SUMware Premium join:2002-05-21
| Disk encryption may not be secure enough From C|Net News February 21, 2008 - quote: Computer scientists have discovered a novel way to bypass the encryption used in programs like Microsoft's BitLocker and Apple's FileVault and view the contents of supposedly secure files.
In a paper [pdf] published on Thursday that could prompt a rethinking of how to protect sensitive data, the researchers describe how they can extract the contents of a computer's memory and discover the secret encryption key used to scramble files.
"There seems to be no easy remedy for these vulnerabilities," the researchers say. "Simple software changes are likely to be ineffective; hardware changes are possible but will require time and expense; and today's Trusted Computing technologies appear to be of little help because they cannot protect keys that are already in memory. The risk seems highest for laptops, which are often taken out in public in states that are vulnerable to our attacks. These risks imply that disk encryption on laptops may do less good than widely believed."
It's complicated, so read the article and pdf. | |
|
 OneHeart
join:2002-02-20 | Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough TrueCrypt is also on the list. | |
|
 |  SUMware Premium join:2002-05-21
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by OneHeart :TrueCrypt is also on the list. Yes. said by C|Net : The researchers say their technique works against Apple's FileVault, the BitLocker Drive Encryption feature included in the Enterprise and Ultimate versions of Windows Vista, the open-source product TrueCrypt, and the dm-crypt subsystem built into Linux kernels starting with 2.6.
| |
|
  AB Premium join:2006-04-04 Leesburg, VA
| Concerns about this very thing when using WDE (whole disk encryption) in the latest version of TrueCrypt. No easy solution, apparently.
I just use straight volume encryption with TrueCrypt, and have it set to not cache passwords. I also have Windows set to clear the pagefile on shutdown. I lose no sleep.
I'm confident that if anyone can find a way to fix this issue in WDE, it's the fine and brilliant folks at TrueCrypt. | |
|
 |  genewitch
join:2007-09-12 Klamath Falls, OR
·Charter Pipeline
·Suddenlink
·Cebridge Connections
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by AB :Concerns about this very thing when using WDE (whole disk encryption) in the latest version of TrueCrypt. No easy solution, apparently. I just use straight volume encryption with TrueCrypt, and have it set to not cache passwords. I also have Windows set to clear the pagefile on shutdown. I lose no sleep. I'm confident that if anyone can find a way to fix this issue in WDE, it's the fine and brilliant folks at TrueCrypt. I run my windows boxes without a pagefile. And i'd assume that ram clears itself on a power cycle? One would hope. if not, the first person to come up with ram that clears itself like that would make a ton of money (copyright 2008 Genewitch) | |
|
 |  |   jig
join:2001-01-05 Hacienda Heights, CA | Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough you can't copyright ideas. | |
|
 SUMware Premium join:2002-05-21
1 edit | said by C|Net : So what are the countermeasures? As I noted above, shutting down the system, zeroing memory on boot, and unmounting encrypted volumes are some options. The paper suggests others, including limiting booting from network or removable drives, better methods of putting a computer to sleep (perhaps involving encrypting the portions of memory with the keys to the file system), recomputing keys when they're needed to avoid keeping copies in memory, and hardware changes such as tamperproof or encrypting RAM.
There is one irony here. One Princeton Ph.D. student, Joseph Calandrino, is listed as having "performed this research while under appointment to the Department of Homeland Security." Because this research lets them bypass filesystem encryption in some cases, police agencies are the most obvious and immediate beneficiaries of this research.
As early as 1984, the FBI Laboratory began developing computer forensics hardware. And we know from the Scarfo, Forrester-Alba, and Boucher cases how intent federal police agencies are in trying to find ways to circumvent the privacy that encryption provides. If the feds didn't know about these techniques already--remember, they were years ahead of everyone else in inventing public key cryptography--today will be a very good day for Homeland Security.
[edit - added links] | |
|
  jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
3 edits | If they can get SYSTEM access to my computer when its running, well, ofcourse they can get the encryption keys currently in use. Nothing strange here. If SYSTEM could not get the keys, it could not decrypt anything I have in the system.
LESSON: Dont let anyone to get your box OWN3D while its running with crypto going on. And for havens sake, dont let anything write the encryption keys or passphrases on plaintext on hdd or other media!
OK, I forgot this portion of the news:"describes is how to supercool the RAM chips with a can of compressed air held upside-down. Then the cooled memory can be physically extracted and inserted in another computer owned by the attacker."
