From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <glkdd-dm-crypt@m.gmane.org>
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.server123.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun,  8 Feb 2015 13:15:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
 (envelope-from <glkdd-dm-crypt@m.gmane.org>) id 1YKQlT-0008V1-8b
 for dm-crypt@saout.de; Sun, 08 Feb 2015 13:15:03 +0100
Received: from 66-87-138-24.pools.spcsdns.net ([66.87.138.24])
 by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
 id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 08 Feb 2015 13:15:03 +0100
Received: from eternaleye by 66-87-138-24.pools.spcsdns.net with local (Gmexim
 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 08 Feb 2015 13:15:03 +0100
From: Alex Elsayed <eternaleye@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2015 04:10:30 -0800
Message-ID: <mb7jnn$qi6$2@ger.gmane.org>
References: <mb7b8h$2m5$1@ger.gmane.org> <54D7347F.1080608@gmail.com>
 <mb7inu$gtm$1@ger.gmane.org> <20150208120236.GA3878@fritha.org>
 <mb7jl0$qi6$1@ger.gmane.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] truecrypt - what's the real story behind it?
List-Id: <dm-crypt.saout.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/options/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt/>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-crypt@saout.de>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=subscribe>
To: dm-crypt@saout.de

Alex Elsayed wrote:

> Heinz Diehl wrote:
> 
>> On 08.02.2015, U.Mutlu wrote:
>> 
>>> Then I wonder if the NSA/CIA/DHS etc. was involved in the decision of
>>> the authors to abondon truecrypt developement, or was there maybe a mole
>>> among
>>> the devs?... conspiracy mode off  :-)
>> 
>> Nobody knows but the Truecrypt devs. IMHO the reasons to abandon TC
>> development was rather financial ones.
>>  
>>> The advantage of truecrypt, as I see it, is that it is a multiplatform
>>> solution; works even under the Windows cr*p
>> 
>> If you use Wind*ws as your platform, you'll most likely have a lot more
>> serious security problems than a simple "how reliable is TC"... ;-)
> 
> Also, while IIRC it doesn't support encrypted rootfs, there _is_ FreeOTFE
> for opening LUKS volumes on Windows.

Correction; it seems FreeOTFE died while I wasn't looking. This seems to be 
the replacement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DoxBox