Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.computer.security > #5913 > unrolled thread

TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate

Back to article view | Back to alt.computer.security

Contents

  TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate none@none.nets - 2018-02-13 01:23 -0600
    Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2018-02-13 02:48 -0600
      Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-02-13 13:32 +0000
        Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2018-02-13 16:25 -0600
    Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate "Linea Recta" <bleep.bleep@bleep.invalid> - 2018-02-13 13:42 +0100
    Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate Dave <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2018-02-13 15:27 +0000
      Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate none@none.nets - 2018-02-13 21:36 -0600
        Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2018-02-14 22:29 -0500
          Re: TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate kellly85@whoosh.comquat - 2018-02-14 22:51 -0600

#5913 — TrueCrypt 7.1a Does Not Worik With My New Win 7 Ultimate

It says in the TC guide that TC works with Win 7.  Evidently, my new 8
core computer with Windows 7 Ultimate is too new for the old TC, which
works fine on my other computer running XP SP 3.

It blew my C: Windows.  It booted into the DOS screen and said it
could not find an O.S.  It asked for the password, but wouldn't accept
it.  What saved my butt was the recover disk I had made when I got the
computer.

I have used TC full disk encryption a number of times through the
years, including on my standby XP machine.  It ain't that hard to use.
The instructions are very easy to follow.

I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt. The latter
has sent the powers that be into court a number of times in an effort
to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.  So far as I
know, that has yet to be the case with drives encrypted with
VeraCrypt.  That's why I still trust TrueCrypt.  However, I now have
to trust VeraCrypt.  It is open source, so hopefully enough high
powered techs have examined it.  Since in the few years it's been
around, I haven't read of any of those encryption savants point out
any serious compromises in it.

My advice is that anyone with a newer updated Windows 7 to make dang
sure you have created a full save of your system and files, system
restore points, plus having made a recovery disk before you attempt
using TC.  My machine would now be a doorstop had I not had all these.

Just thought I'd give out this warning of what happened to me.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#5914

none wrote:

> It says in the TC guide that TC works with Win 7.  Evidently, my new 8
> core computer with Windows 7 Ultimate is too new for the old TC,
> which works fine on my other computer running XP SP 3. 
> 
> It blew my C: Windows.  It booted into the DOS screen and said it
> could not find an O.S.  It asked for the password, but wouldn't
> accept it.  What saved my butt was the recover disk I had made when I
> got the computer.

Truecrypt (TC) is not a multi-core program.  It doesn't care.  I am
running TC 7.1a on Windows 7 Home x64 SP-1 with no problems and that's
on a quad-core CPU.

You never mentioned *HOW* you are using TC.  It has no problems
creating, opening, and allowing file reads & writes into TC containers
even on the latest hardware.  What TC won't work with is when using it
for whole-disk encryption on newer *hardware*.  It will work with
old-style BIOS that uses MBR on the active disk.  It will /not/ work
with UEFI -- and that's probably what you changed in your new computer
config from your old MBR BIOS on WinXP.

You only mentioned operating systems as a differentiating factor between
where TC works and where it does not.  You never mentioned how your
Windows XP and Windows 7 Ultimate hosts differ in their HARDWARE.

> I have used TC full disk encryption a number of times through the
> years, including on my standby XP machine.  It ain't that hard to use.
> The instructions are very easy to follow.

Yeah, you've used whole-disk encryption with TC on MBR BIOS *hardware*.

> I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt. 

One of the updates to TC in Veracrypt's adaption was to support UEFI.

> The latter has sent the powers that be into court a number of times in
> an effort to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.  

Since when has Veracrypt sued anyone to access the contents of encrypted
containers or encrypted disks?  Please cite a case.

> So far as I know, that has yet to be the case with drives encrypted
> with VeraCrypt.  

Yet to be the case ... for what?  That a gov't agency could not invade
into a TC or VeraCrypt container or encrypted disk?  It can be done but
requires lots of brute strength (which is available these days), the
will or desire to do so and permission to allocate those crunching
computers, and perhaps legal requirements, like a judge's order.  

To thwart the brute force method, use multiple encryption schemes.  TC
gives you a benchmark when creating an encrypted container showing you
how much impact each encryption algorithm will incur on reading and
writing files along with benchmarking when you select multiple schemes.

You could also use the dummy pseudo-partition within a TC container so
under duress, like someone holding your kids with a knife at their
throat and drawing blood and threatening to do worse, you could give the
password to the dummy section of the TC container (where you should put
some bait files) but keep the other section safe since it uses a
different password.  Obviously if you're writing your passwords down in
a logbook, on Post-It notes, or elsewhere then those are discoverable.

> That's why I still trust TrueCrypt.  

