[Truecrypt] for David T. from Truecrypt-Team
Carsten Krueger
Nobody can mail you if your DNS fails.
Hostfile is working only for web but it contains no valid mx.
--
http://learn.to/quote - richtig zitieren
http://www.realname-diskussion.info - Realnames sind keine Pflicht
http://oe-faq.de/ - http://www.oe-tools.de.vu/ - OE im Usenet
http://www.spamgourmet.com/ - Emailadresse(n) gegen Spam
David T.
> When do u fix your DNS?
> Nobody can mail you if your DNS fails.
> Hostfile is working only for web but it contains no valid mx.
If you wish to contact me, you can email me at da...@atlas.cz
Regards,
David
Leto
news:t16a409d9nt8ifhut...@4ax.com:
> If you do get a page up, obviously you cannot post the zips, but could
> you post the signatures for them? A friend might find them in a
> binaries group after reading an anonymous announcement here, and if so
> that friend would want to check they were not tampered with.
The signatures and the key are available at www.truecrypt.tk. People who
downloaded these files from truecrypt.org can confirm the authenticity of
the files hosted at truecrypt.tk.
WinTerMiNator
<nob...@nospam.org> a écrit dans le message de
news:t16a409d9nt8ifhut...@4ax.com...
> downloaded for legal reasons, remove them, but like the other poster
> said, keep the rest of the site up. Even just one page explaining why
> you have had to close the rest of the site would be something. Perhaps
> you are not allowed to? Advertising what is going on would generate
> awareness of TC and bad publicity for DC. Latest news on the situation
> would be good too. You are in danger of disappearing without a trace
> at the moment.
Site is always on. If you have DNS problems, add "65.161.144.72
www.truecrypt.org" in your hosts file.
--
Michel Nallino aka WinTerMiNator
http://www.chez.com/winterminator
(Internet et sécurité: comment surfer en paix)
http://www.gnupgwin.fr.st
(GnuPG pour Windows)
Adresse e-mail: http://www.cerbermail.com/?vdU5HHs5WG
Gordon
What does the line below mean?
Site is always on. If you have DNS problems, add "65.161.144.72
> www.truecrypt.org" in your hosts file.
"WinTerMiNator" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:c25dah$1pjgtp$1...@ID-220974.news.uni-berlin.de...
WinTerMiNator
"Gordon" <busi...@lavere.net> a écrit dans le message de
news:4uidnTWm_PN...@comcast.com...
> I have NEVER been able to get to this site. www.truecrypt.org
>
> What does the line below mean?
> Site is always on. If you have DNS problems, add "65.161.144.72
> > www.truecrypt.org" in your hosts file.
If you are using Windows, you have "a local DNS" (Domain Name Server) on
your PC, which is called "hosts" (without extension).
It is a text file, that you can edit it with Notepad.
Locate it on your PC, open it with Notepad, add a line "65.161.144.72
www.truecrypt.org" and save your modified "hosts" file. Next time you will
want to connect to "http://www.truecrypt.org", your browser will read your
"hosts" file and connect to 65.161.144.72, which is the IP adress of
TrueCrypt site.
Just try it...
Andraia Matrix
Or at the least make the needed changes in their hosting so you could just
do it directly with the IP address. http://65.161.144.72/ Having to do it
in the hosts file is kind of bizarre. (Of course, not every web host allows
that, so that may be beyond their control. Many web hosts will put lots of
web sites onto the same IP address.)
As for their distribution issues.... All they really need to do is make
their changes into a "Diff" patch against e4m, and distribute that instead.
(And instead of requiring MSVC, Intel C, etc., let it work with MingW,
Borland C, or OpenWatcom, all of which are free. I think there are a few
others, but those are the major ones.)
That'd solve the whole situation for them. The user could take their freely
distributable patch, find their own e4m, apply it, and build their own copy.
That's what the LAME mp3 encoder team did for a long time. Just supplied a
Diff against the official free ISO demo source. That kept them out of legal
trouble from people far more powerful than SecurStar. (Eventually they did
just release their own, since they had completely rewritten it anyway and
there was no longer any original code left.) Since it's only source code,
it is protected under US law as free speech, unlike binaries.
And if the TrueCrypt team wanted to, they could still provide md5 hashes
etc. against their correct builds. (User compiled ones should generate
identical binaries, provided the build environment is set right.) Just so
users could make sure they did it right. (Or in case they got it from some
other source (p2p, etc.), they could verify that it is what it's supposed to
be.)
And if they didn't want to keep their own web site going, there are plenty
of places to host it, such as SourceForge and several other open source
development sites. LAME is even hosted at SF.
I don't see any real problems with them doing this... They just need to get
up and actually do it.
"WinTerMiNator" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:c25j8t$1oeffv$1...@ID-220974.news.uni-berlin.de...
WinTerMiNator
"Andraia Matrix" <andrai...@subdimension.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:dDs1c.19999$aT1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> It'd be better if they'd just go ahead and fix their end, though.
