Re: Truecrypt binaries are a massive, global Big Brother honeypot!

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:15:25 +0000 (UTC), Robert James wrote:

> Everybody knows the TrueCrypt foundation is just an INFOSEC front

Fukktard.

Proof? None?

Fukktard.
--
Tom Giarmo aka Ryan White aka poonytang |
Please feel free to email me tgiarmo@sandata.com or drop me a line!
Corporate Headquarters Port Washington, New York
26 Harbor Park Drive Port Washington, NY 11050 | T: 800¡V544¡V7263
F: 516-484¡V6084

"Thomas J. Giarmo" <tgiarmo@sandata.com> wrote in news:j4ftr4$qg4$1@dont-
email.me:

> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:15:25 +0000 (UTC), Robert James wrote:
>
>> Everybody knows the TrueCrypt foundation is just an INFOSEC front
>
> Fukktard.
>
> Proof? None?
>
> Fukktard.

I wonder if he'll get nasty now you've exposed the deficiencies in his
argument.

--
Bear Bottoms, security consultant
http://bearware.info

In article <j4ftr4$qg4$1@dont-email.me>
"Thomas J. Giarmo" <tgiarmo@sandata.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:15:25 +0000 (UTC), Robert James wrote:
>
> > Everybody knows the TrueCrypt foundation is just an INFOSEC front
>
> Fukktard.
>
> Proof? None?
>
> Fukktard.

:-)

In article <j4gqe9$8mb$2@dont-email.me>
Robert James <ballsack_harry@joesbarbershop.com> wrote:
>
> When I questioned this on the forms there excuse
>

Where?

Robert James wrote:

>Try to compile a version of TC using the exact same dependencies; same
>versions of course, exactly as TC's developers suggest. You will notice
>the hash and size of your binary is radically different then the pre-
>compiled one they provide. TC's excuse??? They had to include 64-bit
>Vista/Win7 driver sigs. When I questioned this on the forms there excuse
>did not explain why this was also true of the WinDriverless .deb version.
>Ask about this strange difference on the TC forums and you'll have your
>posts quickly deleted.

Hash 'radically' different? I see, you're an expert!