Encryption

>>58623993
if you're using Windows just stick to Bitlocker. Security is a process, not a state that can be acquired with a magic trick.

Other than that, it's true that they fixed some bugs after a new audit - per se, it should be pretty good.

>>58623993
No, it's fine. They fixed a few (minor) problems in Truecrypt that the audit found.

If you're serious about security though, you should still be using dm-crypt on Linux.

>>58624031
I'm on Windows 10, but it's not one of the fancy versions that has BitLocker enabled.
>>58624032
With my current situation, I'm kind of stuck with Windows, I just need the best solution for right now.

>>58624031
>if you're using Windows just stick to Bitlocker
Literal placebo tier

OP don't use windows and yes all publicly available info indicates VC is fine.

https://ostif.org/the-veracrypt-audit-results/

When you're looking for information on security products, always try and narrow your search terms with "audit" or "security audit" or "patches" or "vulnerabilities". You'll find a trail that leads you to ask what contingencies you're willing to put up with and what you need.

veracrypt should be absolutely fine for basic needs (ie. personal documents). Businesses usually go for something a little more guaranteed, but the likelihood of veracrypt being severely compromised to the point that your personal documents are totally unsafe without your knowledge is very low, especially considering the audit.


Please please please stop asking for the opinions of Internet trolls on /g/ for your security needs. 4chan is rife with shills and jews working with various agendas, not to mention brainless idiots who only post the opinions of others before them without personal research.

Try to find the information yourself, from a more trusted source.

>>58624031
>if you're using Windows just stick to Bitlocker
alphabet soup agency, plz leave

>>58624084
>I'm on Windows 10
have you considered suicide?
>>58624086
>Literal placebo
literally "good enough for someone using Windows 10"

>>58624108
>literally "good enough for someone using Windows 10"
I suppose, if you consider that you're running it on a compromised-by-default operating system, there's no point having secure encryption so everything is good enough..
But that's taking a very generous definition of the word good.

>>58624084
VeraCrypt is ok BUT;

I was unable to repair win10 system fully encrypted with VC, windoze could not find win10 instalation (after entering correct password).

I use Veracrypt for work, but truecrypt still works

>>58624031
Bitlocker is nonsense... Not safe at all, but just makes everything a pain in the ass

>>58624092
I've always wondered about what if someone thought that those telling you to look up info on your own were trying to lead you astray

Can you full-disk-encrypt SDDs? Is hardware SSD encryption any good?

>>58625965
I'm talking Linux btw

>>58624031

Yes yesss... trust microsoft with your privacy

Gooood goyim

>>58625965
>Can you full-disk-encrypt SDDs?
Yes. dm-crypt/LUKS works with any block device.
>Is hardware SSD encryption any good?
Nope. You want software crypto so you can control the keys, settings, and so you can patch it later if a bug is found.

>>58623993
they were recently audited and everything looked good, it's a good solution if you need a windows system encrypted, especially if you don't have a TPM. don't bother on W10 though, microsoft's terrible new update system requires the original bootloader each time there's a new release.

>>58626044
I've always though you don't have full access to SSD, like there is cache or some shit that you cannot encrypt

>>58624031
Bitlocker stores your keys in the cloud

>>58626080
You're thinking of overprovisioning.

A 120GB SSD has a bit more than 120GB of actual flash chips on board. As flash cells die, the firmware detects this, marks them unusable, and uses some of the spare capacity to replace them. This, plus wear-leveling, is how modern SSDs last a long time under heavy write loads, even though each individual flash cell might only have 3,000 program/erase cycles in it.

>>58626080
>>58626115

Yeah, SSDs can really only be securely erased when you secure erase the entire disk.

Although, I'm not totally sure, but a TRIM command from Windows or Linux *might* securely delete/ wipe the free space on the disk.

File: confession.jpg (41KB, 746x328px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 746x328px

>>58624031

>>58626799
why I switched to Linux in a nutshell

What about that old zlib implementation fiasco in veracrypt?

>>58624092
>https://ostif.org/the-veracrypt-audit-results/
Why should we use google when we can create threads and have multiple people google for us?

File: FB_IMG_1484419147792.jpg (81KB, 1200x2000px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1200x2000px

>>58627931
Either fixed or patched already as the most recent audits have found Veracrypt to be secure and free of back doors.

Been using Veracrypt for a while. Use it to fully encrypt my laptop's drives. Have had a laptop stolen in the past with nothing more than a login screen password. Felt terrible.

>RIP Thinkpad T61. You were my first.

>>58623993
TrueCrypt 7.1a is the only answer