5
$\begingroup$

I've seen from a number of sources that both the Colossus and the cryptological bombes operating for England were dismantled after the war ended. The Wikipedia article even says that all of Colossus' documentation was burnt.

I would guess that at that time it would be clear to anyone that the need for cryptanalysis would not end with the end of the war. What is the rationale behind this?

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I would assume there was a need for secrecy. Germany was no longer in a huge position of power, but Churchill, for one, never trusted Stalin to the degree that Roosevelt/Truman did, and there were likely others in the British government who agreed with Churchill. $\endgroup$ – HDE 226868 Sep 26 '15 at 23:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Another reason may be: Britain was practically bankrupt, but "Colossus and the cryptological bombes" could be scrapped and sold for money. $\endgroup$ – Gerald Edgar May 7 at 23:08
5
$\begingroup$

1, To keep secret the level of expertise in cryptanalysis so future opponents wouldn't put effort into improving their own codes. Probably pointless because it was inevitable that some details of Bletchley would leak to the USSR, in the same way as secrets of the Manhattan project. And probably equally pointless in that, although every side in WWII broke almost all of the opponents codes - they all believed their own codes were unbreakable so put little effort in counter-crypt-analysis.

2, The UK government gave captured Enigma machines to their allies - claiming that they were unbreakable.

3, Allied leaders wanted the glory of people believing that they had won through their own bravery and military genius. Not because they had been reading all the opposition's orders before they did.

4, Standard government procedure to keep everything secret until compelled otherwise.

5, Finally and possibly the most important: To not give the losers a simple excuse for why they lost. If the message becomes: Our invincible army only lost because of poor crypto then we would win if we fixed this problem and and so should try again.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ "Allied leaders wanted the glory of people believing that they had won through their own bravery and military genius. Not because they had been reading all the oppositions orders before they did" - lol $\endgroup$ – Cicero Sep 28 '15 at 1:18
  • $\begingroup$ @Cicero, Winston Churchill wrote his official history of WWII with no mention of breaking enigma and a distinctly personal slant on winning. $\endgroup$ – Martin Beckett Sep 28 '15 at 1:52
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with your statement, I found it funny and unfortunately true $\endgroup$ – Cicero Sep 28 '15 at 2:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's interesting to see that today, we see more glory to breaking Enigma code (and starting the upcoming computing revolution) than to winning the war by conventional method, like carpet bombing cities. $\endgroup$ – ch7kor Sep 28 '15 at 15:15
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think "glory" is the right word. "Morale" is much closer: Churchill didn't want to demoralise the frontline soldiers by making them feel that they had been largely irrelevant. $\endgroup$ – Peter Taylor May 7 at 11:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.