I have heard that as well, but have never been able to find the actual law. At the same time, if the encryption is not being sold/distributed in the US (a server/website based in the US) that pretty much goes out the window.
it might be one of those laws that aren't written down, but if you break it some guys will show up in a black SUV and personally explain it to you.
Yup, I'm waiting to see the fallout from this or to see if the developers/creators make something new/different to replace it.
The whole website looks fake and/or hacked by someone else, or a disgruntled member of their team. For the website to recommend something as absurd as Bitlocker for a substitution raises alarms for me.
If hacked, it's one impressive hack. The 7.2 on that site has the right signatures, so if it was hacked they got to everything at TrueCrypt before turning loose this site.
May not be hacked, but might be a disgruntled member of the dev team. TrueCrypt even had instructions for Windows Vista/7/8 last month when I checked, so it is not a WinXp issue.
That was mine as well, and with a brand new package accompanying that webpage is suspicious as hell. It could be MS purchased or forced the purchase of the rights/source? Maybe, but it is possible . . .
Which is the issue now if its no longer being developed. The old versions will still work for now. It just let me see that I have a single point of failure in my preps. If LibreOffice were to stop development today I can use Apache OpenOffice or KDEOffice. If Firefox or Thunderbird stops today I can use Chromium or Konqueror and Kmail. If Slackware stops today I can use Unbuntu or Deadrat or whatever. But if Truecrypt dies I realized I haven't installed or tested any other programs. I suppose I could still decrypt on my tablet and have them unencrypted but I could just do that today with TrueCrypt, it doesn't future proof me.
The same reason the NSA would own Tor nodes, the FBI would own proxy servers, and in the 90's owned email anonymizers. Opsec so they can see what people are trying to hide.
Bitlocker is not in the same class as Truecrypt with respect to civil liberties and protections against the state. Using Bitlocker the gov/cops can see your drive is encrypted and can potentially compel you to provide the keys. Truecrypt is much more resilient to this kind of attack. Bitlocker is better for businesses and corporations as keys can be managed and employees don't get God like control of your data.
Because they couldn't crack it and were unable to help in the investigation. All they did was run password guessers on clusters for a few months then gave up after exhausting all the obvious options. In another similar case in the UK the cops cracked some terrorist's password, amazingly enough a verse from the Qu'arn
It is still a drastic website change, and suspicious that a new version suddenly coupled with a recommendation for Bitlocker
For most encryption purposed, Bitlocker also stores the keys on another device which can become compromised etc. It is not nearly as an effective security/encryption program as Truecrypt is/was.
To be fair, they were both the same type of attacks. I am sure that when investigation an Islamic terrorist group, the use common/relevant phrases from the Qu'arn.Because they couldn't crack it and were unable to help in the investigation. All they did was run password guessers on clusters for a few months then gave up after exhausting all the obvious options. In another similar case in the UK the cops cracked some terrorist's password, amazingly enough a verse from the Qu'arn
Bitlocker seems to be a compromise between security and data protection. TC is definitely better, particularly on the civil liberties front.
I think the Brazilians were hoping the FBI had access to something a bit more special, like a crack to AES from the NSA. The NSA just seems to step around the crypto.
You don't. You send them plaintext so the government and it's paramilitary agencies can read them.Bitlocker is also Windows only. So how do you read your encrypted files on your phone with Bitlocker
I use bitlocker at a corporate level, and can tell you it is very secure . . . unless you have the decryption key, which is generally stored on an external device/location. An IT professional does not even need to know if it is a pin, password or token to bypass it with that.
I'm sure there is some crypto that the NSA can step around, that is one reason TrueCrypt was so popular, plus it was free and very configurable. I'm still not convinced at the website's claims, especially when it is recommending bitlocker as a replacement. I have a feeling the devs changed the site/software for a reason we are not aware of.
