The version has been around since February 2012 and, beyond people looking at its source code, has passed a significant portion of a third-party audit. S till, people are believing th e claims that TrueCrypt 7.1a is not secure. To me, that is about as unconfirmed as you can get.
Going missing and unreachable, the day of your supposedly gigantic resignation announcement, does not support the validity of that announcement. They have been missing since at least "the announcement" ( or earlier if they were not the ones who made it ).
(Seriously, because Microsoft deprecated Windows XP almost two months ago, they pull support for a two year old version now ? ) The developers have not denied the end of support, and its full-of-crap reason. Lastly, none of these are a good solution for users who want a single encrypted container across multiple OSes.Ī new version ( don't use it!!! ) called TrueCrypt 7.2 was released and signed with their private encryption key. Not only that, but several versions of Windows (such as 7 Home Premium) do not have access to BitLocker. Instead, they suggest a switch to BitLocker, Mac OSX built-in encryption, or whatever random encryption suite comes up when you search your Linux distro's package manager ( !?). Officially, the TrueCrypt website (which redirects to their SourceForge page) claims that, with the end of Windows XP support ( ?), the TrueCrypt development team wants users to stop using their software. It should not pass anyone's smell test but it apparently does, according to tweets and other articles.
0 kommentar(er)
