TrueCrypt Is Dead -- Long Live TrueCrypt!

You said it better than any other commenter on here Jack. If it's free then it is free. If other than that say it up front period...

There are choices: Free, Donationware, 30 day Trialware and etc. But say it up front and don't try to shame people into paying for freeware after the fact.

FREE IS FREE!!!

Wow, you're right Bob. There have been a number of freeware products I've donated to, but not near as many as I have used over the years. Thanks for the reminder that these people who code these products do so because they see a need, and are willing to share with the community, but that doesn't mean that they should not be compensated. I don't think they will ever get what they would if their product was sold commercially; however, a small financial token of appreciation would probably go a long way. I'm going to go through and search for freeware I haven't donated to, and do so asap! Thanks again for this timely article.

If a product is offered completely free of charge it is in no way theft to accept that offer. If the developer of a particular application requests donations, then it is just that - a request. There is no obligation, either explicit or implicit, in such a request. If you like a product and use it regularly, of course you should be courteous and make a donation. But for someone to offer something for free and then get angry because people take them up on that offer is evidence of a serious character flaw. If the desire is to be compensated for the product, then that needs to be part of the offer itself. This is what trial periods are for.

TrueCrypt is to be used to hide information. There are methods listed for how to hide the fact you're trying to hide information. Lots of information on how to keep from being "forced to disclose" the unlock key. Lots of information on how secure the encryption is. Lots of information that leads *me* to believe they really mean keeping who I am and what I'm doing private.

"And you want me to break that security by sending them money? Traceable money? Are you nuts?" I've dealt with people who want to be 'secure', 'untraceable', and 'off the grid'. They don't send money over the internet. Not to anybody, not for any reason. Snail mail? Sure, postal money order paid with cash. That's got to be *some* software to get someone to do that.

TrueCrypt's stated purpose was keeping information secure. It just turned out that keeping information secure also meant very few people were willing to risk exposure and send them money.

I'm so enamored with PrivaZer I "tipped" 'em sixty bucks!
After MalwareBytes free version saved my ass a few years ago, I immediately purchased the Pro version.

Your point is taken and I agree; therefore, the software that I use are the upgraded versions of the "Free-ware." However, my income is less than halfway to the 'poverty level.' I was blasted out of the "working world" back in 1988 with the diagnosis of Multiple sclerosis(The #1 crippler of young adults.). I had a good start to a career in wildlife science. Was even accepted into the Peace Corp and headed for Kenya Africa. So I appreciate "Freeware."

There's a lot of wrong headed thinking in these answers and the actual article. I can't see how anyone gets to the point where they think there is a "moral obligation" to pay these fellows. What does the word free mean? No payment required. They are offering you an option. Where is the immorality in taking one of the options that they offer? If they actually demanded a payment and you used their wares without payment then that would be theft. If programmers want payment then offer their wares as trials that time out after a certain time. If they're too scared to compete in the market place on that basis then please spare us the moral intimidation of "Please donate...."

It is not stealing if you use something which was offered free of charge, and never donate, even if the author(s) said, 'Please'. I find nothing wrong with developing a program and offering it free, then - if the user base warrants it - start charging for future versions: upgrades, if you will. If the people who use the program really like it, they'll pay for the improved versions. If they don't want to pay - c'est la vie!

First of all, if something is designated as freeware I don't believe anyone is under obligation to pay for it. That being said, I have wondered for years how people who offer freeware make enough money to do the work. It sounds like the answer is: they don't.
But here's the problem. For some reason there is a great gulf between freeware and the prices typically charged for "pay-ware". There are many programs I would like to have but would only use rarely. And I simply won't pay 40 or 50 dollars or more to have them! If people who create the "freeware" would simply ask a reasonable price for what it's value to the customer is - and I'm thinking 5 or 10 bux - I bet they would get a lot more than they apparently do now. Of course, it would work best if they offered a free trial period so you could see if you actually liked and would use the program.
And I apply the same theory to commercial software. Charge a reasonable price for good software and offer a trial and you will sell far more than you do by jacking up the price sky high. And the result will probably be that for many programs you will make far more than you do now. Unlike a physical product, the cost of creation and production of software is exactly the same whether you sell 100 copies or 100,000 or more.

