full-disclosure - How I Compiled TrueCrypt For Windows and Matched the Official Binaries

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20131027145117.a25ueiruoao8cowk@mail.encs.concordia.ca>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:51:17 -0400
From: Xavier de Carné de Carnavalet
 <x_decarn@...s.concordia.ca>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: How I Compiled TrueCrypt For Windows and Matched
	the Official	Binaries

TrueCrypt is a popular piece of software enabling data protection by  
means of encryption for all categories of users. It is getting even  
more attention lately, following the revelations about the NSA, as the  
authors remain anonymous and no thorough security audit have yet been  
conducted to prove it is not backdoored in any way. This has led  
several concerns raised in different places, such as  this blog post  
[1], this one [2], this security analysis [3], also related on that  
blog post [4] from which IsTrueCryptAuditedYet? [5] was born. One of  
the recurring questions is: What if the binaries provided on the  
website were different than the source code and they included hidden  
features? To address this issue, I built the software for Windows from  
the official sources in a careful way and was able to match the  
official binaries. According to my findings, all three recent major  
versions (v7.1a, v7.0a, v6.3a) exactly match the sources.

Details on how to reproduce the results are mentioned at  
https://madiba.encs.concordia.ca/~x_decarn/truecrypt-binaries-analysis/

FAQ:
- Does it mean TrueCrypt isn't backdoored in any way and is safe/secure?
No.
- Does it mean a potential backdoor or weakness should only be found  
in the source code?
Assuming you trust the compiler not to do anything wrong, yes.
- Nobody audited the source code.
True, so you should support IsTrueCryptAuditedYet? for this to happen.

Don't trust me, compile it yourself the way I did. If official  
binaries get changed in the future, I can't vouch for them. Check  
authenticity and integrity.

[1]  
http://www.privacylover.com/encryption/analysis-is-there-a-backdoor-in-truecrypt-is-truecrypt-a-cia-honeypot/
[2] http://brianpuccio.net/excerpts/is_truecrypt_really_safe_to_use
[3] https://www.privacy-cd.org/downloads/truecrypt_7.0a-analysis-en.pdf
[4] http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2013/10/lets-audit-truecrypt.html
[5] http://istruecryptauditedyet.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/