Audit of TrueCrypt disk encryption software reveals low source code quality

in security on (#3HZ)
Back in October 2013, Kenneth White and Matthew Green kicked off the idea to do a full and complete audit of TrueCrypt, the most popular disk encryption package out there. They raised over $60,000 dollars and 33BTC to this end, and got underway.
The first part of the audit - the in-depth source code review - was performed by a security firm and completed on April 14 of this year ( report ).
The results are interesting to read. No bogeys have been found so far, though 11 medium-to-minor items were identified. But the authors did note:
Overall, the source code for both the bootloader and the Windows kernel driver did not meet expected standards for secure code. This includes issues such as lack of comments, use of inse-cure or deprecated functions, inconsistent variable types, and so forth.

The next stage, cryptanalysis , has begun and is proceeding.
I'm sure plenty of people are thinking, "How about doing the same thing for OpenSSL?" I'd personally prefer to see this sort of effort going into improving the OpenSSL software.

Update Schedule (Score: 3, Insightful)

by on 2014-04-16 13:53 (#13F)

Perhaps Truecrypt can be considered mature software, but I highly doubt (with all that it does), that there aren't bugs requiring fixes. The last release was early 2012, and about one per year before that. With all that it does, I'd expect a far more frequent update releases. Truecrypt has always worked well for me, but I wonder how much the project is stagnating.
Post Comment
What is the 1st number in the list 34, thirty two and 19?