I haven't read all the posts and no doubt others have expressed the same sentiment. Your call to be supportive financially of good software that we use frequently is heard. But what of those, including myself, who HAVE supported these developers only to be left in the lurch. It tends to make one reluctant to support developers who will often quit their project. I suppose it's damned if you're the developer; damned if you're the supporter!

Funny you should write this article just now...I made a donation to Matt Kuse within the last week (generous by your "$5 or $10" suggestion). And it wasn't my first donation to Matt--as well as other developers who use this model. Thank you for bringing attention to this situation. We all need to support products we want to continue to be available to us.

Bob ... I am going to take a completely different take on the "Freeware" issue.

Yes, I have "donated" here and there, but, over all, when a developer makes the statement, that their product is Free, than to me ... It is Free! Plain and simple. If, they want to "earn money" to continue on with their development, than do what many others do ... Offer the previous version, as the "Free" version and only those who pay for Pro or Premium get the latest versions.

If, they are developers for an Open Source Core project, than that project is Free, period. Does anything created by Mozilla, cost you anything? Firefox is an Open Source Code project. Yes, Firefox does have Ads, so do you Bob, but, you haven't started charging for your newsletters. Should you ever feel the need to charge, I would be first in line to pay you!!!

Now, I did for Privazer. I knew right away, it was an excellent software. I didn't pay for CCleaner, until last year, I always used the "Free"version. As I did for all the years, I used either AVG or Avast! programs, until last year, when I decided I wanted to have the capability of more automation, in my scheduling and other areas.

The stupidest thing these developers could ever do, is to "complain" about an issue, they could have solved for themselves, by doing what many, many others have done ... Charge for services rendered. Offer the Free version, for a short length of time, before they would have to pay for the privilege of paying for the Full version. Or offer a Free version and a Pro/Premium version. To simple bitch and complain is so childish like.

I use Matt Kruse Social Fixer, on Facebook. Lately, he has not be updating, due to Facebook changing their codes so often, that he can't keep up. Plus, Matt's Facebook page was "taken down" for awhile, while he "gave in" to Facebook's demands. Please, tell me why I should pay Matt, under the circumstances? As someone else said, Matt only excepts "donations" through PayPal, BitCoin and Snail Mail. He doesn't want to pay for the use of either Credit Cards or Debit Cards, which is what I use. He easily could use a Payment Service, like some of the others do. I have purchased software, where Digital River and other payment sites, handle all of the financial issues and there I have always been able to use my Credit/Debit Card. Likewise, for the True Crypt developers.

Now, I do have a PayPal account and have NOT used it, in ages!!! Too many problems with PayPal and eBay, so, for my protection ... I don't use either, any more. From what I read, BitCoin is not doing well, either. As for Snail Mail, nope, haven't in a long, long time.

Bottom line, IF, you want your program to be your full time job ... Then charge, accordingly. If, you simply love to develop and use others, for feedback, then give it away, until it has become a good, solid program.

Sorry, Bob ... That is my take, on this issue.

To me FREE means FREE. As I age, and experience grows, I feel sick and tired of people who 'give' a 'gift', with strings attached. When somebody gives something for free they should understand the meaning of their actions, and not expect something in return.
If the motive is to 'throw' something out there for Free, in the hope/expectation of obtaining money from it, was it ever Free? Would feel like I was being baited, much like bait used in many slick Commercial Market strategies.
Hey people, look up the (real) definition of Free. I wont be changing what Free means to me just because somebody wants to redefine it to benefit themselves. Soon No could mean Yes.
Software asking for donations should be classed as Donourware, or turned into Trialware, perhaps.
Developers, if you are offering Freeware labelled software, have a hard think of the what and why you are doing so, and what you should expect in return from 'giving freely'!
All that said, Kudos and MUCH thanks to the developers of Freeware (and Donourware), you provide great help to MANY people, and keep at bay the appalling Financial Noose that I can imagine of a World of paid-only Software!
Much Thanks, always I hope!

