3 ms·

I don't see why so many are jumping onto conspiracy theories. Truecrypt, like the page states, has become redundant with built-in OS offerings. While it could b

by gldsmth 12y ago

I don't see why so many are jumping onto conspiracy theories. Truecrypt, like the page states, has become redundant with built-in OS offerings. While it could be used for other things, the main reason/drive behind its development was the Full Disk Encryption feature, which has only ever worked on Windows, and has only ever truly been "necessary" for Windows XP users. Windows had bitlocker for FDE since Vista, Mac OS X had FDE built-in with Filevault 2 since Lion, and linux since installers started shipping with dm-crypt built-in. Like it or not, with Windows XP being obsoleted there isn't much drive left to develop something like Truecrypt. Just use the built-in OS features.

jmnicolas 12y ago
There are people in this world that do not trust big corporations with their data. Truecrypt is (was ?) a welcome alternative to Bitlocker and Filevault.
- gldsmth 12y ago
  Because developers who refuse to show any responsibility for the code they've written (by staying anonymous and thus not risking their career/credibility in software) are much more trustworthy than "big corporations" right? It hasn't even been a month since phase 1 of the first truecrypt audit ended. Which means up until now this piece of software was as shady as it could be.
  - dmix 12y ago
    People who create security software are always targeted by governments, and a lesser extent hackers. Truecrypt devs who remain anonymous can produce software in a much safer environment. Just like Satoshi. Code can speak for itself.
    - gldsmth 12y ago
      > Code can speak for itself. The constant open source mantra of "code speaks for itself" strikes again.. except that none of the competent eyeballs have looked at truecrypt up until very recently (phase 1 audit ended in April 2014 which is ten years after the first truecrypt release). A lot of good did it do with OpenSSL too. But surely, code written by anonymous, untrustworthy developers that hasn't been looked at much for ten years is worth more than code written by a corporation that has a public image to uphold. As for "being targeted by government" that's called conspiracy theories. Unless you live in a place like Russia or Saudi Arabia you don't have anything to fear just because you wrote encryption software.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - dewey 12y ago
        > As for "being targeted by government" that's called conspiracy theories. This is already happening and not a conspiracy theory any more: [0] http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/06/08/interest-in-cryptocat-spikes-following-developers-interrogation-at-us-border/ http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/06/08/interest-in-crypt... [1] http://www.cnet.com/news/researcher-detained-at-u-s-border-questioned-about-wikileaks/ http://www.cnet.com/news/researcher-detained-at-u-s-border-q...
cortesoft 12y ago
None of those options you listed are cross platform. I have many TrueCrypt volumes that I use on Windows, Linux, and Mac. Being able to mount them on all of of the OSes is very important.

by gldsmth 12y ago

jmnicolas 12y ago

There are people in this world that do not trust big corporations with their data. Truecrypt is (was ?) a welcome alternative to Bitlocker and Filevault.

gldsmth 12y ago
Because developers who refuse to show any responsibility for the code they've written (by staying anonymous and thus not risking their career/credibility in software) are much more trustworthy than "big corporations" right? It hasn't even been a month since phase 1 of the first truecrypt audit ended. Which means up until now this piece of software was as shady as it could be.
- dmix 12y ago
  People who create security software are always targeted by governments, and a lesser extent hackers. Truecrypt devs who remain anonymous can produce software in a much safer environment. Just like Satoshi. Code can speak for itself.
  - gldsmth 12y ago
    > Code can speak for itself. The constant open source mantra of "code speaks for itself" strikes again.. except that none of the competent eyeballs have looked at truecrypt up until very recently (phase 1 audit ended in April 2014 which is ten years after the first truecrypt release). A lot of good did it do with OpenSSL too. But surely, code written by anonymous, untrustworthy developers that hasn't been looked at much for ten years is worth more than code written by a corporation that has a public image to uphold. As for "being targeted by government" that's called conspiracy theories. Unless you live in a place like Russia or Saudi Arabia you don't have anything to fear just because you wrote encryption software.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - dewey 12y ago
      > As for "being targeted by government" that's called conspiracy theories. This is already happening and not a conspiracy theory any more: [0] http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/06/08/interest-in-cryptocat-spikes-following-developers-interrogation-at-us-border/ http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/06/08/interest-in-crypt... [1] http://www.cnet.com/news/researcher-detained-at-u-s-border-questioned-about-wikileaks/ http://www.cnet.com/news/researcher-detained-at-u-s-border-q...

cortesoft 12y ago

None of those options you listed are cross platform. I have many TrueCrypt volumes that I use on Windows, Linux, and Mac. Being able to mount them on all of of the OSes is very important.