Re: VeraCrypt Trustworthiness?
On Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:06:51 -0500 Snehan Kekre <snehan.kekre612@protonmail.ch> wrote:
I still have no definite idea as to why TrueCrypt was dropped and Bitlocker was suggested! I too think that Vera looks like a fork of TrueCrypt.
It doesn't 'look like' a fork. It is a fork. And obviously it's not something they are hidding. So the previous comment from korpalski pointing out that it "looks just like a rebranded Truecrypt" is pretty stupid. https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=FAQ What's the difference between TrueCrypt and VeraCrypt? VeraCrypt adds enhanced security to the algorithms used for system and partitions encryption making it immune to new developments in brute-force attacks. It also solves many vulnerabilities and security issues found in TrueCrypt. ----------- Who knows if that's really true, tho. I personally use DiskCryptor.
Regards,
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:06:51 -0500 Snehan Kekre <snehan.kekre612@protonmail.ch> wrote:
I still have no definite idea as to why TrueCrypt was dropped and Bitlocker was suggested!
Because whoever suggested it trusted closed source Microsoft. Not that anything running from or on top of that OS should ever be considered secure.
I too think that Vera looks like a fork of TrueCrypt. https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=FAQ
What's the difference between TrueCrypt and VeraCrypt? ... Who knows if that's really true, tho.
I'd agree those are bullshit FAQ words in general. Has any project truly surfaced as the [technical] community recognized sucessor or comparable to TrueCrypt yet? Or are we still in fork of the month club mode?
participants (3)
-
grarpamp -
Juan -
Snehan Kekre