Reports of TrueCrypt’s flaws were greatly exagerated, if a 77-page report coming out of Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute is anything to go by. The intensive six-month study concludes that the encryption software is nowhere near as insecure as reported back in 2014.
“Our general conclusion is that TrueCrypt is safer than previous examinations suggest,” wrote professor Eric Bodden in a blog post announcing the study.
TrueCrypt was discontinued in the summer of 2014 — the developers said they didn’t want to maintain a standard with “unfixed security issues.” It’s still not clear exactly what those vulnerabilities were — they were never announced, in part to protect the project’s millions of users. Security researcher James Forshaw did find two flaws in September that could be used to compromise a machine (though not decrypt an encrypted hard drive), but it’s possible the vulnerability that led to the project being abandoned is something else entirely.
Whatever the problem is, the Fraunhofer Institute didn’t find anything they deemed a critical flaw during their six-month study — though they did state that encryption can’t solve all security concerns.
“From a security perspective, the fact that TrueCrypt is a purely software solution means that it cannot in principle protect against all relevant threats,” says the study.
Bodden added to this point in his blog post.
“It does not seem apparent to many people that TrueCrypt is inherently not suitable to protect encrypted data against attackers who can repeatedly access the running system,” wrote Bodden, adding that “TrueCrypt seems not better or worse than its alternatives” so far as encrypting data is concerned.
Basically, if someone already has access to your system in some way — be it physical access to the machine while it’s running, or the installation of Trojan horse malware — encryption of any kind won’t help. Keyloggers can be installed, and files can be accessed by malware while the user is accessing an encrypted drive — no encryption can prevent that. Encryption does, however, make it hard for someone who steals your hard drive to access the data on it.
Whatever flaw prompted the TrueCrypt developers to abandon the project — and even advise developers to not fork it — may not have shown up in any study, but it’s becoming harder to imagine what that flaw might be. A fork of the software, called VeraCrypt, includes patches for every bug that’s been found so far.
Did you think hitting delete on your AI chatbot conversation actually makes it disappear? Georgia Tech researchers just proved that's not entirely true. They have built a forensic tool called ORISA that can dig deleted conversations from your phone and even rebuild them into a working chatbot session you can keep talking to.
How can ORISA bring deleted AI conversations back?
Touchscreen laptops have been around for years. You can get them in all sizes and shapes. Just not from Apple. For years, the Cupertino giant has treated the idea of a touchscreen MacBook the way I treat a meeting that could have been an email: with open contempt. However, Wednesday looks like the day the company could finally change its mind.
The latest Apple invite puts the “Pro and Tell” showcase in Los Angeles at 10 a.m. PT (1 p.m. ET) on October 28, 2026. Instead of a regular live-streamed keynote, it is an invitation-only, hands-on event for a handful of press and creators (similar to what the company did for the MacBook Neo earlier this year).
Two residents of Chicago have filed a lawsuit in the US over claims that robots run by Coco Robotics and Serve Robotics captured their facial and hand measurements without consent, bringing renewed attention to the food delivery robots. The cases raise a troubling question: If a robot delivers food to your door, can it also be gathering sensitive information about you?
According to a report by The Associated Press, the proposed class-action lawsuits were filed in Cook County on Oct. 9 and allege violations of Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act. The complaints claim that the robots’ cameras and LiDAR sensors captured information on customers’ faces and hands as they approached the machines to pick up their orders. Both have denied the allegations.