• Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    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.

    • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      How high is the percentage of people using a 12 character key, not stored in the TPM but only in their mind to unlock their phones in your experience? I’m not arguing that Linux luks or aes-256 is not secure, I’m arguing that nearly nowhere it is implemented in a way where ONLY you hold the key ONLY in your mind.

      Encrypting something and putting the key on the storage is like locking the front door and put the key under the mat, if you have a TPM its like having it hidden somewhere on the property. Enough to keep your nosy aunt out, not enough to keep the police/mafia/big data out if they for some reason really want that information

    • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        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.

        • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            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.

            • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                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.

                • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  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