3 ms·
>But that also seems odd since I am not quite sure that if TrueCrypt people were who we all want to believe they were, would suggest using bitLocker. bitLocker?
by blueskin_ 12y ago
>But that also seems odd since I am not quite sure that if TrueCrypt people were who we all want to believe they were, would suggest using bitLocker. bitLocker??? Alone that suggestion smells like rotten fish just by its association with MS and the US government.
That's the canary.
Not only is bitlocker backdoored, and most TrueCrypt users would know that, but they also say it is available on all windows versions, which is eminently not the case.
- outworlder 12y agoIsn't a canary something that is 'removed', not 'added'? As in, the canary warns by being absent.
- Zancarius 12y agoNot in this case [1], or rather, not always. And if you consider where the term arose (canaries in mines), it's really an issue of state more than it is absence. If the state of the canary changes it's cause for alarm. In this situation, warrant canaries (or maybe an NSL canary as the case might be) is a subtle indication that everything is no longer in a known-good state and something has been compromised. Although given some of the comments by danielweber, I'm increasingly less inclined to believe this was a canary. Developers throwing in the towel might be a more plausible situation, no matter how disappointing that may be. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary