Comment 202 Re: LUKS was a better alternative anyway

Story

TrueCrypt Project Problems

Preview

LUKS was a better alternative anyway (Score: 1)

by bryan@pipedot.org on 2014-05-30 22:42 (#1ZE)

LUKS encrypted file systems have been natively supported in most Linux distros for 5+ years. These encrypted file systems can be easily created on the command line or with a GUI tool like "gnome-disks". If you, for example, insert a thumb drive formated as a LUKS, the desktop environment pops up a password dialog to automatically mount the file system for you.

TrueCrypt mainly catered to Windows users. Also, the TrueCrypt license was incompatible with both the free-software and the Open Source Initiative philosophies.

Re: LUKS was a better alternative anyway (Score: 3, Insightful)

by fnj@pipedot.org on 2014-05-31 06:40 (#1ZK)

What LUKS doesn't give you is HIDDEN, deniable containers.

Re: LUKS was a better alternative anyway (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2014-06-01 12:19 (#1ZS)

From what I read, the alleged "plausible deniability" of "hidden" containers was pretty weak anyway.

Re: LUKS was a better alternative anyway (Score: 3, Interesting)

by fatphil@pipedot.org on 2014-06-01 23:05 (#202)

Any system which is designed to give you plausible deniability is guaranteed to give you no plausibible deniability at all.

You show them one thing, they say "yeah, yeah, you're running something which permits you to have multiple views - now show us the other one", and get out a bigger wrench.

Moderation

Time Reason Points Voter
2014-06-02 17:21 Interesting +1 renevith@pipedot.org
2014-06-03 08:35 Normal 0 tdk@pipedot.org
2014-06-04 01:26 Insightful +1 billshooterofbul@pipedot.org
2014-06-10 03:01 Normal 0 reziac@pipedot.org

Junk Status

Not marked as junk