Score:1

How does the plausible deniability used by TrueCrypt work mathematically?

sa flag

I have been unable to find any mathematical explanations on how TrueCrypt's plausible deniability encryption works, when using TC containers.

Would someone be able to provide a mathematical walkthrough of how it works?

Other encryption systems implementing things in a similar way is outside the scope of my question. Also, whilst I have some experience in the theoretical side of cryptography, the simpler the explanation the better.

kodlu avatar
sa flag
The description https://www.truecrypt71a.com/documentation/plausible-deniability/ is bereft of mathematics. The claim of plausible deniability does not rest on any mathematics as far as I can see.
Score:0
sa flag

The link https://www.truecrypt71a.com/documentation/plausible-deniability/ says

Although file-hosted TrueCrypt volumes (containers) do not contain any kind of “signature” either (until decrypted, they appear to consist solely of random data), they cannot provide this kind of plausible deniability, because there is practically no plausible explanation for the existence of a file containing solely random data. However, plausible deniability can still be achieved with a file-hosted TrueCrypt volume (container) by creating a hidden volume within it (see above).

which seems to imply that file containers DO NOT provide the absolute plausible deniability claimed for the other use case.

securityauditor avatar
sa flag
I think you are looking into things a bit too deep. TrueCrypt has plausible deniability, which means there is one password but maybe a second secret password. Is there any technical writeup as to how this is possible? I know about plausible deniability from my time playing with the One Time Pad, but I would guess TrueCrypt works differently...?
I sit in a Tesla and translated this thread with Ai:

mangohost

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.