3 ms·
Why are people so adamant about auditing TrueCrypt instead of just migrating to an alternative?
by nilved 13y ago
Why are people so adamant about auditing TrueCrypt instead of just migrating to an alternative?
- josephlord 13y agoTrueCrypt is highly trusted, they are verifying that trust is well placed. What alternative were you proposing?
- nilved 13y agoLUKS, GPG as examples only. I feel like time would be better spent switching to something less suspicious than trying to prove the suspicions false.
- jlgreco 13y agoWhy do you think that a binary distribution of LUKS deserves less suspicion than binary distributions of Truecrypt? If everyone were using LUKS instead, one would hope that people would attempt to verify that trust in binary distributions LUKS was well-placed as well.
- rmk2 13y agoGPG doesn't do disk encryption (full or any), and LUKS is linux-only. That's what keeps people from "just migrating away"... It doesn't matter what you or I personally prefer, if you want what at least seems to be trustworthy and secure[1], cross-platform cryptography, Truecrypt is what you want. [1]: Obviously, that is the part that is slowly being evaluated and tested. We'll see what'll happen.
- nilved 13y agoWhat's the point of implementing cryptography on a closed-source OS? We'll audit TrueCrypt and then have people say "there can still be backdoors in Windows or Mac OS." When it comes to security and cryptography, Linux (and similar) are the only things that matter.
- dublinben 13y agoIt's important for Windows users to have access to trusted encryption programs.
- nilved 13y agoI don't think it is. Windows and Mac users will never be safe, period. If you care about security, stop using those OSes.