[geekcrypt] Re: [geekcrypt]

  • From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geekcrypt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 12:25:27 -0400

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Stephen R Guglielmo <srguglielmo@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> Hey guys,
>
> I just joined the mailing list. Looking through the list archives, I
> noticed there was a discussion regarding the name of the project. I
> know the name shouldn't be something a lot of time is spent on, but I
> do like the CipherShed name. I checked some domain names, they seem to
> be generally available. I don't think "FalseCrypt" gives a good first
> impression on a naming basis alone, to be honest. Plus, I imagine it
> could open up some litigation issues (eg "false is the opposite of
> true, they're still copying our name" or something).
>

Hi, Stephen.  I really like the CipherShed name, too.  I think some more
discussion is warranted, but with your backing it also, I went ahead and
bought 1 year of Ciphershed.com/org/net.  Whoever runs the site in the end
should own it, but I'll keep it for now.

I think keeping the FalseCrypt domain, and pointing it to CipherShed may be
helpful for users trying to find the site, at least in the short term.


> I'd be happy to setup a IRC channel on Freenode or OFTC for the group
> if there is interest. I find that an IRC presence can help both
> interested users and contributors communicate.
>

I tend not to hang out in IRC all day, but it would be great if someone on
the team did!  If you don't mind participating in the IRC discussions, then
yes, please set it up.


> I think the roadmap is pretty solid for the time being. I agree the
> first thing to focus on is to "branding" the code: Picking a name and
> replacing the TrueCrypt references (including images, as mentioned on
> the webpage). That should be easy enough. Then, fix any known problems
> by the Open Crypto Audit Project group, then build using modern build
> environments (libraries, clang, Win7, etc).
>

Yes, this seems pretty obvious.  I was expecting such a roadmap from the
truecrypt.ch guys, but I'm not sure how technical they really are.  All
that's really required to merge back with their project is for them to put
some real geeks in charge, so they can begin making real progress.


> As for changing the license in the future, I personally am a fan of
> the 3-clause BSD license. It basically allows anyone to do anything
> with the code or the binaries, as long as they keep the copyright
> notice and don't use our names to endorse/promote their software. But
> that's probably a discussion for down the road a bit.
>
> Anyway, nice to meet you all!
> -Steve
>
>
Nice to meet you, too!  I also like the BSD license, but we'll have to
cross that road when we come to it.  We may want to share code with other
projects such as tc-play, and we may have to accept their licenses as a
pragmatic solution.  Let's assume for now that the eventual target is
BSD/MIT for now, but realize that we likely will have to change that goal.
I do not wish to have to reimplement existing cryto code when it already
exists under a generally accepted FOSS licenses.  Crypto is where writing
code gets scary :-)

Bill

Other related posts:

  • » [geekcrypt] Re: [geekcrypt] - Bill Cox