Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Thursday May 29 2014, @04:03AM   Printer-friendly
from the Another-one-bites-the-dust dept.

The TrueCrypt website has been changed it now has a big red warning stating "WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure as it may contain unfixed security issues". They recommend using BitLocker for Windows 7/8, FileVault for OS X, or (whatever) for Linux. So, what happened? The TrueCrypt site says:

This page exists only to help migrate existing data encrypted by TrueCrypt. The development of TrueCrypt was ended in 5/2014 after Microsoft terminated support of Windows XP. Windows 8/7/Vista and later offer integrated support for encrypted disks and virtual disk images. Such integrated support is also available on other platforms (click here for more information). You should migrate any data encrypted by TrueCrypt to encrypted disks or virtual disk images supported on your platform.

Did the TrueCrypt devs (or SourceForge?) get a NSL? They are offering a "new" version (7.2), but apparently the signing key has changed and a source code diff seems to indicate a lot of the functionality has been stripped out. What's up?

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by zocalo on Thursday May 29 2014, @11:27AM

    by zocalo (302) on Thursday May 29 2014, @11:27AM (#48677)
    Or maybe *some* of the real devs did it.

    What if TrueCrypt was backdoored as the result of an NSL some time ago - say pre-v7.1a, which is when development basically stalled and could be the reason for that stall? One likely outcome of that might be a difference of opinion between the devs, ending development and culminating in a difference of opinion wherein one or more of them basically decided to blow the whistle against the wishes of the rest. If the whistleblower(s) were the coders rather than the web admin, then it's conceivable they might not have access to SourceForge but would have the code signing keys, which would explain the hacky nature of the "reveal".
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2