Folder Castle 2.0 beta
Posted by Anatoliy on 22 January 2008 - 21:13 · 14 comments & 14215 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: Anatoliy
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: Anatoliy
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#1 Posted by needlegun on 22 Jan 2008 - 21:44
- There's also TrueCrypt as a free open-source alternative for keeping those pesky little secrets, well.... secret
-
(2 replies)
#2 Posted by TRC on 22 Jan 2008 - 21:47
Yeah and don't forget that this company keeps a special master key for every registered user.
Isn't that a great feature, total strangers having a backdoor for the super encryption program they sold you.
Edit: Disregard, it seems they have wisely changed this policy.
Last edited by TRC on 23 Jan 2008 - 00:09-
#2.1 Posted by Anatoliy on 22 Jan 2008 - 22:18
- For improved security since version 1.2.1.74 MagneticSoft has removed the possibility of password recovering (for Control Center accessing). Now only you know the password.
The password used for encryption Secure Storage is not stored anywhere on a computer in any kind.
-
#3 Posted by michael.dobrofsky on 23 Jan 2008 - 01:04
- True Crypt won't let you down, guys.
And it's free.
-
#4 Posted by Lare2 on 23 Jan 2008 - 06:58
- IMO this is a ****ing joke when there's true crypt for free
-
(4 replies)
#5 Posted by BenDark on 23 Jan 2008 - 07:13
- Guys,
I'm bored with your TrueCrypt. I've installed it, but it is so complex!
And there are 2 operations in Folder Castle that make the same as the heap of buttons and controls in TrueCrypt. they have encryption of 256 bits - more than TrueCrypt has. -
#5.1 Posted by TRC on 23 Jan 2008 - 09:48
- they have encryption of 256 bits - more than TrueCrypt has.
You're wrong, Truecrypt supports AES-256, and if you want to talk about "more" it also supports Serpent and Twofish encryption or cascades of all three. -
#5.2 Posted by Jugalator on 23 Jan 2008 - 13:10
- This is simply inaccurate. TC both supports stronger encryption than Folder Castle through AES-256 (that alone is 256 bit encryption) combined with other algorithms if you really care for that, as well as supporting plausible deniability through wrapping hidden volumes. It's also cross-platform, completely free, open source so anyone can verify backdoors aren't there, uhh why do I need to go on.
I think this one is clearly inferior for any uses I can think of. -
#5.3 Posted by BenDark on 23 Jan 2008 - 14:39
- (Jugalator said @ #5.2)It's also cross-platform,
Well, why do I need this I want to protect only my laptop with Windows installed(Jugalator said @ #5.2)completely free,
complex to understand whole features(Jugalator said @ #5.2)open source so anyone can verify backdoors aren't there
Well, I don't think that you can check out all TC source codes to find backdoors. As long as "anyone" can verify that FC doesn't have it -
#5.4 Posted by TRC on 23 Jan 2008 - 20:00
- complex to understand whole features
You keep saying that but I really don't see what is so complex about it. Especially if you take a few minutes to learn how. It's actually quite simple to use. I mean how do you post on this forum or even use a web browser? Look at all those buttons!
Well, I don't think that you can check out all TC source codes to find backdoors. As long as "anyone" can verify that FC doesn't have it
Oh come on... you know what he meant and he's right. If there were a backdoor in Truecrypt it would be found very quickly and all it would take is for one person to find it. That doesn't mean it has to be you.
-
(1 reply)
#6 Posted by caesar on 23 Jan 2008 - 08:03
- Can't wonder what files and folders would one *hide* on his personal computer located at home? p0rn? pictures with another lady that his current GF/wife should not be aware of?
Unless the encryption is one way I could not care less if it would be 512-bit key length or whatever.
As if I'd honestly would store my credit card or personal info either on my personal computer or on their server, no matter how secure they state it is.. Yet there are some people that do this, I wonder why? -
#6.1 Posted by Jugalator on 23 Jan 2008 - 13:20
- Uhh... There are so many reasons sensitive information may be stored on a computer, I wouldn't even know where to begin. Passwords being one example, or account information. That would be safer stored encrypted on a computer than in an envelope from your ISP at home, anyway. ;-)
Other things could be having your Outlook mailbox file stored on an encrypted volume. If you exchange things you wish to remain private even if the compuiter is stolen, used by someone other than you or whatever, that should also be encrypted.
-
#7 Posted by Jugalator on 23 Jan 2008 - 13:09
- I recommend TrueCrypt over this one. Encryption tools like these should always be open source due to theoretical problems with backdoors, or for public scrutiny of security weaknesses or security holes in the software. That's why I don't really care for Vista's encryption either.
Last edited by Jugalator on 23 Jan 2008 - 13:15
In the new version powerful feature was added - Secure Storage. Secure Storage is the protected storehouse for sensitive data on your computer. You can reliably store any sensitive information in Secure Storage: information about bank accounts, credit cards numbers, any passwords, confidential documents, e-mail messages, photos and many other things. The information in Secure Storage is encrypted by cryptographic algorithm Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) with 256-bit key length. AES is adopted as an encryption standard by the U.S. government. AES algorithm with 256-bit key length is sufficient to protect classified information up to TOP SECRET level.