On 10/07/2011 09:25 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 02:51:26PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote: >> On 10/06/2011 04:54 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:28 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth >>> <tchollingsworth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> If I remember correctly it's not that TrueCrypt is non-free, but that >>>>> the license is incompatible with Fedora and upstream was not willing >>>>> to budge on that so it was re-branded instead. >>>> >>>> The TrueCrypt License is, in fact, non-free for several reasons: >>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/distributions/2008-October/000276.html >>> >>> That's being rather pedantic... Yes it's considered non-free because >>> of the screwy licensing agreement, however, the software is free to >>> download and use, it is open source. >> >> TrueCrypt is definitely not Free Software. A simple rebranding to >> prevent use of their trademark is not sufficient to make it Free >> Software. It is also not Open Source, as it fails several of the OSI >> Open Source Definition criteria. >> >> In addition, I have strong reason to believe that the license in >> TrueCrypt is carefully crafted to incorporate legal conditions where the >> TrueCrypt upstream could do all sorts of really really nasty and >> horrible things, including suing users for _complying_ with the terms of >> the license. When I pointed this out to TrueCrypt's upstream in 2008, >> their answer was basically "Yeah, so what?". >> >> Stand far, far, far away. > > Is there any reason to use TrueCrypt, over the whole disk encryption > that Fedora already provides? LUKS "just works" afaict ... works on both linux and windows:-) while you use it on windows since it has a lots of features you can also use you pendrive on linux...and there is no alternative:-( -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!" -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
