have your laptop cloned/scanned at the border and now the 10 families you spoke to are rounded up. Imagine if you were a journalist writing a story on converts from Islam in Pakistan, where apostasy is punishable by death. If decrypting your data takes a few seconds thanks to a known backdoor then your contact is in trouble. If there is no backdoor and your encrypted data must be brute-forced then there is time for your contact to evade detection and escape. You are held and your equipment is examined. Imagine that you're a journalist with interviews & other incriminating data from a whistleblower. One example of where a backdoored system is immediately worse than than a non-backdoored one is this: and if you are on windows why are you worried about truecrypt you have bigger security problems Until such time I will avoid truecrypt Until Phase II is complete.Īnd unless you are on windows there are better options anyway today. So it is not I, nor /u/mangeek that needs to provide a vulnerability, no it is you that needs to prove that it is in fact secure. I am unaware of any complete audits that have been done on TrueCrypt. So since there is a question about the security of truecrypt, the prudent course of action is to assume that is compromised until it is proven not to be by an audit or other methods. I have no proof that truecypt is compromised, but here is the thing, real security professional assume everything is compromised until someone shows, explains, or proves it is not. I see you take the fools approach to cryptography.
If you have evidence to the contrary, the Internet would love to see it.
0 kommentar(er)
