Products > Security

Storage encryption

<< < (3/3)

golden_labels:

--- Quote from: Zucca on June 01, 2023, 02:29:38 am ---Why having an extra layer of security if it is not needed?
--- End quote ---
With that mindset, answering is hard. You can’t expect anybody to deliver an argument, that contradicts your original assumption in a model based on that assumption.


--- Quote from: Zucca on June 01, 2023, 02:29:38 am ---And yes even if the performance losses are small, they are just irritating if not necessary.
--- End quote ---
For a few years now it’s likely your HDD or SSD does full-disk encryption anyway. You can only choose if you want to use your own key or not, and if you want to use an auditable solution or trust the vendor.


--- Quote from: Zucca on June 01, 2023, 02:29:38 am ---BTW now that I am upgrading my workstation box, having not encrypted storage make the d(s)ata transfer between boxes a piece of cake.
--- End quote ---
How does encryption affect that process?


--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 01, 2023, 02:48:15 am ---Do you encrypt your backups?
--- End quote ---
If the content was encrypted originally, so are backups. Yes.


--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 01, 2023, 02:48:15 am ---What about the keys?
--- End quote ---
Yes, I do. The ultimate key is a 64-bit passphrase. This can be extracted using rubber-hose cryptoanalysis, a keylogger or social engineering attacks. 23 bits are backed up in cleartext, in case my memory fails to the point I should need a hint. If even the hint fails, not being able to perform decryption is going to be the least of my problems.


--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 01, 2023, 02:48:15 am ---:popcorn:
--- End quote ---
Did you want to make some statement with “:popcorn:”? If yes, perhaps be more explicit: makes responding much easier.

Nominal Animal:

--- Quote from: Zucca on June 01, 2023, 02:29:38 am ---Thanks everybody, everything seems reasonable for me too now.
Why having an extra layer of security if it is not needed?
--- End quote ---
In my case, my own data and stuff isn't worth encrypting, but when I'm helping others, I take all the precautions of not leaking their data, regardless of whether they consider it worth encrypting or not.

If I keep any backups of others' data during helping – I delete the backups always afterwards –, I do it on physically secured external storage.


--- Quote from: Zucca on June 01, 2023, 02:29:38 am ---And yes even if the performance losses are small, they are just irritating if not necessary.
--- End quote ---
In my case, even on a fast SSD, it is neglible.  That is, I cannot tell whether the data I'm accessing is encrypted or not.

My own backups are mostly source code and emails, and I don't encrypt those.  (Any emails with proprietary information are moved to the abovementioned external storage and deleted from my mailbox.)

Why so "paranoid", one might ask?  Because it is a very easy way to completely ensure I'm not the weakest link, security wise.  Nowadays it is second nature, and not a bother at all.  When traveling, I always use a secondary laptop (one I can afford to lose) with a pre-prepared, initially completely wiped one, that contains only the minimal amount of information I'll need.  This also means that if e.g. border control or customs wants full access to it, I have no problem with that.

I also keep my passwords in plaintext in a 2D array of characters, where the password is read in a certain orientation (not in a straight line in any specific direction or starting from a specific position).  The width and height can even be smaller than the length of the password.  While this is not "secure" in the way encryption is secure, it is sufficient to stop any casual intrusion.  Anyone with the werewithal or resources, can always just put a gun to my head and force me to decrypt the data, so there is no such thing as absolute security.

On servers, my preferred security measures step up a couple of notches, though, but that's a separate topic.  I'll just mention that there, leaving an immutable audit log of privileged accesses (traceable to a human account) is paramount.  Missteps, excesses and intrusions will happen because we're human, and when they do, an immutable audit log is often the only thing to find out what happened, and to deal appropriately with the people involved.  (Many CxO's hate this, because it makes it impossible to throw a scapegoat underling under the bus when they themselves err.)

elagergren:
Selectively encrypting things is more effort than it’s worth. Just encrypt everything.

DrGeoff:
Just use FIPS140-2 SED's and set the key to something other than the default key.
Everything is then encrypted on the drive using hardware/firmware on the drive controller.
There is no change in performance since the default key performs encryption of the contents anyway.
Need to erase the drive? Set a random key.

madires:
It depends on the risks involved. So I wouldn't say you should always encrypt your disks. But if there are good reasons to do so, then go for it. BTW, if you encrypt your data/disks then make sure that your family is able to access the data/disks in case anything bad happens to you.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page