Thanks for this insight! I'll edit my comment to credit you, but I won't delete it since someone might have the same thought process as me.
My comment:
So I see now (thanks to you) that it is just showing test cases (test warbles) to demonstrate that these scrambling techniques work with foreign languages. However, why would the us gov need to make sure that this program can successfully obfuscate Unicode strings in Chinese/Russian/Arabic/Farsi?
My gut reaction: while code comments would be trivial to forge, it appears the us gov is still using foreign language strings in some way - maybe having just one string constant originally in a foreign language that is then obfuscated/scrambled (such as by xoring every char against a random key)
Just FYI. Those Chinese characters are really really really rarely used in any writings. In fact, anyone with Chinese reading compression will tell you those are gibberish words and none of the words make any sense.
My comment:
So I see now (thanks to you) that it is just showing test cases (test warbles) to demonstrate that these scrambling techniques work with foreign languages. However, why would the us gov need to make sure that this program can successfully obfuscate Unicode strings in Chinese/Russian/Arabic/Farsi?
My gut reaction: while code comments would be trivial to forge, it appears the us gov is still using foreign language strings in some way - maybe having just one string constant originally in a foreign language that is then obfuscated/scrambled (such as by xoring every char against a random key)