«

http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net

Regards,

> nemo outis wrote:
> http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net
>
> Regards,

Have you test this yet? If so, does it appear robust? (able to survive
BSOD's and other abuse)

Does it appear as robust as crosscrypt (presuming you've tested CC and
this)? (IIUC, it, as crosscrypt, allows a second entry address within
the body of the encrypted data.....but CC is accessible via Linux.)

In article <>, "Roger Parks" <> wrote:
> > nemo outis wrote:
>> http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net
>>
>> Regards,
>
>Have you test this yet? If so, does it appear robust? (able to survive
>BSOD's and other abuse)
>
>Does it appear as robust as crosscrypt (presuming you've tested CC and
>this)? (IIUC, it, as crosscrypt, allows a second entry address within
>the body of the encrypted data.....but CC is accessible via Linux.)




I know nothing about how good this latest version is - I look
forward to reading your detailed review

Regards,

nemo outis wrote:
> In article <>, "Roger Parks" <> wrote:
>
>>> nemo outis wrote:
>>> http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>> Have you test this yet? If so, does it appear robust? (able to survive
>> BSOD's and other abuse)
>>
>> Does it appear as robust as crosscrypt (presuming you've tested CC and
>> this)? (IIUC, it, as crosscrypt, allows a second entry address within
>> the body of the encrypted data.....but CC is accessible via Linux.)
>
>
>
> I know nothing about how good this latest version is - I look
> forward to reading your detailed review

(@#!*$#@!!!)

( )

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, nemo (nemo outis) wrote:
>http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net
>
>Regards,


Thanks!!!!!