Just quickly scroll through the diff (better version here: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/e5791d5703325b9cf6d1) and you will immediately see that all that was done is disable/remove a majority of the functionality.
AbortProcess ("INSECURE_APP");
Print ("WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure");
They added exceptions/rose errors/printed warnings everywhere where you could possibly encrypt and all of it reflects their intent at the Sourceforge page.
The whole point of the underhanded c contest is that the code looks extremely benign, and you wouldn't know that it's doing something evil by staring at it for a short time. Example: http://underhanded.xcott.com/?page_id=22
Anyway, it was a joke.
edit: But I'm not touching that binary with a 10 foot pole, thank you. There isn't even any guarantee yet that that source compiles into the given binary.
Comments
Here's the source code diff https://www.alchemistowl.org/arrigo/truecrypt-7.1a-7.2.diff....
Time to call in the underhanded C contest (http://underhanded.xcott.com/) participants on a special bugfinding challenge :)
Not needed.
Just quickly scroll through the diff (better version here: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/e5791d5703325b9cf6d1) and you will immediately see that all that was done is disable/remove a majority of the functionality.
They added exceptions/rose errors/printed warnings everywhere where you could possibly encrypt and all of it reflects their intent at the Sourceforge page.The whole point of the underhanded c contest is that the code looks extremely benign, and you wouldn't know that it's doing something evil by staring at it for a short time. Example: http://underhanded.xcott.com/?page_id=22
Anyway, it was a joke.
edit: But I'm not touching that binary with a 10 foot pole, thank you. There isn't even any guarantee yet that that source compiles into the given binary.