra, but this was not taken into account by the Americans.
Likewise, Ultra traffic suggested an attack in the Ardennes in 1944, but the
Battle of the
Bulge was a surprise to the Allies because the information was
disregarded.
After the War, American TICOM project teams found and detained a considerable
number of German cryptographic personnel. (See Bamford's Body of
Secrets in regard to the TICOM missions immediately after the
war.)
An intriguing question concerns alleged use of Ultra information by
the "Lucy" spy
ring. It has been alleged that "Lucy" was, in major part, a way
for the British to feed Ultra intelligence to the Soviets in a way
that made it appear to have come from highly-placed espionage and
not from cryptanalysis of German radio traffic. The Lucy ring was
operated, apparently, by one man, Rudolf Roessler, and was initially treated with
considerable suspicion by the Soviets. The information it provided
was accurate and timely, and Soviet agents in Switzerland
(including Alexander
Rado, the director) eventually took it quite seriously.
Purple decrypts in Europe
In the Pacific
theater, the Japanese cipher machine dubbed "Purple" by the Americans,
and unrelated to the Enigmas, was used for highest-level Japanese
diplomatic traffic. It was also cracked, by the US Army's Signal
Intelligence Service.
The Japanese are said to
have obtained an Enigma machine as early as 1937, although it is
debated whether they were given it by their German ally or bought a
commercial version which, except for plugboard and actual rotor
wirings, was essentially the German Army / Air Force machine.
First, as David Kahn
pointed out in his 1974 New York Times review of F.W.
Winterbotham's The Ultra Secret, after World War II the
British gathered up all the Enigma machines they could find and
sold them to Third World countries, confident that they could
continue reading the messages of the machines' new owners. A second
explanation relates to a misadventure of Winston Churchill's
between the World Wars, when he publicly disclosed information
obtained by decrypting Russian secret communications; this had
prompted the Russians to change their cryptography, leading to a
cryptological
blackout. The third explanation is given by Winterbotham (The
Ultra Secret, introduction), who recounts that two weeks after
V-E Day Churchill
requested that former recipients of Ultra intelligence be asked not
to divulge the source or the information they had received from it,
in order that there might be neither damage to the future
operations of the Secret Service nor any cause for the Allies'
enemies to blame it for their defeat.
Since it was British and, later, American message-breaking which
had been the most extensive, this meant that the importance of
Enigma decrypts to the prosecution of the war remained unknown.
Nevertheless it was the public disclosure of Enigma decryption, in
the book Enigma (1973) by French Intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand, that
generated pressure to discuss the rest of the Enigma/Ultra
story.
The British ban was finally lifted in 1974, the year that a key
participant on the distribution side of the Ultra project, F.W.
Winterbotham, published The Ultra Secret.
The official history of British intelligence in World War II was published
in five volumes from 1979 to 1988. It was chiefly edited by
Harry Hinsley,
with one volume by Michael Howard. There is also a one-volume
collection of reminiscences by Ultra veterans, Codebreakers
(1993), edited by Hinsley and Alan Stripp.
As mentioned, after the war, surplus Enigmas and Enigma-like
machines were sold to many countries around the world, which
remained convinced of the security of the remarkable cipher
machines.
Some information about Enigma decryption did get out earlier,
however. In 1967 the Polish military historian W?adys?aw
Kozaczuk in his book Bitwa o tajemnice (Secret War)
first revealed that the German Enigma had been broken by Polish
cryptanalysts before World War II. The same year, David Kahn in
The
Codebreakers described the 1945 capture of a Naval Enigma
machine from U-505 and mentioned, somewhat in passing, that Enigma
messages were already being read by that time, requiring "machines
that filled several buildings." In 1971 Ladislas Farago's The
Game of the Foxes gave an early published version of the myth
of the purloined Enigma that enabled the British (according to
Farago, Alfred
Dillwyn Knox) to crack the cipher (Farago also mentions an
Abwehr Enigma). It was
shortly after this (1974) that a decision was taken to permit some
revelations about some Bletchley Park operations.
The United States National Security Agency retired the last of its
rotor-based encryption systems, the KL-7 series, in the 1980s.
