ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    TrueCrypt compromised by ?????

    IT Discussion
    9
    42
    6.9k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Reid CooperR
      Reid Cooper
      last edited by

      Does that mean we don't think that there is anything to this?

      StrongBadS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • StrongBadS
        StrongBad @Reid Cooper
        last edited by

        @Reid-Cooper said:

        Does that mean we don't think that there is anything to this?

        Sniff test says that this is a scam to me.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • T
          technobabble
          last edited by

          Well everyones talking about it on twitter and other websites. Here's what PC World is saying: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2241300/truecrypt-now-encouraging-users-to-use-microsofts-bitlocker.html

          alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • StrongBadS
            StrongBad
            last edited by

            Not sure that that clears anything up. If the site was hacked that would explain this. Something is very fishy. And what about non-Windows users. XP retirement would mean nothing for them.

            alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • alexntgA
              alexntg @technobabble
              last edited by

              @technobabble said:

              Well everyones talking about it on twitter and other websites. Here's what PC World is saying: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2241300/truecrypt-now-encouraging-users-to-use-microsofts-bitlocker.html

              That makes sense, as Windows has the same functionality built-in.

              DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • alexntgA
                alexntg @StrongBad
                last edited by

                @StrongBad said:

                Not sure that that clears anything up. If the site was hacked that would explain this. Something is very fishy. And what about non-Windows users. XP retirement would mean nothing for them.

                OS X has had disk encryption for years.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • DashrenderD
                  Dashrender @alexntg
                  last edited by

                  @alexntg said:

                  @technobabble said:

                  Well everyones talking about it on twitter and other websites. Here's what PC World is saying: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2241300/truecrypt-now-encouraging-users-to-use-microsofts-bitlocker.html

                  That makes sense, as Windows has the same functionality built-in.

                  Sure, but it's closed source.. so it's really not trustworthy!

                  alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • alexntgA
                    alexntg @Dashrender
                    last edited by

                    @Dashrender said:

                    @alexntg said:

                    @technobabble said:

                    Well everyones talking about it on twitter and other websites. Here's what PC World is saying: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2241300/truecrypt-now-encouraging-users-to-use-microsofts-bitlocker.html

                    That makes sense, as Windows has the same functionality built-in.

                    Sure, but it's closed source.. so it's really not trustworthy!

                    Until recently, no one had actually audited TrueCrypt's code, so for a very long time, it could have had massive backdoors that no one cared to look for. Whether it's open source or close source, it doesn't really matter. On one side, you hope the folks that wrote it were trustworthy and that if there were any issues, they or an associate caught it. On the other hand, you hope that the folks that wrote it were trustworthy and that if there were any issues, they or an associate caught it. Unless you're manually auditing the code yourself, what does it matter?

                    scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • JaredBuschJ
                      JaredBusch
                      last edited by

                      This seems too coordinated for a hack IMO. There are way too many pieces being changed at the same time. Yeah if it was just the website or just the source code, but the way back machine has no info? That is abnormal. The new executable being signed with the correct but recently reissued key? Unusual.

                      This is a lot of stuff to change and would be an unprecedented public hack.

                      scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller @alexntg
                        last edited by

                        @alexntg said:

                        @Dashrender said:

                        @alexntg said:

                        @technobabble said:

                        Well everyones talking about it on twitter and other websites. Here's what PC World is saying: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2241300/truecrypt-now-encouraging-users-to-use-microsofts-bitlocker.html

                        That makes sense, as Windows has the same functionality built-in.

                        Sure, but it's closed source.. so it's really not trustworthy!

                        Until recently, no one had actually audited TrueCrypt's code, so for a very long time, it could have had massive backdoors that no one cared to look for. Whether it's open source or close source, it doesn't really matter. On one side, you hope the folks that wrote it were trustworthy and that if there were any issues, they or an associate caught it. On the other hand, you hope that the folks that wrote it were trustworthy and that if there were any issues, they or an associate caught it. Unless you're manually auditing the code yourself, what does it matter?

                        No one published an audit. Doesn't imply that it wasn't audited.