I trust Truecrypt and will continue to use it.  However, if I build a
new computer that uses UEFI BIOS then I'll have to move to Veracrypt.
Veracrypt started with TC's code, fixed some problems found in the 2
audits of its code, and added new features.  Veracrypt is open source
(https://github.com/veracrypt/VeraCrypt) just as was TC so anyone with
the expertise could audit Veracrypt, too.

> However, I now have
> to trust VeraCrypt.  

Well, you had to do that, too, when you first started using TC.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5916

In message <1f1vhn88qnhd4$.dlg@v.nguard.lh>, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> 
writes:
>none wrote:
[]
>> I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt.
>
>One of the updates to TC in Veracrypt's adaption was to support UEFI.
>
>> The latter has sent the powers that be into court a number of times in
>> an effort to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.
>
>Since when has Veracrypt sued anyone to access the contents of encrypted
>containers or encrypted disks?  Please cite a case.
[]
You've done what I did the first time, misread what he said - his "the 
latter" referred to TC not VC.
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I'm not against women. Not often enough, anyway." - Groucho Marx

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5918

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> In message <1f1vhn88qnhd4$.dlg@v.nguard.lh>, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> 
> writes:
>>none wrote:
> []
>>> I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt.
>>
>>One of the updates to TC in Veracrypt's adaption was to support UEFI.
>>
>>> The latter has sent the powers that be into court a number of times in
>>> an effort to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.
>>
>>Since when has Veracrypt sued anyone to access the contents of encrypted
>>containers or encrypted disks?  Please cite a case.
> []
> You've done what I did the first time, misread what he said - his "the 
> latter" referred to TC not VC.

Very early on there was a suit from some parent company claiming one of
their employees (who was involved with TrueCrypt) of stealing that
company's encryption code.  I don't recall what happened in that lawsuit
but TrueCrypt survived.

I have never heard of TrueCrypt or Veracrypt suing any user of their
product "to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive".  Maybe
he meant that gov't agencies attempting (during a court proceeding or
through coercion) to get a user to divulge the contents of a TrueCrypt
container or encrypted drive.  I seem to recall 3 cases of persons
charged with espionage or spying that were ordered to divulge their TC
containers but refused and forensics teams didn't manage to invade the
TC containers.  I don't know about all countries where some may have
prosecutors make such demands but aren't legally enforceable due to laws
against self-incrimination.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5915

<none@none.nets> schreef in bericht 
news:jt258dl6nho0og27vua0gtbk4kt0ivt105@4ax.com...
> It says in the TC guide that TC works with Win 7.  Evidently, my new 8
> core computer with Windows 7 Ultimate is too new for the old TC, which
> works fine on my other computer running XP SP 3.
>
> It blew my C: Windows.  It booted into the DOS screen and said it
> could not find an O.S.  It asked for the password, but wouldn't accept
> it.  What saved my butt was the recover disk I had made when I got the
> computer.
>
> I have used TC full disk encryption a number of times through the
> years, including on my standby XP machine.  It ain't that hard to use.
> The instructions are very easy to follow.
>
> I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt. The latter
> has sent the powers that be into court a number of times in an effort
> to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.  So far as I
> know, that has yet to be the case with drives encrypted with
> VeraCrypt.  That's why I still trust TrueCrypt.  However, I now have
> to trust VeraCrypt.  It is open source, so hopefully enough high
> powered techs have examined it.  Since in the few years it's been
> around, I haven't read of any of those encryption savants point out
> any serious compromises in it.
>
> My advice is that anyone with a newer updated Windows 7 to make dang
> sure you have created a full save of your system and files, system
> restore points, plus having made a recovery disk before you attempt
> using TC.  My machine would now be a doorstop had I not had all these.
>
> Just thought I'd give out this warning of what happened to me.





I use TC 7.1a on my dual core computers under Windows 7, without problems.




-- 


|\  /|
| \/ |@rk
 \../
  \/os

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5917

On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 01:23:18 -0600, none wrote:

> It says in the TC guide that TC works with Win 7.  Evidently, my new 8
> core computer with Windows 7 Ultimate is too new for the old TC, which
> works fine on my other computer running XP SP 3.
> 
> It blew my C: Windows.  It booted into the DOS screen and said it could
> not find an O.S.  It asked for the password, but wouldn't accept it. 
> What saved my butt was the recover disk I had made when I got the
> computer.
> 
> I have used TC full disk encryption a number of times through the years,
> including on my standby XP machine.  It ain't that hard to use.
> The instructions are very easy to follow.
> 
> I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt. The latter has
> sent the powers that be into court a number of times in an effort to
> force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.  So far as I know,
> that has yet to be the case with drives encrypted with VeraCrypt. 
> That's why I still trust TrueCrypt.  However, I now have to trust
> VeraCrypt.  It is open source, so hopefully enough high powered techs
> have examined it.  Since in the few years it's been around, I haven't
> read of any of those encryption savants point out any serious
> compromises in it.
> 
> My advice is that anyone with a newer updated Windows 7 to make dang
> sure you have created a full save of your system and files, system
> restore points, plus having made a recovery disk before you attempt
> using TC.  My machine would now be a doorstop had I not had all these.
> 
> Just thought I'd give out this warning of what happened to me.