It seems to me that many software/program developers emphasize the free use of their product, to induce a potential user to try it, and perhaps assist, inadvertently or directly, in the improvement and development of the product. I think that is fair, and generally understood; and sometime clearly stated with the launching of so-called beta versions, or the like. I didn’t fully understand the tenuous nature of some developers to stay afloat with regard to denotations. It seems to me, that fairly recently, more developers have shown the actual amount of donations received, and the target necessary to stay viable; or at the least, I believe this strategy, and others, are worthy of consideration. IMHO, this is a tricky business because a company or developer can provide false information as to the exact amounts of their current donations. If a kind of ‘clearing house’ for donations is established, that is trusted by all concerned, this issue can be certainly improved.

Obviously developers/companies have failed to come up with a business plan that provides more disclosure, relative to the financial needs necessary to sustain their ‘free’ product/s. Offering and presenting a free program, and at the same time asking for donations requires special marketing skills, as well as clarity, and honesty. I read Bob’s informed article and thought; who knew. Perhaps, and much earlier; and better integrated into their business practices, if TrueCrypt’s developers had better marketing skills, and articulated their needs with language that displayed the fairness, and benefit of supporting a great product that would otherwise discontinue, we would not be reading this article; at least not for the present focus. Bob’s article is crucial in its own right.

Bob, you seem to imply; if TrueCrypt had offered a paid version of their software, that this option alone might have been sufficient to sustain them financially. Do you think that is a better option than efforts to seek, and secure donations? I offer these thoughts for your consideration. Thank you.

No, it is not theft by any definition of the word. The term "FREE" means exactly that .. free. If there are any conditions such as "free with a purchase of #100 of other product", "free with a donation" or anything else "free with xyz..." it is not in any sense of the word .. free. Free means gift, no charge, gratis, no tip, no conditions, just a straight forward "Here, I made this for you, please enjoy". Now should you donate?? If you want to and you CAN (even $5 donations have to be made judiciously by some with little means) then yes you should donate if you find that the product has value and you want to support a creative and talented coder.

But FREE MEANS FREE ... and there are no gradations of free, it is or it isn't,

I am going to let the great keepass.info site be my mouthpiece on this one:

"Is it really free?
Yes, KeePass is really free, and more than that: it is open source (OSI certified). You can have a look at its full source and check whether the encryption algorithms are implemented correctly.

As a cryptography and computer security expert, I have never understood the current fuss about the open source software movement. In the cryptography world, we consider open source necessary for good security; we have for decades. Public security is always more secure than proprietary security. It's true for cryptographic algorithms, security protocols, and security source code. For us, open source isn't just a business model; it's smart engineering practice.
Bruce Schneier, Crypto-Gram 1999/09/15"
Pasted from

Good article, Bob, needed saying. The comment from someone that e.g. radio stations shouldn't have to rely on donations is a) irrelevant (as different kind of product, ergo different user benefits and therefore probably different demand-supply-payment structure) and b) ignores question of what they should rely on.

AS small effort to catch up with missed donations, have sent 2 granola bars - happy munching

I am surprised that nobody in this discussion has mentioned Heartbleed. Heartbleed is the media's name for a small coding error in a piece of freeware called OpenSSL. Businesses large and small relied on OpenSSL for security, but contributed nothing to support its development.

I encourage all to read this eloquent eWeek story on the subject:

http://www.eweek.com/security/heartbleed-openssl-bug-reveals-the-true-cost-of-open-source-software.html

So true. It is like trying to shop locally, not going to the next city's mall, or when you want to buy something fast you find the local store has closed down due to slow business.

I appreciate Bob also. Anyone who does so has the opportunity to show their appreciation and buy Bob a Snickers Bar or even an Audi TT Coupe :-) via his Buy Bob a Snickers link above these posts.

Please keep up the great work Bob, you are my "go to" guy on internet questions.

Free is free, however, if I like the free program and a paid version with enhanced features is offered, I will pay for the enhanced version. Truecrypt's script kiddies could have done the same.

I was deeply offended by the actions of the Truecrypt parents. I still run 7.1.a, however, I now encrypt the 7.1.a encryption results with Axcrypt. That's right, a double encryption process rolled into a script file. Then the encrypted files are stored on a virtual drive that can be shared on line with a public/private hash component. The weak link? Bob knows.

There are numerous free encryption programs as good as Truecrypt. If you are truely paranoid, multilevel encryption will enhance your perceived security. I doubt however that the NSA is really interested in my Home depot shopping lists.