True Crypt is Not Secure

[Stephen D. Williams]

Keep reading.  As far as I know (and I've not paid diligently close attention to further developments after the aftermath died down, 
so please update my statements), the consensus is that that last update and the tongue-in-cheek directive to use Bitlocker was 
likely a warrant canary, i.e. they could no longer be independent and uncompromised so they burned the project, staying legal while 
upholding principles.

However, shortly thereafter others have taken the previous public open source version, forked it, in some cases begun (and maybe 
finished) an audit of the code.  The results of those should be usable as secure with some degree of confidence.  YMMV.

sdw

On 7/24/15 7:46 AM, Yush Bhardwaj wrote:
> BitLocker is better or I should try something else ?
>
> WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure
>
>
> http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/true-goodbye-using-truecrypt-is-not-secure/
>
> http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net/
> /*
> */
> /*
> */
> /*
> */
> /*
> */
> /*
> */
> /*
> */
> /*Yush Bhardwaj*/
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2904 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20150724/3882ef23/attachment-0002.txt>