/tech/ - Technology★

I guess.

If you are using a Linux-based operating system, then I recommend you use LUKS.

It's safe in the sense that it's not seriously broken. You shouldn't use it and instead use a fork that has continued support (CypherShed, VeraCrypt. VC is the best) or move to a different scheme such as dm-crypt containers.

Here are the truecrypt audit reports, it's relatively clean.

https://opencryptoaudit.org/reports/iSec_Final_Open_Crypto_Audit_Project_TrueCrypt_Security_Assessment.pdf

https://opencryptoaudit.org/reports/TrueCrypt_Phase_II_NCC_OCAP_final.pdf

>>963834

That's CipherShed **

Upon double-checking, it looks like their website is down. So VeraCrypt might be the winner.

>>963827 (OP)

VeraCrypt was professionally audited in 2016

people still clinging on to truecrypt feel like those people who stubbornly clung on to Windows XP long after its EOL.

Move on, guys. Veracrypt is just truecrypt but with support for more algorithms and without the potential security vulns as it's actively developed and receiving patches for that kinda stuff

>>964235

Your post translated into cleaned up speech is: "some external guy looked at the software and thought it seemed okay."

I don't know anything about this topic, my brain just itched.

>>964459

>>963837

TrueCrypt audit is okay, but don't expect it to update.

Just use VeraCrypt for better compatibility.

>>964459

Helps if you read the full audit report, anon. It's not like a fucking tweet going "yeah it's okay". They uncovered a couple of minor issues.

>>963827 (OP)

>Is truecrypt still safe

More or less, but it's been superseded by VeraCrypt, with advancements in nearly every way.

For example, VeraCrypt provides full disk system encryption on UEFI based systems.

TRUECRYPT HIDDEN VOLUMES CAN BE DETECTED. THIS VULNERABILITY IS MITIGATED IN VERACRYPT. IF YOU ARE USING TRUECRYPT FOR ITS HIDDEN VOLUME FUNCTIONALITY YOU WILL GET YOUR SHIT KICKED IN.

See version 1.18a release notes

https://www.veracrypt.fr/en/Release%20Notes.html

https://archive.fo/8rDPi

https://web.archive.org/web/20180903220458/https://www.veracrypt.fr/en/Release%20Notes.html

>>964667

CIA nigger detected. But in all serious you are correct.

Wasn't truecrypt proved to be compromised 2-3 years ago?

>>974196

If memory serves me...

The audit showed that the Windows version relied upon vulnerable Windows files. So not anything in the code of TrueCrypt itself was found to be bad. Other OSs were not affected as they didn't rely on vulnerable Windows files.

In the years since TrueCrypt has stopped being updated there are better alternatives. You should use Luks (if on Linux) or VeraCrypt (if need ease of use or cross system compatibility).

>>963827 (OP)

Just use veracrypt