Good to know. I might change my protection method in future.
Currently I have about 20-30 private documents to protect so my very simple method will do the job.
But I hope my business will expand and soon zipping files might not be solution.
Never heard about this Macrium. I will read on it.
There was no mysterious problem with TrueCrypt. The message is more or less just a warning so user wouldn't be at risk of using a program that is no longer updated. There is a Tin Foil Hat rumor that they were forced to shutdown TrueCrypt because Snowden had used it on his computer and it couldn't be cracked. I have switched to VeraCrypt to keep copies of such things as our S.S. numbers, D.L. numbers and other personal info so I can have access to this info if needed but other people can't.
Accessing Bitlocker in another OS is one thing. I don't use it so I don't know if you can or not. What if for example someone is using Windows 10 Home and they need to encrypt something. How is Bitlocker going to Help? I'm not for or against any of these encryption programs. I'm just giving a what if example. :)
Really? Is that why when you go to the TrueCrypt page there is a giant red text at the top that says, quite explicitly "WARNING: using TrueCrypt is not secure". Do you believe yourself to be smarter than the authors?
By the way, more details from the Wikipedia page (which is inconsistent, about the subject).
VeraCrypt claims to have fixed these vulnerabilities, but obviously if these were the problems the original authors referred to they wouldn't have just abandoned the project as unfixable.According to a study released September 29, 2015, TrueCrypt includes two vulnerabilities in the driver that TrueCrypt installs on Windows systems allowing an attacker full system compromise
What's more, the only remaining original developer of TrueCrypt that has weighed in on the matter (Matthew Green) has refused to relicense the code under a real open source license (VeraCrypt's legality in this regard is questionable, because it's based on the TrueCrypt source and the license has been found to be questionable as to whether it legally allows modification), and believes that the original code should not be forked because of its inherent problems, and any person who wishes to pursue a new version should "start from scratch" in their words.
The OP's concern was if they used bitlocker to encrypt files and then later moved to home (or another OS) they couldn't access these encrypted files and that they would be lost.
This isn't the case - they could access them (so the documents wouldn't be lost) - they just could not encrypt new things.
For a user using Windows Home using bitlocker to encrypt things isn't an option. To encrypt using bitlocker you need Pro or Enterprise. although you can read/write bitlocker volumes from OSX or Linux using this GitHub - Aorimn/dislocker .
There is one slight caveat - some devices use device encryption which is based on bitlocker and this works in all Windows editions (including Home) to encrypt local fixed drives only. It has a whole list of pre-requisites and I don't know anything apart from Surface Pro line that uses it - but then I've not looked.
I still stand by my statement that it's a warning that TrueCrypt is unsafe to use because it is no longer being developed. And no I don't think I'm smarter than the author. I am smart enough to read and understand the warning. This right from the page "WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure as it may contain unfixed security issues". TrueCrypt . Wikipedia! Isn't that the website most people take with a grain of salt unless it says the same thing they are saying?
Quote