Is there any way to get the original files from TrueCrypt 7.1a?

>>60490345
I have saved the original installer and generated its hash and saved that as well. If this thread is still up tomorrow morning I'll post it. (2am here, posting on my phone)

>>60490397
But I imagine you can search for the hash of the original installer, I'd assume many other people saved it as well.

>>60490419
But can you trust them?
If you go to VirusTotal you will see the installer was first analyzed in 2014, but the file dates back to 2012. It's very odd.

>>60490449
Are you retarded? If the hash is the same then there's no way it's modified. That's the whole point of file hashes.

>>60490345
I have a 7.1a installer
http://www.sabby.space/files/cpcatuxtw.zip
SHA1 for the file is :

98a43df0ed359a593

eeea6aa8cc5597532b86666
Get rid of the space in the middle. For some reason 4chan's spam filter considers hashes to be spam

>>60490490
>SHA1
>not SHA-256

>>60490469
Read again.
How can you trust them? How can you trust that's really the original hash?

>>60490490
>This file was last analysed by VirusTotal on 2017-05-19 23:41:47 UTC (22 minutes ago) it was first analysed by VirusTotal on 2006-09-18 07:26:15 UTC.
What?

File: Screenshot from 2017-05-19 18-06-28.png (5KB, 351x103px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 351x103px

>>60490503
SHA 256:

7f22e065e387e559b454595440f27c7

58eeaadd0c690dab252d1c10070b0c3dd

>>60490507
Dunno.
According to my properties I downloaded the installer in 2012

File: archive.png (18KB, 822x481px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 822x481px

What did they mean by this?

>>60490537
thank you

>>60490507
Why are you using virustotal anyway?
If the hashes match you know it's good

>>60490554
Iirc in the robots.txt file you can also disable the way back machine

>>60490507
>How can you trust them? How can you trust that's really the original hash?
I dunno, maybe try emailing the fucking FSF with your conundrum instead of asking random dickheads on /g/? They surely have the original hash on record.

Protip: No matter what you're relying on the web of trust. You are trusting that the team who audited TC told the truth. You're trusting that the NSA doesn't secretly have a backdoor they never told anyone about.

>>60490554

The (((((ADL))))) got hold of archive.org and have been wiping out (((problematic))) archives. I only noticed because they erased the William Pierce broadcasts archive.

>>60490561
>Why are you using virustotal anyway?
None of your business.

>>60490469
>>60490561
This is what I mean https://defuse.ca/truecrypt-7.1a-hashes.htm

The online hashes archive doesn't match with the one from this anon >>60490537

And VirusTotal because it tells you the first time a file was analyzed.

>>60490574
Yes, but that's not the message archive gives you when you do that.

>>60490586
Tell me more about him. What did he do?

>>60490345
http://www.xup.in/dl,46442660/truecrypt-7.1a-linux-x64.tar.gz/

>>60490586
Funny how they announced they're moving to Canada because under Trump they'll have to delete everything non pro-trump. Instead they doing the opposite.

>>60490621
This one is real, thank you.
Any idea on where to find a windows one however? it has some functionalities the linux one doesn't.

>>60490604
It's because that website is missing a hash for the Linux installer script for Truecrypt
There are no entries at all for truecrypt-7.1a-setup-x64. There are entries for the tar file it was originally part of, but they never posted the hashes for the extracted file itself.
Unfortunately I no longer have the original tarball file.

If you're looking for the Windows .exe, I have that too

https://sabby.space/files/sxycekylc.zip

The sha1 hash is

7689d038c76bd1df695d

295c026961e50e4a62ea

>>60490719
Thank you.
Any ideas on why VirusTotal returns the following though?
>This file was last analysed by VirusTotal on 2017-05-19 23:41:47 UTC (36 minutes ago) it was first analysed by VirusTotal on 2006-09-18 07:26:15 UTC.
>first analysed by VirusTotal on 2006-09-18

>>60490604
>Tell me more about him. What did he do?

He named the jew HARD before it was cool, lol.

>>60490635

Since archive.org is managed by far-left jews with an agenda like ((((((BREWSTER KAHLE)))))))) ((((((((((NANCY WATZMAN)))))))))))), ((((((((JEFF KAPLAN))))))))))) etc. the whole kvetching about le evil DRUMPF shutting down archive.org while they themselves are erasing and censoring inconvenient parts of it is nothing but typical jew hypocrisy.

But the archive purge didn't matter, 8ch autists built their own parallel archive backups via torrent.

>>60490345
https:// www.grc.com/misc/truecrypt/truecrypt.htm

>>60490345
I have 7.1. Am I fucked?

What's the difference between VeraCrypt and TrueCrypt?

>>60492697
Veracrypt is an open source fork of Truecrypt. Truecrypt was abandoned by the devs and since that time security holes have been found in the old software.

>>60492717
So... What's the advantage of TrueCrypt over VeraCrypt?

>>60492767
There is none. TC is outdated and has known flaws. OP demonstrated in this thread that he's a fool.

>>60492697
>>60492767
Updated and patched version of the audited version of TC that's a little more secure

>>60492787
Who gives a fuck

File: 1494471703001.jpg (19KB, 222x293px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 222x293px

>>60493056
>Who gives a fuck about security flaws in encryption software

A rare example of someone who wants to use free software but still has lingering retardation on jerking off to logos and names from decades of eating ads. Hilarious. Same shit sometimes happens for libre office and we still have idiots clinging to open office

>>60492787
>TC is outdated and has known flaws.
But I thought it passed an audit with no serious issues?

>>60493270
it did, veracrypt shills are nsa fags

>>60492787
>TC is outdated and has known flaws
It passed a fucking security audit. It is the only open-source (not free) encryption system to have had a professional security audit.

and they said I was crazy for archiving everything...

AHAHAHAHAHAA!!!
if you will excuse me, I have some 16-color porn I have to fap to.

Now

whats so special about truecrypt? support has already ended, why do people still want it?

>>60495001
It "just werks".

>>60495001
because it's fucking safe, passed security audit. People don't trust VerCrypt even if it's open sourced. (((they))) can already have a backdoor for VC, while it's less likely that (((they))) have a backdoor for TC. Vault7 -> ctrl+f TrueCrypt -> 0 results.

Checked for MDA?

>>60495100
>implying (((they))) don't have a backdoor in TC
>implying CIA's Vault 7 represents even a 1/1000th of what (((they))) have
Mossad will never give CIA any of the good stuff.