>
> Or at the least make the needed changes in their hosting so you could just
> do it directly with the IP address. http://65.161.144.72/
For an obscure reason, http://65.161.144.72 doesn't work on my PC (XP home,
and IE 6), while "hosts" works well! And, if you put it in your hosts file,
no need to remember for next connexion.
>Having to do it
> in the hosts file is kind of bizarre. (Of course, not every web host
allows
> that, so that may be beyond their control. Many web hosts will put lots
of
> web sites onto the same IP address.)
There are two uses for your "hosts" file:
* add the IP address of a page that you often connect to (or don't arrive to
connect to, due to DNS problems...)
* use as "anti ads" technique: in front of the names of all the sites you
don't want to connect to, you add the address "127.0.0.1" or "0.0.0.0" which
are local addresses representing your own computer; in that case, instead of
connecting to web site, you just connect... to your PC, and don't download
ads pages.
It is not "kind of bizarre" to use hosts the 1st way, it is the way "hosts"
has been designed for!
>
> As for their distribution issues.... All they really need to do is make
> their changes into a "Diff" patch against e4m, and distribute that
instead.
Nice idea.
> (And instead of requiring MSVC, Intel C, etc., let it work with MingW,
> Borland C, or OpenWatcom, all of which are free. I think there are a few
> others, but those are the major ones.)
Tons of work to go from MSVC to another compiler...!
> That'd solve the whole situation for them. The user could take their
freely
> distributable patch, find their own e4m, apply it, and build their own
copy.
"Joe User" doesn't know how to compile his app...
And, regarding "TrueCrypt Team", I'm afraid it resumes to "David T.", also
known as "Flarexxx", a former poster of this group, and, being an
individual, he has been afraid by the eventuality to face a trial with
Securstar, what he can probably not afford to.
For those reasons, I don't believe in the future of TrueCrypt; I think
CrossCrypt is here, GPLed, it works, is maintained, has an identified
author --> this will be the winning horse!
Andraia Matrix
just
> > do it directly with the IP address. http://65.161.144.72/
>
> For an obscure reason, http://65.161.144.72 doesn't work on my PC (XP
home,
That is odd. Very odd.
> and IE 6), while "hosts" works well! And, if you put it in your hosts
file,
> no need to remember for next connexion.
It's almost certainly due to the web hosting company. They'll put hundreds
or even thousands of web sites onto a single IP address and then use the
HTTP request header to decide where it's supposed to go. That way they can
get hundreds (or even thousands) of small insignificant web sites onto a
single server.
So I don't know why it occasionally works for you.... Dunno. For the
record, using the IP address directly doesn't work for me.
> There are two uses for your "hosts" file:
> * add the IP address of a page that you often connect to (or don't arrive
to
> connect to, due to DNS problems...)
That's common. It also can cause problems when the IP address changes. And
yes, it does happen. You'll be using a web site with no problems, and then
one day it's gone. It may take you quite a while tor emember that you put
the IP address into your host file.
The reality is that it doesn't take all that much time for a DNS query the
normal way, and just let the OS cache it like normal.
The 'hosts' file should only be used for static IP addresses that aren't
going to change, such as on a LAN.
If you need more than that, then you should use one of the DNS caching
packages.
> * use as "anti ads" technique: in front of the names of all the sites you
Been there, done that. It can occasionally cause problems. I used to do
that with a lot of ad sites, but occasionally it would cause problems.
> It is not "kind of bizarre" to use hosts the 1st way, it is the way
"hosts"
> has been designed for!
Actually, no, it wasn't. It was designed for static IP's for a LAN etc.
Not for the dynamic internet. That's why Windows caches DNS's on its own,
just like other temporary internet files.
> > (And instead of requiring MSVC, Intel C, etc., let it work with MingW,
> > Borland C, or OpenWatcom, all of which are free. I think there are a
few
> > others, but those are the major ones.)
>
> Tons of work to go from MSVC to another compiler...!
Well, I'm not a Windows programmer, so I can't comment on that.
Seems to me though that it'd be much better to use a compiler that people
can actually use, rather than an expensive one that few people would have.
Realistically though, I doubt there would be that many changes involved.
Most windows compilers should provide the same kind of stuff out of
necessity.
> > That'd solve the whole situation for them. The user could take their
> freely
> > distributable patch, find their own e4m, apply it, and build their own
> copy.
>
> "Joe User" doesn't know how to compile his app...
No, they don't. That's why I also commented about them providing md5 hashes
etc. Or even official p2p links, such as for emule / edonkey, gnutella,
bittorrent, etc. Any "Joe User" who knows enough to use encryption is going
to know enough to be able to use a simple p2p app. Or be able to find it
somewhere else on some website in no telling what country. In which case,
they might want to know if it's the same file as the 'official' one. Hence
the md5's etc.
