[geekcrypt] Re: Crypto export law in US

  • From: Niklas Lemcke - 林樂寬 <compul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geekcrypt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 21:43:58 +0800

On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 09:22:35 -0400
Bill Cox <waywardgeek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> However, I feel *very* strongly that the first priority should be shipping
> a slightly updated tool with our rebranding, to start people transitioning
> from TrueCrypt to CipherShed, rather than having them switch to BitLocker.
> Every day we delay, we lose more users!
> It's really important to me to be doing stuff that makes a difference.  I
> measure that like a geek: now  much difference per person times number of
> people.  To make a real dent in the Universe, we need to get our rebranded
> version out there ASAP, and that means shipping at least 1 version under
> the TrueCrypt 3.0 license.
> Bill

Exactly how I feel, and why I said let's get cracking! License stuff is
longterm goal.

Phase 1 is rebranding and bugfixing on the basis of the audit, and get
a product ready and shipped.

3,2,1 go! :P

(agree with Stephens last post)


At the time of writing, no warrants have ever been served to me, Niklas
Lemcke, nor am I under any personal legal compulsion concerning the
CipherShed project. I do not know of any searches or seizures of my

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Other related posts: