Audit of TrueCrypt disk encryption software reveals low source code quality

by
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.

Re: Update Schedule (Score: 2, Insightful)

by nightsky30@pipedot.org on 2014-04-16 19:06 (#13K)

My coworker has stated a few times that he once encountered a corruption with an encrypted volume he created using TrueCrypt. I've never experienced this myself. From an outsider perspective, I thought the application was fairly stable myself. It has worked quite well. I welcome this analysis. Could they do the same for Keepass? http://www.keepass.info
Post Comment
Subject
Comment
Captcha
One plus two is what?