                        alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • scottalanmillerS
                          scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
                          last edited by

                          @JaredBusch said:

                          This seems too coordinated for a hack IMO. There are way too many pieces being changed at the same time. Yeah if it was just the website or just the source code, but the way back machine has no info? That is abnormal. The new executable being signed with the correct but recently reissued key? Unusual.

                          This is a lot of stuff to change and would be an unprecedented public hack.

                          True it is seemingly more and more likely to be legit.

                          It's not really a needed product anymore across any platform. But still very odd.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • alexntgA
                            alexntg @scottalanmiller
                            last edited by

                            @scottalanmiller said:

                            @alexntg said:

                            @Dashrender said:

                            @alexntg said:

                            @technobabble said:

                            Well everyones talking about it on twitter and other websites. Here's what PC World is saying: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2241300/truecrypt-now-encouraging-users-to-use-microsofts-bitlocker.html

                            That makes sense, as Windows has the same functionality built-in.

                            Sure, but it's closed source.. so it's really not trustworthy!

                            Until recently, no one had actually audited TrueCrypt's code, so for a very long time, it could have had massive backdoors that no one cared to look for. Whether it's open source or close source, it doesn't really matter. On one side, you hope the folks that wrote it were trustworthy and that if there were any issues, they or an associate caught it. On the other hand, you hope that the folks that wrote it were trustworthy and that if there were any issues, they or an associate caught it. Unless you're manually auditing the code yourself, what does it matter?

                            No one published an audit. Doesn't imply that it wasn't audited.

                            Nor does it imply that it was audited.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller
                              last edited by

                              No. But every company and every individual had the right and the ability to audit. That's important. Companies have coverage tools that they use all the time on this stuff.

                              alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • T
                                technobabble
                                last edited by

                                Unless I am mistaken Bit locker is only for enterprise which is another reason its not a good replacement.

                                alexntgA scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • alexntgA
                                  alexntg @technobabble
                                  last edited by

                                  @technobabble said:

                                  Unless I am mistaken Bit locker is only for enterprise which is another reason its not a good replacement.

                                  BitLocker's available with 8.1 Pro.

                                  T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • alexntgA
                                    alexntg @scottalanmiller
                                    last edited by

                                    @scottalanmiller said:

                                    No. But every company and every individual had the right and the ability to audit. That's important. Companies have coverage tools that they use all the time on this stuff.

                                    Have you used TrueCrypt before?

                                    scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • scottalanmillerS
                                      scottalanmiller @technobabble
                                      last edited by

                                      @technobabble said:

                                      Unless I am mistaken Bit locker is only for enterprise which is another reason its not a good replacement.

                                      And requires different tools on different platforms.

                                      alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • scottalanmillerS
                                        scottalanmiller @alexntg
                                        last edited by

                                        @alexntg said:

                                        @scottalanmiller said:

                                        No. But every company and every individual had the right and the ability to audit. That's important. Companies have coverage tools that they use all the time on this stuff.

                                        Have you used TrueCrypt before?

                                        Long ago just a little. Use LUKS now.

                                        alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • alexntgA
                                          alexntg @scottalanmiller
                                          last edited by

                                          @scottalanmiller said:

                                          @alexntg said:

                                          @scottalanmiller said:

                                          No. But every company and every individual had the right and the ability to audit. That's important. Companies have coverage tools that they use all the time on this stuff.

                                          Have you used TrueCrypt before?

                                          Long ago just a little. Use LUKS now.

                                          Did you audit TrueCrypt?

                                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • scottalanmillerS
                                            scottalanmiller @alexntg
                                            last edited by

                                            @alexntg said:

                                            @scottalanmiller said:

                                            @alexntg said:

                                            @scottalanmiller said:

                                            No. But every company and every individual had the right and the ability to audit. That's important. Companies have coverage tools that they use all the time on this stuff.

                                            Have you used TrueCrypt before?

                                            Long ago just a little. Use LUKS now.

                                            Did you audit TrueCrypt?

                                            Not relevant. I'm not and was not on the security team. That's redirection.

                                            Companies that I've worked at did code audits, certainly.

                                            alexntgA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 1 / 3
                                            • First post
                                              Last post