THIS is a problem. Serious problem. We are used to believe that RAM is pretty safe, since when power is down, its content is gone. Well, it isnt. If someone can clearly find and point out what memory types are not vulnerable, PLEASE POST IT UP. -- My computer security & privacy related homepage »www.markusjansson.net Use HushTools or GnuPG/PGP to encrypt any email before sending it to me to protect our privacy. | |
|
 The Snowman Premium join:2007-05-20 |
Question:
would encrpting the Paging File prior to shut-down/deletion be of any help to twart this ?
| |
|
 |  ihaddsl
join:2001-12-05 /dev/hda0
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by The Snowman : Question: would encrpting the Paging File prior to shut-down/deletion be of any help to twart this ? no, that does nothing for the RAM which is the attack vector. Similarly if you were to over write RAM on (graceful) shutdown, that doesn't help the case where the system is simply powered off forcibly. | |
|
  jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
| Is there any way to easily overwrite old data in RAM? I mean, starting computer up doesnt clear the whole RAM or does it? Booting some lame Knoppix wont consume enought RAM to clear it from sensitive data either? What can you do - except wait and hope for best? -- My computer security & privacy related homepage »www.markusjansson.net Use HushTools or GnuPG/PGP to encrypt any email before sending it to me to protect our privacy. | |
|
 |  mikenolan7 Premium join:2005-06-07 Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough Proves once again that physical access = owned.
There is a software memory wiper called SMEM. It was included in older versions of the System Rescue CD. I haven't downloaded a copy of System Rescue lately, so I don't know if it is still one of their packages. You would have to boot the System Rescue CD, then wipe your memory to go that route. I have used it when completely wiping a machine. In order for it to not stall and crash, I found that I had to set up a swap drive bigger than the amount of RAM in the machine (which System Rescue CD doesn't do on it's own). | |
|
 |  |  SUMware Premium join:2002-05-21
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by mikenolan7 :There is a software memory wiper called SMEM. It was included in older versions of the System Rescue CD. I haven't downloaded a copy of System Rescue lately, so I don't know if it is still one of their packages. Yes, thanks. SMEM is one of numerous integrated Linux commands.
From Sysresccd-manual-en Secure Deletion of Data quote: SMEM from the THC-Secure Deletion Tools ( see »www.thc.org/releases.php?q=delete ) does a secure overwriting of unused memory (RAM)
For more information about SMEM, SRC, SHRED, etc. see: Howto: Delete Files Permanently and Securely in Linux smem - Secure memory wiper; used to wipe traces of data from your computer's memory (RAM) | |
|
 |  |
 |  |  a_large_rock
join:2003-08-02 Markham, ON
·Cogeco Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by Anonymous_ :said by jansson_mark :Is there any way to easily overwrite old data in RAM? memtest86+ » www.memtest.org/will over write it with usesless crap Memtest86 on powerdown would work. I remember reading about a company 20 or 30 years ago using a watchdog card to whipe system memory on a powerdown/power failure. I'm not sure how easy that would be on a PC today. | |
|
 amungus Premium join:2004-11-26 America clubs:
| Very interesting article SUMware.
This little part here almost made me laugh: --- "Notably, using BitLocker with a Trusted Platform Module (TPM) sometimes makes it less secure, allowing an attacker to gain access to the data even if the machine is stolen while it is completely powered off."
page 13 - »citp.princeton.edu/pub/coldboot.pdf ---
I'm curious about one thing... why wouldn't Vista's "address space randomization" (whatever it's called...) do any good here? Should that not make it more difficult to find the keys? Could there be any way to sufficiently randomize it such that an analyst couldn't tell which pieces to put back together? Granted, that'd probably take some serious work, but it seems like it might be one way of making things more difficult... | |
|
 |   Killer Max
@rr.com
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by amungus :I'm curious about one thing... why wouldn't Vista's "address space randomization" (whatever it's called...) do any good here? Should that not make it more difficult to find the keys? Could there be any way to sufficiently randomize it such that an analyst couldn't tell which pieces to put back together? Granted, that'd probably take some serious work, but it seems like it might be one way of making things more difficult... Relax, it does.
