[Afforess]

I disagree. TrueCrypt (for better or for worse) made encryption available to the masses in an easy to use application. Without it, similar level of encryption requires knowledge of unix command line or expensive commercial products. The events that have unfolded do certainly raise the stakes for the TrueCrypt audit, but at present, I am still better off using TrueCrypt, than nothing at all.

[secfirstmd]

Having taught hundreds of people how to use True crypt over the years, I would certainly say that it was hardly easy for the average person to use.

[sentenza]

It was, however, easy enough to use for anybody capable of administering their own Windows PC, a situation which most of us on this site have been in at some point in our lives.

[secfirstmd]

Hmm, I think the YC News people are not the average users :)

The problem really came in Africa and the Middle East were overall IT literacy is low. People could often use a computer but were not familiar enough with it/scared to break something that they were afraid to really problem solve - esp human rights defenders in their late 40/50s in these places.

So for example, if taught A then B = C, TC was fine. The problem often came when A then B = Z, then TC became a problem. It's UI/UX and use of language (why call something "Mount"? Just use the word "Decrypt" for gods sake! - yes its not perfectly accurate but its easier for people to understand.) was pretty intimidating for many of the people who's lives really depend on it.

[Sir_Cmpwn]

I'm speaking to developers who would work on something like maintaining a TrueCrypt fork. Instead, improve the usability of the alternatives to solve the problems you've raised.

[kijin]

Who says they aren't going to fork and continue development?

It's just a landing page that a couple of guys put up while they try to figure out what direction to take. Since there's an audit going on right now, when it's done they'll probably start fixing the problems and releasing new versions. Have a bit of patience.