[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 04/06/14 12:39, Kevin Peat wrote: > > Either way > it reflects poorly on open source security products which is a shame > especially after heartbleed. I don't think the behaviour of any individual project reflects on Open Source (or Free Software). Any more than Halloween Documents paint all proprietary software companies as black. Truecrypt was always odd, in that the developers stayed anonymous, where as for many Open Source developers (at least those not doing it for their day job, and many who are) are often partly in it for reputation benefits. The coverage of Truecrypt end of life was a bit weird too. The developers pointed out that the reason for the project is no longer there, as all major operating systems have robust disk encryption built in. Far rather have developers say "we've stopped", than struggle on and deliver security fixes late. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq