Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47

Thread: TrueCrypt Has Been Potentially Compromised

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    101

    Default

    Well, gee, how coincidental ... Just recently Sourceforge requested a mass password reset.

    Subject: SourceForge.net Password Reset Required

    SourceForge.net Team <noreply@sourceforge.net>

    May 21 (7 days ago)

    Greetings,

    To make sure we're following current best practices for security, we've
    made some changes to how we're storing user passwords. As a result, the
    next time you go to login to your SourceForge.net account, you will be
    prompted to change your password. Once this is done, your password will be
    stored more securely. We recommend that you do this at your earliest
    convenience by visiting the SourceForge website and logging in.

    And, as always, be vigilant about password security. Use a secure password,
    never include your password in an email, and don't click on links for
    unsolicited password resets.

    If you have any concerns about this, please contact SourceForge support at
    sfnet_ops@slashdotmedia.com

    Best regards,
    SourceForge Team

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    SourceForge.net has made this mailing to you as a registered user of
    the SourceForge.net site to convey important information regarding
    your SourceForge.net account or your use of SourceForge.net services.

    We make a small number of directed mailings to registered users each
    year regarding their account or data, to help preserve the security of
    their account or prevent loss of data or service access.

    If you have concerns about this mailing please contact our Support
    team per: http://sourceforge.net/support

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nslay View Post
    Well, gee, how coincidental ... Just recently Sourceforge requested a mass password reset.
    Ignore that. SourceForge already commented on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by https://sourceforge.net/blog/forced-password-change/;
    On 2014-05-22, we triggered a forced password change for SourceForge users.

    *) We have adopted a longer minimum password length standard.
    *) There has been a change in our authentication layer, moving to a more modern Open Source platform.
    *) Password hashing algorithm and key length has changed.
    *) Forced password reset has occurred sitewide to ensure all stored password hashes meet these stronger standards.
    *) All site users have been sent email asking for password change.
    *) There has been no known breach or compromise of our systems.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    158

    Default

    I checked the gpg signature of the 7.2 file using their older key from last year - the signature is correct :-/

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Their web-site, hosted on SourceForge, also encourages users to switch over to Microsoft's BitLocker encryption software as an alternative.
    I cannot image them being so naive and recommending a closed source software which besides being a no-go because of closed source alone, obviously very probably has backdoors because it's from M$. Maybe their acc has been hijacked, maybe they are trying to tell us something, we'll see.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bucharest Romania
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarmad View Post
    So, if that turns out to be legitimate, what other alternatives do we have on Linux that works in a similar way? I need a tool that creates an encrypted file-based virtual drive as I am using it to encrypt USB thumbdrives that I may access on more than one machine.
    GPG. It was the best choice anyway

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by araxth View Post
    GPG. It was the best choice anyway
    GPG is good but it is not convenient as a replacement for truecrypt. GPG is actually much better suited for signing/encrypting emails which you should do as well.

    LUKS (and cryptsetup in the userspace) is a much better and safer (full-disk encryption is always a safer option).
    Note that new versions of cryptsetup support opening truecrypt format volumes which might help you migrate.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bucharest Romania
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stikonas View Post
    GPG is good but it is not convenient as a replacement for truecrypt. GPG is actually much better suited for signing/encrypting emails which you should do as well.

    LUKS (and cryptsetup in the userspace) is a much better and safer (full-disk encryption is always a safer option).
    Note that new versions of cryptsetup support opening truecrypt format volumes which might help you migrate.
    Agree, i ain't seen so far many user friendly (aka GUI etc) GPG / PGP power-ed tools for linux to encrypt full disks. However I am quite pleased with the integration in such desktop environments as KDE etc. As you said, the emails too. Still needs to be digged it, the fun with FOSS is the fact that somewhere someone might have done it already .

    I wasnt a big fan of TCrypt as well since i always counted PGP a better choice for the next door Joe and Jane trying to provide a bit of security to his / her files.

    Good luck,
    n

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Matthew Green, who according to Heise.de is one of the TrueCrypt Auditors, claims on twitter:

    "I have no idea what's up with the Truecrypt site, or what 'security issues' they're talking about. @kennwhite"

    https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/...41836722073600
    http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldu...r-2211037.html

    Citing Heise.de:
    "Der erste Teil der Quellcode-Prüfung von Truecrypt hatte keine nennenswerten Probleme aufgedeckt; der zweite hat noch nicht begonnen."

    My translation:
    "The first part of the source code examination didn't uncover any noteworthy problems; the second part hasn't begun yet"

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by septianix View Post
    Ok, I may be a little paranoid here but doesn't that remind you of when Lavabit shut down its operations?
    YES! It could be that one of the developers, in possession of the release signing key, came under pressure from authorities; therefore puts out a brief warning without going into details or even discussing it with co-developers.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    52

    Default

    My reading of the message regarding unfixed security issues is that it's no longer being maintained. That said, it could also be a subtle indication that there are bugs in there they are being coerced not to fix.

    It's also interesting that they're suggesting people use the integrated encryption support, which is closed source (for both Windows and OS X).
    They haven't provided any links to alternative software for Linux, even though there are some fairly comprehensive summaries on both the Ubuntu and Arch websites. It's possible that they didn't want to recommend an open source program.

    For now, the only conclusions that can be drawn are:
    • we can't trust the latest version
    • we can't trust any of the older versions, since they could be compromised
    • we can't trust BitLocker, since that's what they want us to (plus it's closed source)


    Therefore, anyone who's using Truecrypt for anything really important needs to change to another open source solution, like LUKS or ecryptfs. There are Windows programs compatible with both of those listed on the Arch wiki article posted earlier, though I imagine anyone doing anything really important probably isn't running Windows.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •