this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
92 points (97.9% liked)

Privacy

31954 readers
616 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Isn't it an open secret that powerful entities (like spying institutions) can get into pretty much every system if they have physical access? Why is this not plausible

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 12 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Because they would have to possess technology that doesn't exist in order to circumvent actual encryption without a key.

If I adequately encrypt my own data, and keep the keys a secret, I could hand my hard drive off to Microsoft and they could spend billions running all their AI clusters trying to crack it, and it would be a futile endeavor.

If the government had the technology to bypass encryption or quickly and inexpensively crack it, they'd use it for a whole lot more than unlocking smartphones. They could basically control the flow of Bitcoin on a whim with such tech.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I am aware that there are secure encryptions, but android isn't hardware encrypted isn't it? Haven't used google android for a while, but no encryption was one of the reasons I moved away from it.

No idea about apple, but longer startup times for storage encryption doesn't seem like a very apple thing to do

Also phones are so seldom turned off, and if the system is running storage encryption becomes less of a concern as the key is somewhere in the ram

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

For a few years now Android has been encrypting storage. Not the SD card, and maybe not even the internal storage (which on android land means your files that you can access with a file manager without root) but I'm not sure about that part. The app's main data is surely encrypted though, when the security menu in the settings says so.

But, there's a loophole. Or two.
The parent commenter said, actual encryption can't be broken without keys.
First, the keys are in the black box TPM of the phone.
Second, how do you verify that the phone uses an effective and unmodified encryption algorithm, and also that keys are never leaked anywhere?
And now consider that popular brands have been bundling malware for years, some of which cannot really be uninstalled either.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah TPM chip encryption is mostly not secure (at least not by simply existing, as an encryption with with a strong password that only exists in your head is) I've seen a german youtuber crack the bitlocker TPM encryption of a windows think pad, I have no doubt big companies can do this for the 3-4 most used TPM chips in android phones

And if you got the device and can damage it, even if you couldn't crack the chip, putting the silicia under an electron microscope is always an option (lots of actual manhours of actual experts needed, but you could charge the client heavily to compensate)

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No. The TPM was not cracked. The communication was sniffed, which is unencrypted. This requires a Device to be modified and then successfully unlocked to get exploited also this does not affect devices where the tpm is integrated in the SoC.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You are right in a sense of: If the TPM holding the keys were itself encrypted with a strong password, this would be still be considered secure. You are wrong in the sense of: lenovo sells a device, tells its users its encrypted, their data is safe. None can steal their data

in reality the data can easily be accessed, which could be considered as "cracking the device/bypassing the encryption" because what lenovo prevent was someone ripping your ssd l, but not just decrypt it because the encryption was not implemented securely.

I don't want to debate the security of a luks Linux volume or veracrypt windows laptop, (even though even those are in theory vulnerable to highly targeted and skilled things like cleverly exploiting e.g the logofail bug)

My point isn't that there are no ways to have a secure system, my point is that the percentage of truly secure systems is low

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The device needs to be physically accessed and modified and then unlocked in order to exploit it.

Yes it is a vulnerability but with those steps you could also just solder a keylogger to the keyboard.

Similar outcome.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The device needs to be physically accessed and modified and then unlocked in order to exploit it.

Exactly the service the company offers

Yes it is a vulnerability but with those steps you could also just solder a keylogger to the keyboard.

This is not a hot take at all!

Sure thing, it is equally hard to confiscate/steal a device (if the user notices you just shrug) and open it no user input required And Stealing the device without the user noticing Solder a keylogger, get it back to the user without them noticing and having them put in their password, then steal the device again so you can use said passwort

I totally agree

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No. You watch too many Movies. Yes there were attempts from state sponsored actors to weaken encryption algorithms. But is encryption easy to crack? No.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Dude what encryption are you talking about? Hardware storage encryption is just by now getting more widely adapted, the phone I used till a year ago didn't even support any encryption.

Sure, aes-256 with secure password only stored in your mind is quasi 100℅ safe, but that is not how most devices handle their "encryption".

If the key for the encryption is on the device, and either stored in an unencrypted TPM or unencrypted storage, its not a matter if breaking the encryption (quite impossible) but breaking the software/hardware (quite possible for someone with good enough forensics and skilled programmers)

Also also: encryption only helps if the device is off, which is seldom the case with phones.

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Isn't it an open secret that powerful entities (like spying institutions) can get into pretty much every system if they have physical access? Why is this not plausible

You stated in your original comment: "pretty much every system". So no, any modern phone if android or iOS is by default encrypted.

If the key for the encryption is on the device, and either stored in an unencrypted TPM or unencrypted storage, its not a matter if breaking the encryption (quite impossible) but breaking the software/hardware (quite possible for someone with good enough forensics and skilled programmers)

TPMs are by design encrypted.

Keys are not stored unencrypted at least not when you encrypt your storage with modern solutions and set it up reasonably. You use either your TPM to store the key or store it on the drive and have it encrypted by itself or use a KDF.

Also also: encryption only helps if the device is off, which is seldom the case with phones.

No this assumption is wrong. You still would need to circumvent the Login into the device which is mostly secured by a pin or password or biometrics.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you think TPMs are always encrypted, a key can be encrypted "with itself" and still be any use to you and android system pin is secure you are right. Might also believe in santa

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you think TPMs are always encrypted, a key can be encrypted "with itself" and still be any use to you and android system pin is secure you are right. Might also believe in santa

Not sure what you are rambling about the TPM.

Then prove that the Lockscreen is insecure.

[–] Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How do you think encryption works?

What do you think does a lockscreen?

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How do you think encryption works?

What do you think does a lockscreen?

As i guessed. You are evading the question by again babbling nonsense and questioning my knowledge instead of actually proving anything you are saying.

You have shown that you have a bad understanding of what you are actually talking about (see the 'cracked' TPM discussion) and constantly shifting the discussion away from what you are saying : "Basically every device can be accessed without major problems" and what i am trying to explain to you.

You are acting in bad faith.

Bye

You keep referring to concepts like "Keys encrypted with itself" "Tpm are by design encrypted"

When you don't really say anything from value.

Not every "encryption" is the same.

When we talk about safe encryption we talk about file system level encryption of a system with safe algorithms like aes and a long enough random password (the key). this is safe.

If you store the key unencrypted on your phone, this encryption is no longer safe.

If you don't know the 16 random digit key it HAS to be on the phone and it CAN'T be encrypted "by itself" because you would no longer have any means to decrypt it.

It could be encrypted with a pin, but again, then its only as strong as the pin, and I don't know how long an only numeric pin would need to be to withstand modern brute forcing, but I doubt a relevant percentage of people have that kind of pin.

You can't explain how this would be safe, so you just come at me with russels teapot and say "well you can't prove its not safe" (which is true because I'm no security expert, but someone with enough knowledge could certainly) and lash out at me "acting in bad faith" because I don't jump through your hoops of passive aggressive misunderstanding.

All I can do is refer to experts, who found things like CVE-2022-20465 - a bug which allowed lockscreen bypass.

As you could have googled that yourself, but you ask this just to throw me off.

But if you want to keep using your google android and bitlocker win and feel safe, its not my problem.