TrueLock and VeilType now approach the same encrypted-capsule workflow from two sides.
VeilType protects text, voice, photos, video and files before they enter the messenger. TrueLock focuses on protected capsules and controlled opening after content has been shared.
The integration question is not whether both products can encrypt. It is whether a person can create a capsule on Android, send it through an ordinary channel, and open it predictably on another device without a proprietary cloud or account.
We are choosing the next compatibility run:
Hi Product Hunt 👋 maker here.
TrueLock is an offline-first way to share a single encrypted capsule file (.cfcaps) where the access rules travel with the file — so you can send it over any channel, but it only opens when the rules match.
Rules (AND/OR):
time window
geo radius (Windows geo can be confirmed via phone relay / QR proof)
password (Argon2id)
visual key (up to 5 images, can be split across people)
optional device checks (when available)
Capsules can include text + attachments/media, voice messages, and an in-app photo series.
Quick question: which rule would you actually use first?
A) “send now, open later” (time)
B) “open only at this place” (geo)
C) “team unlock” (visual key)
Reply with A/B/C + 1 sentence use case — I’ll prioritize the most requested workflows.
Hey Product Hunt 👋 maker here.
A bit more detail for anyone curious:
TrueLock creates a self-contained .cfcaps file: encrypted payload + embedded policy (rules travel with the file).
Rules can be combined with AND/OR: time window, geo radius (Windows via phone relay / QR proof), password (Argon2id), visual key (up to 5 images), optional device checks.
Capsules can include text + attachments/media, voice messages, and an in-app photo series.
Current clients: Android + Windows.
If you tell me your use case, I can suggest the simplest rule setup (and I’ll use feedback to refine onboarding).