Executives of Microsoft said BitLocker has a range of protection options that they referred to as good, better and best. .... ...The Princeton researchers acknowledged that in these advanced modes, BitLocker encrypted data could not be accessed using the vulnerability they discovered. »www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/techn···business | |
|
 |  |   jig
join:2001-01-05 Hacienda Heights, CA | Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough ya know, they say that, but my guess is that they haven't tried yet. | |
|
 |  |   jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
| said by Killer Max :
Executives of Microsoft said BitLocker has a range of protection options that they referred to as good, better and best. .... ...The Princeton researchers acknowledged that in these advanced modes, BitLocker encrypted data could not be accessed using the vulnerability they discovered. You completely misquoted them, perhaps on purpose? The original sayes: "That might include either a special U.S.B. hardware key, or a secure identification card that generates an additional key string. The Princeton researchers acknowledged that in these advanced modes, BitLocker encrypted data could not be accessed using the vulnerability they discovered."
Without additional USB-plugged encryption devices and or smart cards, the Bitlocker IS vulnerable, as the example video clearly showed. -- My computer security & privacy related homepage »www.markusjansson.net Use HushTools or GnuPG/PGP to encrypt any email before sending it to me to protect our privacy. | |
|
  jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland | Easiest way to clear and wipe RAM is to reboot and let BIOS do the "Power-On Self Test" (POST). It will read/write whole RAM three times. End of game. | |
|
 |   Anon users
@anonymouse.org
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough What's worse IS some new machines HAVE so-called Turbo flash memory installed AND some new HDs HAVE flash memory bundled with their magnetic dishes... Those are the Dream machines for your adversary...PowerDown won't help... 'They' just read it OUT from the FLASH MEMORY!!! | |
|
 |  |   Anon users
@anonymouse.org
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough After reading the coldboot pdf, the best combo to combat this side-channel attack is STILL 'a Laptop running WDE with Truecrypt 5.0a' 
Imagine 'They' break in with WMD pointing to your head and You SHOULD HAVE unplugged your machine, what should 'they' do??? Rapidly remove your RAM from your machine and put it in a liquid Nitrogen container. Now that's the point why LAPTOP is better!!! Get a laptop that needs screws to replace RAM!!! Laptop motherboard is much hotter than your DESKTOP pc, at least 50 C, data in RAM be GONE in 60 SECONDS!!!
Also, figure 5 in the pdf is an overstated example. a key is just 32byte long and the key schedule a little bit longer. While our cognitive skill let us visualize 'the lady', doesn't mean 'they' can construct a key with 45-50 bit loss, come on!!!
So Dump your copy of PGP; Use WDE with Truecrypt 5.0a!!! The Tide HAS CHANGED  | |
|
 |   HA Nut Premium join:2004-05-13 USA
| said by jansson_mark :Easiest way to clear and wipe RAM is to reboot and let BIOS do the "Power-On Self Test" (POST). It will read/write whole RAM three times. End of game. To make sure a daft person like me understands... if a user cold boots, allows the PC to go through the normal BIOS POST test, and then does a shutdown without entering any passwords, would the RAM be flushed of any clues? I assume a re-boot would NOT be good enough, since the POST is not necessarily ran? | |
|
 |  |  dave Premium,MVM join:2000-05-04 not in ohio
·Verizon Online DSL
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by HA Nut :To make sure a daft person like me understands... if a user cold boots, allows the PC to go through the normal BIOS POST test, and then does a shutdown without entering any passwords, would the RAM be flushed of any clues? I assume a re-boot would NOT be good enough, since the POST is not necessarily ran? Yes, but leaving your PC powered off for 15 minutes before it gets stolen would seem to do the job just as well.
Which is to say, this is very interesting theoretically, but for most home users, I don't see any practical significance. We're talking about motivated attackers who have physical access to your computer and who arrive determined to capture your RAM content. Maybe law enforcement will come equipped for RAM transplants in some cases.
Even for the laptop-in-car case, it requires motivation and planning. I don't believe that is a factor in most such thefts. Or to put it another way, if you've got data that's worth someone doing RAM scavenging, you should think twice about whether it's appropriate to leave it on a laptop in your car.