> And, regarding "TrueCrypt Team", I'm afraid it resumes to "David T.", also
> known as "Flarexxx", a former poster of this group, and, being an
> individual, he has been afraid by the eventuality to face a trial with
> Securstar, what he can probably not afford to.
I figured the threat of lawsuits could be an issue. That's why I mentioned
the Diff idea, and pointed out that the LAME mp3 encoder team did it that
way specifically because they couldn't be sued. The binaries have to be
done by somebody else outside of the US, etc., but the source can be done.
Of course, once they rewrote the whole thing, they no longer had to do a
Diff.
> For those reasons, I don't believe in the future of TrueCrypt; I think
> CrossCrypt is here, GPLed, it works, is maintained, has an identified
> author --> this will be the winning horse!
Well... I haven't tried CrossCrypt, so I can't really comment on it, other
than to say that since it's still early alpha, I wouldn't expect much from
it for quite a while.
And it's quite possible the low level stuff could change drastically between
versions, making it difficult to access anything you've already done.
Gordon
thank you,
Gordon
"Gordon" <busi...@lavere.net> wrote in message
news:4uidnTWm_PN...@comcast.com...
> I have NEVER been able to get to this site. www.truecrypt.org
>
> What does the line below mean?
> Site is always on. If you have DNS problems, add "65.161.144.72
> > www.truecrypt.org" in your hosts file.
>
>
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++ snip ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Michael Sçheer
> For an obscure reason, http://65.161.144.72 doesn't work
Same here, thats why I first thought "They've deleted the files and
only left their web server working" and didn't edit my host file...
Its an Apache? Mabe its a configuration issue...
--
[PGP] 0x360F113D(RSA) * 0x53E9615A(DH/DSS) * http://pgp.autechre.de/
Michael Sçheer
> Its an Apache? Mabe its a configuration issue...
Ah I see, its about virtual hosting.
John
> It'd be better if they'd just go ahead and fix their end, though.
>
> Or at the least make the needed changes in their hosting so you could just
> do it directly with the IP address. http://65.161.144.72/ Having to do it
> in the hosts file is kind of bizarre. (Of course, not every web host allows
> that, so that may be beyond their control. Many web hosts will put lots of
> web sites onto the same IP address.)
And if the browser user uses a proxy, obligatory in some environments,
it doesn't matter what he has in his hosts file...
Groetjes
John
WinTerMiNator
"John" <john.veldh...@universal.nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:4047102f$0$268>
[...]
> And if the browser user uses a proxy, obligatory in some environments,
> it doesn't matter what he has in his hosts file...
It has been known for long that if you use IE6, a hosts file as"anti ads
technique" and a proxy, you should configure IE6 "to not use proxy for local
addresses".
Regards
Synonymous
version of this software, if for no other reason because I hate it
when big bullies (SecurStar) start throwing their weight around ;).
There are very few good encryption programs on sourceforge.
I also do not understand why Truecrypt cannot exist, the lisence that
comes with E4M (listed below) clearly states that "you may derive new
works based on this product" (with two slight limitations in #1 and
#2, BSD type).
I think he should write a story to slashdot and newsforge and get the
open source community in on this, its total bullshit the scare tactics
that securestar is doing.
--
License agreement for Encryption for the Masses.
Copyright (C) 1998-2000 Paul Le Roux. All Rights Reserved.
This product can be copied and distributed free of charge, including
source code.
You may modify this product and source code, and distribute such
modifications,
and you may derive new works based on this product, provided that:
1. Any product which is simply derived from this product cannot be
called E4M, or Encryption for the Masses.
2. If you use any of the source code in your product, and your product
is distributed with source code, you must include this notice with
those portions of this source code that you use.
Or,
If your product is distributed in binary form only, you must display
on any packaging, and marketing materials which reference
your product, a notice which states:
"This product uses components written by Paul Le Roux
<ple...@swprofessionals.com>"
3. If you use any of the source code originally by Eric Young, you
must
in addition follow his terms and conditions.
4. Nothing requires that you accept this License, as you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the product or its derivative works.
These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.
5. If any of these license terms is found to be to broad in scope, and
declared invalid by any court or legal process, you agree that all
other
terms shall not be so affected, and shall remain valid and
enforceable.
6. THIS PROGRAM IS DISTRIBUTED FREE OF CHARGE, THEREFORE THERE IS NO
WARRANTY
FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. UNLESS
OTHERWISE
STATED THE PROGRAM IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EITHER
EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK
AS TO THE
QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM
PROVE
DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR
CORRECTION.
7. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN
WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED
TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED
BY
YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY
OTHER
PROGRAMS, EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN
ADVISED
OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
--
"Andraia Matrix" <andrai...@subdimension.com> wrote in message news:<dDs1c.19999$aT1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
mike.u...@gmail.com
Borked Pseudo Mailed
0a67f2...@googlegroups.com>
of back doors yet?