Difficulties with some disclosures
Many accounts of the Enigma-decryption story, and of other
World War II
cryptological happenings, have been published. The story about
Churchill deliberately not interfering with a Luftwaffe bombing of
Coventry which was
known through Enigma decrypts is one such. Peter Calvocoressi's
book, Top Secret Ultra, contains a sounder account of the
episode than the commonly recounted allegation. The fate of the
German Enigma spy "Asché" was not publicly known till Hugh
Sebag-Montefiore tracked down Asché's daughter about 1999.
Wartime consequences
An exhibit in 2003 on "Secret War" at the Imperial War Museum,
in London, quoted British Prime Minister Winston Churchill
telling King George VI: "It was thanks to Ultra that we won the
war." Churchill's greatest fear, even after Hitler had suspended
Operation
Sealion and invaded the Soviet Union, was that the German submarine wolf
packs would succeed in strangling sea-locked Britain. A major
factor that averted Britain's defeat in the Battle of the
Atlantic was her regained mastery of Naval-Enigma decryption. As the air gap over the
North Atlantic closed and convoys received escort carrier
protection, airborne anti-submarine aircraft became extremely
efficient hunter-killers with the use of centimetric radar and airborne depth charges. Improvements
to Huff-Duff
(radio-triangulation equipment used as part of ELINT) meant that a U-boat's location could be found
even if the messages they were sending could not be read.
Improvements to ASDIC
(SONAR), coupled with Hedgehog depth charges, improved the likelihood of
a surface attack sinking a U-boat.
From February 1942 when Air Marshal Arthur Harris became Commander-in-Chief of
RAF Bomber
Command, the RAF implemented large scale night area bombardment of German
cities. The historian Frederick
Taylor argues that as Harris was not cleared to know about
ULTRA, he was given some information gleaned from Enigma, but not
where it had come from. Winterbotham, the first author to limn, in
his 1974 book The Ultra Secret, the influence of Enigma
decryption on the course of World War II, likewise made the earliest contribution to
an appreciation of Ultra's postwar influence, which now
continues into the 21st century — and not only in the postwar
establishment of Britain's GCHQ (Government Communication Headquarters) and the
United States' NSA (National
Security Agency).
Further reading
A fictional version of this story is told in the novel
Enigma by Robert Harris (ISBN 0-09-999200-0), the movie made
from the novel—see "Enigma (2001 film)"—and is somewhat covered, also
fictionally, in Neal
Stephenson's Cryptonomicon (ISBN 0-09-941067-2).
A short account of World War II cryptology is Battle of Wits
(2000) by Stephen Budiansky; David Kahn's Seizing the Enigma (1991) is
essentially about the solution of Naval Enigma, based on seizures
of German naval vessels; British success in the endeavor almost
certainly saved Britain from defeat in the crucial Battle of the
Atlantic and thereby made the United States' entry into the
war's European theater possible. Thomas Parrish's The American Codebreakers
(earlier published as The Ultra Americans) concentrates on
the U.S. contribution to the codebreaking effort.
A brief description of the Enigma, as well as other codes/ciphers,
can be found in Simon Singh's The Code Book (1999). he also
co-edited, with Alan
Stripp, a volume of memoirs by participants in the British
cryptological effort, Codebreakers: the Inside Story of
Bletchley Park (1993). Marian Rejewski wrote a number of papers
on his 1932 break into Enigma and his subsequent work on the
cipher, well into World War II, with his fellow
mathematician-cryptologists, Jerzy Ró?ycki and Henryk Zygalski; most of
Rejewski's papers appear in W?adys?aw
Kozaczuk's 1984 Enigma: How the German Machine Cipher Was
Broken, and How It Was Read by the Allies in World War Two
(edited and translated by Christopher Kasparek), which remains the standard
reference on the crucial foundations laid by the Poles for World
War II Enigma decryption.
Broken Enigma messages are still extremely valuable today, as they
provide some of the best surviving direct accounts of the Nazi war
effort.
References
Additional topics
This web site and associated pages are not associated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Ultra Pac, Inc. and has no official or unofficial affiliation with Ultra Pac, Inc..