166
You mean that thing everyone knew about since the authorities derailed open-source TrueCrypt and forced them to message their users that they should migrate to BitLocker?
There's an open-source successor to TrueCrypt called VeraCrypt. For that matter, as far as I know, one can still download the last version of TrueCrypt. It hasn't been disappeared.
It's true that the TrueCrypt developers retired and said that commercial packages like BitLocker were finally good enough and available enough that they didn't feel compelled to maintain TrueCrypt. I remember that. I think it's plausible that Microsoft has (or has provided to someone) back-door access to BitLocker, but I don't remember any hint that the TrueCrypt developers had been coerced; have you got something you can link to?
Certainly at the time there was talk of coercion, there was talk the developers had been asked to put in a backdoor, had refused and then been encouraged to cease and desist their work on TrueCrypt and provide written recommendation of BitLocker, the wording of which did not seem to be their own. But people like conspiracies, maybe the authors did just move on, and if that was encouraged it probably was not as sinister as suggested. Security and privacy will always be duking it out.
But people like conspiracies,
In spite of the fact that they never happen and that government mass surveillance isn't a thing and hasn't been exposed repeatedly for decades and that we all know they have not been aiming to do this exact thing for the better part of a century and that they are genuinely evil and literally never prove themselves to be over and over and over.
These days, if you're not on Windows you can use luks or just zfs with encryption enabled. Code is open and can be audited by anyone. But yes, VeraCrypt to my knowledge is also still a viable option.
load more comments
(1 replies)
This Chaotic Eclipse/Nightmare Eclipse is the same one whose opening post read:
I never wanted to reopen a blog and a new github account to drop code...
But someone violated our agreement and left me homeless with nothing. They knew this will happen and they still stabbed me in the back anyways, this is their decision not mine.
I'm guessing there's plenty more to come.
Kinda funny that they're targeting Microsoft and yet using GitHub to share the PoCs.
Isn’t this the blue hammer guy?
Seems. Like bløgspot is a banned word..
Kinda funny that they’re targeting Microsoft and yet using GitHub to share the PoCs.
This is the part I don't get either. Although - maybe it is because it protects other platforms from legal action by microSLOP? Also, it adds to the Streisand effect should microSLOP remove the proof of concept from its own platform.
The entire Microsoft, Apple and Google ecosystem is USA backdoors. That's why I call it American spyware.
And they tell us to worry about China. :)
It's called misdirection, every magician and thief knows about it :D
Seems like every week there is another reason why I'm thankful I switched to Linux a few years ago.
Only thing I find annoying with full volume LUKS encryption is that it makes it difficult to resize partitions, it's a whole thing, but it's a minor hassle and not something I'd do every day anyway.
I like to use btrfs subvolumes inside a luks lvm volume for this reason.
What? Btrfs subvolumes are basically the same as logical volumes. That's somewhat redundant.
Why not just encrypt the whole drive and then use virtual partitions within the encryption?
Of course they did. They have no interest in protecting your privacy and every interest in making you think they do. I would’ve been way more surprised to learn there wasn’t a backdoor.
I'm left puzzed as to how this works ...like.. the data on the disk should be encrypted sector by sector...it takes forever to encrypt or decrypt a disk which is consistent with that understanding.
When you boot into PE, I don't understand how that OS can read anything off the disk, yellowkey or not, without knowing the encryption key..so how does it get that key. Is the vulnerability here that the key is stored in the TPM and win PE can be convinced to retrieve it without the proper credentials being provided ?
If that's the case, and the TPM can just provide the key on request...then... where is the security here ?
My guess is that the key to decrypt the disk is stored on the disk, encrypted by a Microsoft-known key. This seems to unlock that copy of the key rather than the copy encrypted by your own key.
Though he did say to put the disk back in the original system in part of the instructions, so it might be TPM based. The way to check would be to try this on a system with a disk from another system, or with a wiped TPM.
TPM is not security, it’s security theatre. If you don’t need to type a password in or insert a device with a key on it during boot, then it’s not secure, period.
Yeah, Copy Fail, Dirty Frag and Fragnesia are bad but holy fuck.
Bitlocker is TEMU encryption
It really isn’t. The encryption itself still hasn’t been defeated. The implementation is the problem. Microsoft just can’t get out of their own way. If they ignored all the business majors, nobody would be able to stop them.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Good.
We always knew it was there. They sold their soul to the NSA decades ago.
I remember the day I saw the "Intel! Inside" commercial and the logo, and I thought, I don't fucking trust this company.
Yeah no shit Intel inside, you've got every fucking three letter agency inside.
I knew it was over the day they introduced UEFI and TPM.
Wait what's wrong with UEFI? My computer uses it, although I have an AMD chipset if that makes a difference...
load more comments
(2 replies)
So what are you using and recommending?
Tech megacorps are the fifth estate of their home countries, trusting your data to Microsoft or Google is essentially the same as handing it directly to the FBI and CIA.
Install Linux, Problem Solved.
More than ever.
LUKS, never had these problems...Too bad Win11 won't boot from it.
more evidence that michaelslop binbows is trash
linux is better
luks wouldnt do this to u
No Shit Sherlock. Not as if it would be required by US law to have a backdoor or anything…
No no, PatriotACT, CloudACT and stuff like PRISM just do not exist…
I am so shocked! Well I instantly fucking knew it the second I learned about BitLocker back when and never EVER trusted it, but still, it is shocking!
load more comments
(3 replies)
If you're running Windows, always assume that if the US Authorities or Microsoft itself want to spy on you as an individual or on do a little industrial espionage on your company (which US agencies also do), they'll just use a backdoor already present or at worse push an update to your machines(s) to create said backdoor.
Treat any and all software made by US companies as a foreign agent.
All the shit that the US Government and companies say about China, is pure Projection - the result of a mental process of "what would we do if we were the ones making those devices". (And, yeah, China probably does that shit too)
If it ain't Open Source, you got it as a binary or it can self-update, that software is somebody else's agent and you're trusting their ethics and goodwill when you have it running in your system outside a sandbox.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 May 2026
166 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
84922 readers
1229 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS