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
   [1]http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/true-goodbye-using-truecrypt-is-n
   ot-secure/
   [2]http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net/
   Yush Bhardwaj

References

   1. http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/true-goodbye-using-truecrypt-is-not-secure/
   2. http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net/