Hey /g/ why don't we create some crypto locker malware that uses the built in Bitlocker drive encryption against the user?
Because that is against the law
>>54555372
Why would we do that?
Too easy to beat dumbass
>>54555372
it already exsists
Bitlocker is backdoored. The user could just send a FOIA request to the NSA and get the key back.
>>54555372
we're not bad people
Because unless you have an exploit to modify Group Policy and apply without rebooting, it wouldn't work for most computers/all old computers (you know, the people dumb enough to fall for this)? Oh wait, that makes too much sense, forget I said anything.
