We are still actively working on the spam issue.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Encryption"
(Created page with "We should probably move all the disk encryption to its own page and use this as a overall page of encryption in general. -- ~~~~") |
(→All closed-source software is backdoored!: new section) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
We should probably move all the disk encryption to its own page and use this as a overall page of encryption in general. -- [[User:God|God]] ([[User talk:God|talk]]) 02:20, 17 March 2015 (EDT) | We should probably move all the disk encryption to its own page and use this as a overall page of encryption in general. -- [[User:God|God]] ([[User talk:God|talk]]) 02:20, 17 March 2015 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == All closed-source software is backdoored! == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I removed some of the FUD regarding Microsoft and Mac OSX. The reported Bitlocker attack requires EM detection of TPM chips; it cannot be generalized to Bitlocker as a software system. | ||
| + | To be honest, if the CIA needs to attack the TPM chip, this should be proof that there is actually no backdoor in Bitlocker... | ||
Revision as of 16:33, 7 January 2016
We should probably move all the disk encryption to its own page and use this as a overall page of encryption in general. -- God (talk) 02:20, 17 March 2015 (EDT)
All closed-source software is backdoored!
I removed some of the FUD regarding Microsoft and Mac OSX. The reported Bitlocker attack requires EM detection of TPM chips; it cannot be generalized to Bitlocker as a software system. To be honest, if the CIA needs to attack the TPM chip, this should be proof that there is actually no backdoor in Bitlocker...
