[fabulist]

A lot of people seem who recommend TC seem to think the same about BitLocker. To be fair, TrueCrypt has been audited and the code is freely available; BitLocker is proprietary, and the code is only available to a select few under NDA.

[ryanlol]

TCs developers told you to stop using it, BitLocker's didn't. Even the people responsible for the audit recommend that people not use TC

[fabulist]

As always, one must consider their own threat model and make an informed decision. I personally would use BitLocker over TrueCrypt, but LUKS over BitLocker.

[Forbo]

I wouldn't consider TrueCrypt's license to be the best example of "freely available".

[yellowapple]

In this context, what's important is source-code availability to the general public. A program which has publicly-available source code but is released under a nonfree (or at least potentially nonfree) license is leaps and bounds better than one which doesn't even provide the source code.

Yeah, software freedom is a very good thing, but - in the context of security - it's the source code availability that matters, and that doesn't necessarily require a FOSS license.