Specificity, Diversity, and Simplicity: TrueCrypt vs Bitdefender

I have been asked to assess two computer security platforms - TrueCrypt and BitDefender - Two pieces of software with deeply divergent design philosophies. The development of TrueCrypt is decentralized; the source code is available, and development is lively and collaborative. TrueCrypt is designed merely to provide disk encryption of various sorts- it uses excellent cryptographic algorithms; Twofish, Serpent, and AES, hash functions; SHA-512, and Whirlpool- This program is made to provide simplicity in encryption, but it does not skimp on features such as quick, specific encryption and full-disk preboot encryption. The beauty of the encryption support is that it allows one to configure specific standards for your environment, depending on individual knowledge and the particulars of your system. One of the other major benefits with TrueCrypt is in its hidden volume cryptography - this feature allows users under pressure a measure of “plausible deniability” in case of a threat agent demanding data - the user can pretend the partition does not exist.

     The Development of BitDefender is Hierarchical; it is produced by Softwin, a Romanian company. BitDefender is a for-profit suite, and because of this, there are many things this program does; including Virus-Scanning, Virus Protection, Firewalling, Performance Optimization, Privacy Control, and Backup, as well as Sector and full-disk encryption. This abundance of features is considered by Softwin to be a “Total Security Suite”, and this no doubt increases the initial ease of selecting software, in a way, it must seem like one stop shopping - why not simply have a chart with features act as your guide when selecting software, choosing the more feature-rich one in the end? It is because when software developers focus on a few select features instead of trying to provide a complete solution, it allows them to design better software.

     Some professionals feel that simplicity and diversity are mutually exclusive - they are not. This is because when the programs you work with have very specific functions, they need to work with other, specific programs. If programs are well written, then integration between programs should not cause problems. Running data, authentication, and user input through as many levels as possible is good for system protection - it may not be good for system performance, but the trade-off is worth it if your data is worth protecting. At some point, you have to ask the question - how much time, effort, and resources do I use to protect my system? If you wish to protect your information in the best possible way, my strategy should be de facto standard.