I already pointed out previously that I do not see any alternative to the TrueCrypt for encrypting data on disk. TrueCrypt is the only tool that we can more or less trust so far. You will probably remember that Bruce Schneier recommended to use Windows encryption, the BitLocker, instead of TrueCrypt and I called that idea nonsense. To prove me right, here comes the Windows 10 End User License Agreement (EULA) that states explicitly Microsoft will retain the keys to the encryption.
This is rather amazing but, indeed, if you used the BitLocker to encrypt the data on disk, the key will be copied by Microsoft to the OneDrive servers. Of course, that makes the encryption quite pointless as the OneDrive servers are controlled by Microsoft and they will give the key to government authorities and intelligence agencies.
Moreover, Microsoft actually reserves the right to do anything they want with all your data, which by definition includes your keys and the data protected by the encryption:
We will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to protect our customers or enforce the terms governing the use of the services.
So, really, all of your information is not only accessible to the government and intelligence agencies but even the company itself will access and manipulate your data whenever they believe it “necessary”.
Yes, TrueCrypt remains the only tool for disk encryption on Windows and you cannot, in good faith, claim that BitLocker is a good substitute for it. And, really, go Linux already.
Since the anonymous team behind TrueCrypt has left the building, security aware people were left wondering what’s next. I personally keep using TrueCrypt and as long as it works I will keep recommending it.
Recently, Bruce Schneier has raised a few red flags by his strange advice that seems to indicate that he is being paid now for his “services to the community” by parties not so interested in keeping the community secure. One more thing is his advice to switch from TrueCrypt to BitLocker.
The guys that “disappeared” from behind TrueCrypt recommended to switch to BitLocker and that makes BitLocker suspect right away. Moreover, anyone working in security would be right suspecting that BitLocker, coming from Microsoft, would be backdoor-ed. And now Bruce Schneier is coming out and saying that he recommends BitLocker now instead of TrueCrypt? Great. I am not going to trust either.
TrueCrypt for the moment remains the only trustworthy application for disk encryption. There is an effort to make TrueCrypt survive and support newer features of the file systems. I hope it works and we still have some tool to trust in five years from now.
I have also stored the recent versions of TrueCrypt.
Quite abruptly, the TrueCrypt disk encryption tool is no more. The announcement says that the tool is no longer secure and should not be used. The website provides a heavily modified version of TrueCrypt (7.2) that allows one to decrypt the data and export it from a TrueCrypt volume.
Many questions are asked around what actually happened and why, the speculation is rampant. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be any explanation forthcoming from the developers. For the moment, it is best to assume the worst.
My advice would be to not download the latest version, 7.2. Stick to whatever version you are using now if you are using TrueCrypt at all and look for alternatives (although I do not know any other cross-platform portable storage container tools). If you are with 7.1a, the version is still undergoing an independent audit and you may be well advised to wait for the final results.
More on the subject:
Update: there is a Swiss website trucrypt.ch that promises to keep TrueCrypt alive. At the moment, most importantly, they have the full collection of versions of TrueCrypt and all of the source code. There will probably be a fork of TrueCrypt later on.