Talk:FreeOTFE

message: I think the program is uncomprehendable if you don't take multiple days to learn about the subject first.
Except from that, take a look at these lines:
If you create a hidden volume within an existing volume, be warned: mounting and adding data to the "host" volume may result in the "hidden" volume being overwritten, and its data destroyed.
When creating a hidden volume within an existing volume, ensure that the offset you specify is large enough such that it does not overwrite any of the system areas of that host volume (e.g. the FAT)
I hardly know what they mean, but would I trust my data to a program that apparently can overwrite it?
I thought it to be a simple window that scambles/unscambles data. Something like WinZip, but simpler. It is not.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Svenpb (talk • contribs).
:First, note that Wikipedia talk pages are for discussing the article and not for expressing your opinions on the subject, unless they are relevant to the article.
:The fact that hidden volumes can be overwritten is a feature, not a bug — it's called deniable encryption, e.g., hiding the fact that there is a hidden volume in the first place. Several disk encryption utilities have this feature and all of them share this behavior.
:If you don't need this feature and want your data to be safe, just don't use the hidden volume feature.
:As for being like WinZip — no, tools like this transparently encrypt and decrypt all the data that is stored on the encrypted volume at all times; otherwise, if you're storing unencrypted data on the disk even temporarily, then that makes your data susceptible to forensics. -- intgr 10:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ease of use

message: It seems like the license has changed and now looks OSD compliant to me. It's a pity the author decided to create another "vanity license" instead of choosing a already approved one. IANAL, but section 4.1.2 looks a little bit problematic as only claims against the Original Author void the license. So I can happily sue anyone that made modifications... Yoghurt (talk) 01:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And that makes it a non OSD licence, since it's not the same licence for the modifier, actually. Maybe we should ask OSI if freeotfe uses it's trademark in a misleading manner. That would bring reliable findings about it's OSD status at least. I think this one is similar to Microsoft's Reciprocal License without adressing the patent issue. -88.70.168.174 (talk) 11:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OSI has no trademark on Open Source, they tried, but couldn't get one. That's the problem nowadays, as everyone can call his license open source, as it has no legal meaning at all (AFAIK, IANAL). But I don't think your statement about it not being OSI compatible is correct. You can use the same license for derivate works, and you license it under the same terms as it was licensed to you. There are some parts in the license that probably would make it non-DFSG-free, though. -- Yoghurt (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What I meant was, that as an author of modifications, the licence doesn't grant you the same rights as sarah dean. That makes it a different licence for the modifier, though it includes the same words. And since it is copyleft, you have to use this one. The only way I can see to modify the program including a disclaimer for your work is with seperate patches. Like before she knows how to keep the rights of her work for her own as shared source. Pubic domain or patches, doesn't matter: Derivative works without lawyer bombs are virtually impossible in this way. --88.70.168.174 (talk) 22:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  License change 

message: I have checked and stalked everywhere, EVERYWHERE, for the past 2 years to contact the author for some suggestions and possible help for signing drivers, which would make this software far more usable and valuable.
Although this is irrelevant to Wikipedia, what is relevant is the whereabouts of the author, and whether or not this one-of-a-kind project can be considered abandoned while in a state of custom license. I thought maybe I could read something in this article about Sarah Dean, but no.
All mailboxes are permanently full, causing bounces. Source Forge messaging is disabled. Questions on stack exchange get removed. Anyone got any clue to get more information about this?
Redsandro (talk) 18:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anyone know if the author is still alive? 

message: Can someone please update this article to add a reference to DoxBox (https://t-d-k.github.io/doxbox/ ) which is a relaunch of FreeOTFE. I am the maintainer of DoxBox.
Squte (talk) 23:25, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  DoxBox