(Note this was way before the evolution of modern cell phones and handheld computers.)
These devices (for convenience just call them "Secret Communicators" or SCs) had these properties:
1. Each SC had a unique identifier burnt in the internal chip (not unlike the CPU of modern computers).
2. Each SC, depending on their versions, had different capacities to register the identifiers of a number of "partner devices" (PDs). A white SC could register 2 PDs, a blue one 3, a green one 4 and a red SC, the most advanced version, could register up to 5 PDs. Only SCs of the same version could become PDs of each other.
3. Each SC could establish anytime anywhere (within a range of 3000 km) communication to any of its PDs in a special frequency based on the 2 identifiers on each side, which made the communication totally secured from outside parties. Again only SCs of the same version could communicate with each other.
4. Beside the direct communication between 2 PDs, each SC also had the special feature which allowed it to become a "bridge" for any 2 of its registered PDs to communicate with each other. This "bridged communication" must use a single SC as the "bridge", and the 2 communicating SCs must be PDs of that bridge.
Essentially these were the basic properties of those SCs. In every KGB mission, depending on the number of participants, all agents would all carry the same version of SCs with them. It was normally a requirement for each paricipant of a mission to be able to establish direct or bridged communication to all other participants.
After a while it became a subject of interest for KGB to determine how many participants of a mission would each SC version able to support. For example, white SCs (with a limit of 2 PDs) were known to be able to support 5 agents in any given mission. To demonstrate this, one could draw up the "Secret Communicator Matrix" (SCM) like this:
Say 5 agents are A,B,C,D,E, we arrange them as a full circle and each agent will have his immediate neighbours' SCs as PDs of his own SC. So say A can have direct communication with B,E while C can have it with B,D. Then we use "+" to represent a direct communication relationship (and "." as blanks):
- Code: Select all
A B C D E
A . + . . +
B + . + . .
C . + . + .
D . . + . +
E + . . + .
Next, we have to work out the bridged communication relationship. For example, because the SCs of B,E are PDs of A's SC, B,E can have bridged communication with each other. We use "*" to represent this relationship. Also, we use "-" to represent a "self relationship" between each agent and himself:
- Code: Select all
A B C D E
A - + * * +
B + - + * *
C * + - + *
D * * + - +
E + * * + -
As one can see, when the SCM is filled up, it means all participants of the mission can communicate to each other. Otherwise if there are holes, it means a participant cannot communicate to another one, then a higher version of SCs would be necesary to be used in the mission.
To make another demonstration, let's try 8 agents (A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H). This time we show that the blue SCs (with a limit of 3 PDs) are enough to establish communications among everyone. The method is to arrange them in a full circle again and have the SCs of each agent register the SCs of his immediate neighbours as well as his directly opposite agent:
- Code: Select all
A B C D E F G H
A . + . . + . . +
B + . + . . + . .
C . + . + . . + .
D . . + . + . . +
E + . . + . + . .
F . + . . + . + .
G . . + . . + . +
H + . . + . . + .
Then we fill in the bridged communication and self relationships:
- Code: Select all
A B C D E F G H
A - + * * + * * +
B + - + * * + * *
C * + - + * * + *
D * * + - + * * +
E + * * + - + * *
F * + * * + - + *
G * * + * * + - +
H + * * + * * + -
Once again, the SCM is filled up, so everyone can communicate to everyone.
Is it possible to work out all the possible numbers of agents each SC version can support?
