It's a registered trademark, could always ask for permission, or there's these which are free: ByteBunker BiteBunker Or my new personal favorite (and I can't believe this is free): BitEn On 13/06/2014 18:51, Titanus Aegis wrote: > I really like BitBunker, the alliteration in the name makes it memorable, > plus I like the connotations of data and safety in the words Bit and Bunker, > respectively. However there's a hardware storage solution called bitbunker > already (www.bitbunker.com), I don't know if it's close enough since it's > IT-related to be considered infringing on their name. > > Luis > >> What about BitBunker? >> >> On 13/06/2014 18:28, Titanus Aegis wrote: >>> Hi Bill, >>> Right, I concur. If you need help polling and such let me know. For now I >>> have a few more options: >>> >>> NigmaCrypt / NigmaLock / NigmaSafe / NigmaBox (coming from the word >>> enigma)BunkerCrypt / BunkerLock >>> EnCipher / EnCypherCryptoGram / CipherGramCryptoFort / CryptFort / >>> CipherFortConcealBoxToughCrypt >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Luis >>> >>>> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 08:13:38 -0400 >>>> From: waywardgeek@xxxxxxxxx >>>> To: ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Subject: [ciphershed] Re: Rebranding >>>> >>>> Hi, Luis. I personally don't like the names from latin or mythology, >>>> since at least here in the US, people go "huh?" >>>> >>>> Of the suggestions, CryptLock like names, seemed the best to me, but I >>>> found that they are already in use when I googled. After the rebranding >>>> release, it will be a *lot* harder to change the name, so I feel good >>>> about this discussion happening now. >>>> >>>> There are a couple of ways to choose a name. One is to have polls, do >>>> user focus groups, A/B testing and such. I wish we had that kind of >>>> time, but I feel we need a replacement for TrueCrypt out there ASAP, so >>>> I don't think we have that luxury. >>>> >>>> A second way is to choose a name, and then be open to changing it if a >>>> better one comes along. This started as "GeekCrypt", which was what I >>>> came up with in 5 minutes. Then it was FalseCrypt, which actually had >>>> some support on the truecrypt.ch forum, but some people really hated it. >>>> Now it is CipherShed. The best measure I have that CipherShed is an OK >>>> name is that no one has yet suggested one that is clearly better and >>>> available. Minor changes like CryptoShed or CipherShack don't seem >>>> worth making the change. Also, people will spell Crypto as cripto. In >>>> fact, I'm infamous for it! >>>> >>>> Given our lack of time, I also tend to put more stock into opinions from >>>> people who do branding, like Alain. I've run it past three people who >>>> do branding (if I include Alain), and the consensus is "not bad", though >>>> I would prefer that they thought "nailed it!" Shown the options, they >>>> don't seem to have anything worth switching to. >>>> >>>> I think we should move forward under the assumption that CipherShed will >>>> remain the long-term name, but if another name comes along that is >>>> clearly better before the rebranding release, we should seriously >>>> consider it. I haven't seen any yet. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> On 6/13/2014 1:07 AM, Titanus Aegis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Greetings, >>>>> Firstly hi to everyone, I'm glad this fork is happening and TC won't >>>>> remain as it is. I'd like to offer some suggestions - aside from the name >>>>> being trademark-free and the URL being available, best names are as short >>>>> as possible (keeping it down to 2 or 3 syllables max), easy to remember, >>>>> and should pass the telephone test (i.e. if you mention the name to >>>>> someone over a telephone, will they know how to write it properly? A >>>>> great example of a telephone test fail is flickr.com). For this reason I >>>>> don't think "cipher" is a good word to use in the name since it can be >>>>> spelled with an "i" or a "y". >>>>> Given it's a new name it'll help users recognize it if it suggests what >>>>> it does (with words like crypto or vault) or the benefits received >>>>> (privacy, security, peace of mind). Proper names that don't mean >>>>> anything in and of themselves to the user are great for distinguishing >>>>> oneself from competitors and branding power down the road (ex: google, >>>>> yahoo), but require greater branding efforts to gain initial traction and >>>>> recognition, so I wouldn't recommend that as a priority in this >>>>> particular case, given the lack of marketing muscle. >>>>> Apparently many obvious combinations are already taken. These are some I >>>>> thought of that didn't show up as encryption software in google searches: >>>>> Privatus (latin word for privacy)Sanctum (a private place from which most >>>>> people are excluded)Aegis (greek mythology, a shield of >>>>> protection)ToughBox / HardBox / StoutBoxCryptLockCryptBoltLockBolt >>>>> /DeadboltCriptify >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Luis >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> -- >> >> At the time of writing, no warrants have been served to me, nor am I >> under any legal compulsion concerning the CipherShed project. I do not >> know of any searches of seizures of my assets. >> > > -- -- At the time of writing, no warrants have been served to me, nor am I under any legal compulsion concerning the CipherShed project. I do not know of any searches of seizures of my assets.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
