Ah, so it did. But the buzzword flew right over my head, and the pages I viewed on the website didn't touch on the topic. (I see the link on the About page now).
I'm pretty confident I'm never going to review the code, and I think Heartbleed hammered the point home that availability for public review isn't at all the same thing as public review. Since I have no need for an multi-platform encrypted container, I think I'll stay with the OS X sparsebundle. On Apr 17, 2014, at 9:49 PM, Jean-Christophe Helary <jean.christophe.hel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Apr 18, 2014, at 12:56, Rian Hunter <r...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > >> Personally I store all my tax, legal, and medical documents in Safe. That's >> just me, Safe is GPL and comes with no warranty :) > > On Apr 18, 2014, at 13:34, Macs R We <macs...@macsrwe.com> wrote: > >>>> As a tool, it empowers more people to make their own cryptography >>>> decisions instead of having to rely on and trust proprietary solutions. >> >> So what makes your program non-proprietary? Are you publishing the source? >> If not, why would someone trust your package? > > > The mail said "Safe is GPL". > > The page has a link to github: > https://github.com/safeapp/safe > > > Jean-Christophe Helary > _______________________________________________ > MacOSX-talk mailing list > MacOSX-talk@omnigroup.com > http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-talk _______________________________________________ MacOSX-talk mailing list MacOSX-talk@omnigroup.com http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-talk