First, for those of you claiming no problems with TrueCrypt, note the op 
wants to encrypt the whole drive which may be more problematic than 
creating volumes.
Second, either one is sufficiently secure for whatever it you are trying 
to protect. If an agency has to go to court to gain access it means some 
pretty savvy people couldn't access the data.
Being security conscience is prudent, paranoia is another matter. I 
switched to VeraCrypt when I moved to Linux, it's a little slower to 
decode the password and annoyingly slow if you type in the wrong 
password, although this might discourage people's guessing attempts.
I only create one volume to hold just the stuff that needs protecting. I 
create similar volumes on backup media for easy file backups.
Of course, everyone should make an image of their os and backup data 
files, preferably confining those to a separate partition.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5919

								On
Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:27:31 -0000 (UTC), Dave <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 01:23:18 -0600, none wrote:
>
>> It says in the TC guide that TC works with Win 7.  Evidently, my new 8
>> core computer with Windows 7 Ultimate is too new for the old TC, which
>> works fine on my other computer running XP SP 3.
>> 
>> It blew my C: Windows.  It booted into the DOS screen and said it could
>> not find an O.S.  It asked for the password, but wouldn't accept it. 
>> What saved my butt was the recover disk I had made when I got the
>> computer.
>> 
>> I have used TC full disk encryption a number of times through the years,
>> including on my standby XP machine.  It ain't that hard to use.
>> The instructions are very easy to follow.
>> 
>> I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt. The latter has
>> sent the powers that be into court a number of times in an effort to
>> force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive.  So far as I know,
>> that has yet to be the case with drives encrypted with VeraCrypt. 
>> That's why I still trust TrueCrypt.  However, I now have to trust
>> VeraCrypt.  It is open source, so hopefully enough high powered techs
>> have examined it.  Since in the few years it's been around, I haven't
>> read of any of those encryption savants point out any serious
>> compromises in it.
>> 
>> My advice is that anyone with a newer updated Windows 7 to make dang
>> sure you have created a full save of your system and files, system
>> restore points, plus having made a recovery disk before you attempt
>> using TC.  My machine would now be a doorstop had I not had all these.
>> 
>> Just thought I'd give out this warning of what happened to me.
>
>First, for those of you claiming no problems with TrueCrypt, note the op 
>wants to encrypt the whole drive which may be more problematic than 
>creating volumes.
>Second, either one is sufficiently secure for whatever it you are trying 
>to protect. If an agency has to go to court to gain access it means some 
>pretty savvy people couldn't access the data.

I did *not* say TC nor VeraCrypt went to court for any reason
whatsoever.

I said:
"I don't know if VeraCrypt is truly as safe as True Crypt. The latter
has sent the powers that be into court a number of times in an effort
to force a computer owner to open an encrypted drive. So far as I
know,
that has yet to be the case with drives encrypted with VeraCrypt."

The "latter", meaning TrueCrypt, has "sent" - read: "caused" the
powers that be - the government/cops, whomever - to  resort to a court
order to get the drive decrypted by the computer owner.

Also, I was speaking only of encrypting the C: system drive containing
Windows, not of creating volumes. I have no idea if my Windows 7
Ultimate can create mere encrypted volumes with TC 7.1a.

>Being security conscience is prudent, paranoia is another matter. I 
>switched to VeraCrypt when I moved to Linux, it's a little slower to 
>decode the password and annoyingly slow if you type in the wrong 
>password, although this might discourage people's guessing attempts.
>I only create one volume to hold just the stuff that needs protecting. I 
>create similar volumes on backup media for easy file backups.
>Of course, everyone should make an image of their os and backup data 
>files, preferably confining those to a separate partition.

More now on what I have since found as to what caused this problem

I had this computer custom built by a local shop.  When detailing what
I wanted to the shop owner, I mentioned the problem True Crypt has
with UEFI Bios running on a Windows 7 machine.  I had read somewhere
or other that one could use MBR Bios instead.  (True or not, I don't
know.)

The manager of the shop said he always made the machines with the MBR
BIOS choice.  After I reclaimed my C: drive back from the system
crash, I used Belarc Advisor to check on this matter.  Guess what? The
machine is running with the UEFI Bios.  That's why I had the massive
fail with TC.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5920

On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 21:36:05 -0600, none@none.nets wrote:
> The "latter", meaning TrueCrypt, has "sent" - read: "caused" the
> powers that be - the government/cops, whomever - to  resort to a court
> order to get the drive decrypted by the computer owner.
> 

And your proof of that outlandish statement would be ... ?

-- 
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
                                       http://BrownMath.com/
                                  http://OakRoadSystems.com/
Shikata ga nai...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5921

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 22:29:31 -0500, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 21:36:05 -0600, none@none.nets wrote:
>> The "latter", meaning TrueCrypt, has "sent" - read: "caused" the
>> powers that be - the government/cops, whomever - to  resort to a court
>> order to get the drive decrypted by the computer owner.
>> 
>
>And your proof of that outlandish statement would be ... ?

I don't know what beef the above guy has taken up with the OP of this
thread, but I'm assuming he doesn't believe the courts have ordered
decryption of hard drives.  If so, he's wrong.

Below are incidents of exactly that happening.  however, it does seem
to be a problem dividing the court system.  Some judges order
decryption while others say it is not legal to do so.

I wasn't about to go through all links looking specifically which
cases refer to TrueCrypt, so I'm placing the main search link here.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=court+orders+to+decrypt+TrueCrypt+drive&t=hb&ia=web

Here are examples showing judges forcing decryption.

A few are regarding TrueCrypt as the encryption.
-------
A case of forced decryption of a disk encrypted with TrueCrypt.
https://www.wired.com/2012/02/laptop-decryption-unconstitutional/
"The defendant in April had refused to comport with a Florida federal
grand jury's orders that he decrypt the data, which was encrypted with
TrueCrypt. A judge held him in contempt and jailed him until December
15, when the circuit court released him ahead of Thursday's ruling."
--------
Another TrueCrypt incident. The FBI could not break TC. Unfortunately
for them, Brazil, unlike the U.S and other countries do not have laws
to force decryption.
Crime Encryption Privacy
FBI Failed To Break Encryption of Hard Drives 486 Posted by kdawson on
Saturday June 26, 2010 @01:37PM from the deploy-the-quantum-computer
dept. benoliver writes to let us know that the FBI has failed to
decrypt files of a Brazilian banker accused of financial crimes by
Brazilian law enforcement, after a year of attempts. Five hard drives
were seized by federal police at the apartment of banker Daniel
Dantas, in Rio de Janeiro, during Operation Satyagraha in July 2008.
(The link is to a Google translation of the original article in
Portuguese.) The article in English mentions two encryption programs,
one Truecrypt and the other unnamed. 256-bit AES was used, and
apparently both the Brazilian police and the FBI tried dictionary
-------
Wikipedia shows how many countries are passing laws demanding
decryption
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law
---------
http://www.phoebuslaw.com/Blog/2012/January/Court-orders-laptop-owner-to-decrypt-hard-drive-.aspx
"Court orders laptop owner to decrypt hard drive, finds no fifth
amendment privilege
Posted By John K. Phoebus || 26-Jan-2012
A federal judge in Colorado has ordered a woman under investigation
for mortgage fraud to reveal her password to decrypt her laptop hard
drive so investigators can search its contents. The United States
District Court for the District of Colorado on January 23, 2012 issued
an order directing a suspect in a criminal investigation to decrypt
her laptop hard drive, which had been protected with PGP encryption
that law enforcement couldn't break. The case is United States v.
Fricosu, Case No. 1:10-CR-00509 (D. Colo. Jan. 23, 2012)"
----------
Sebastien Boucher

Vermont, 2006

Suspected crime: child porn

In December 2006 US customs agents seized a laptop PC that allegedly
contained PGP-encrypted child pornography. Obviously, the encryption
could not be broken. Vermont where a child pornography suspect,
Sebastien Boucher, had a file on his computer clearly labelled as
graphic child pornography. The fact that the file was encrypted didn’t
help him–the mere title of the file was enough to bypass his fifth
amendment argument against handing over the password.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10172866-38.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_Boucher

Encryption product used: PGP

Breaking of encryption successful: no
-----------
Leon Gelfgatt

Massachusetts, 2014

Suspected crime: financial offense

Massachusetts’ top court ruled that a criminal suspect can be ordered
to decrypt his seized computer.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/massachusetts-high-court-orders-suspect-to-decrypt-his-computers/

Encryption product used: DriveCrypt Plus

Breaking of encryption successful: no

Case status: unknown
--------------
- End -

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.computer.security

csiph-web