Just think "data security requires physical security" and you're protected. This new attack drives another nail (well, perhaps just a wire brad) in the coffin of the idea that someone can have your computer and not have your data. | |
|
 |  |  |   Maxo Your tax dollars at work. Premium,VIP join:2002-11-04 Tallahassee, FL clubs:
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by dave :Yes, but leaving your PC powered off for 15 minutes before it gets stolen would seem to do the job just as well. Which is to say, this is very interesting theoretically, but for most home users, I don't see any practical significance. We're talking about motivated attackers who have physical access to your computer and who arrive determined to capture your RAM content. Maybe law enforcement will come equipped for RAM transplants in some cases. Even for the laptop-in-car case, it requires motivation and planning. I don't believe that is a factor in most such thefts. Or to put it another way, if you've got data that's worth someone doing RAM scavenging, you should think twice about whether it's appropriate to leave it on a laptop in your car. Just think "data security requires physical security" and you're protected. This new attack drives another nail (well, perhaps just a wire brad) in the coffin of the idea that someone can have your computer and not have your data. I think this is important for assessing your risk. If you are Joe Shmoe like someone like me is, who has encrypted their data, which contains nothing more than some family pictures and school work, so if the laptop gets stolen they don't get that stuff, this isn't something you need to worry about. If someone happens to swipe my laptop it's unlikely that the person is going to be a security expert who has in depth knowledge of cracking encryption. It'll probably be some punk who saw a chance at a free laptop that they can sell for a couple hundred. When they can't get it to boot, they'll probably just wipe it and start with a fresh, unencrypted, operating system. However, if you are a spy carying state secrets, this is something you may want to be very aware of. Of course, if you are such a person and you actually leave your laptop in a position to be stolen, you are a complete idiot. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  dave Premium,MVM join:2000-05-04 not in ohio | Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough If, however, like Markus you're worrying about Vay Eck attacks through the walls of your house, then I imagine you'll be taking this threat very seriously. | |
|
 |  |   jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
| said by HA Nut :if a user cold boots, allows the PC to go through the normal BIOS POST test, and then does a shutdown without entering any passwords, would the RAM be flushed of any clues? I assume a re-boot would NOT be good enough, since the POST is not necessarily ran? "Cold boot" doesnt have anything to do with POST. You set the computers BIOS so that every time computer is started up POST is done, clearing the RAM from all traces.
Ofcourse if you just shut down the computer, the POST is not done until the computer is next time started up. Thats why you should not shut down directly, but rather reboot (to BIOS state, no reason to start Truecrypt etc. WDE), so that POST can be run BEFORE you actually shut down the computer.
Just do it. | |
|
 |  ihaddsl
join:2001-12-05 /dev/hda0
·Comcast
| said by jansson_mark :Easiest way to clear and wipe RAM is to reboot and let BIOS do the "Power-On Self Test" (POST). It will read/write whole RAM three times. End of game. sure, but how many people are going to
after each shutdown, reboot and let post run (*WITHOUT*) loading the disk encyption keys again when the OS boots up?
It'll work for the truly paranoid, but not for the average laptop user, who is most vulnerable to these types of exploits | |
|
 |  |   jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by ihaddsl :sure, but how many people are going to after each shutdown, reboot and let post run (*WITHOUT*) loading the disk encyption keys again when the OS boots up? If they are smart they WILL do it. It they are stupid, no encryption is going to protect them anyway, so... | |
|
 |  |  |  ihaddsl
join:2001-12-05 /dev/hda0
·Comcast
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by jansson_mark :said by ihaddsl :sure, but how many people are going to after each shutdown, reboot and let post run (*WITHOUT*) loading the disk encyption keys again when the OS boots up? If they are smart they WILL do it. It they are stupid, no encryption is going to protect them anyway, so... smartSavvy
The majority of users who are vulnerable to these types of attacks (mobile corporate workers) who have wde issued by corporate on their laptops are not going to have any idea that this is an issue unless corporate steps up and educates them on this (and even then getting people to put this into practice seems difficult at best) | |
|
 SUMware Premium join:2002-05-21 | Video presentation available here. | |
|
  major marco Res Firma Mitescere Nescit Premium join:2003-02-13 Stepford, CA clubs: | Yeah, I saw this over at SANS. Swa Frantzen did a write up on it. | |
|
 The Snowman Premium join:2007-05-20 |
Finally found time to read the pdf.....and to very quickly sum my thoughts up on this.......I definitely wont be lossing any sleep over this.....not so much as a wink. | |
|
  hpguru Curb Your Dogma Premium join:2002-04-12
| This has been a known issue for a long time. I first learned of it back in the '90s but I don't remember exactly. As I recall, most any good ram checker will mitigate the problem and some computer BIOS software can check ram during POST, over-writing it with zeros and ones. -- 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF | |
|
 |   jig
join:2001-01-05 Hacienda Heights, CA
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough almost everyone has post checks turned off, and further, almost no-one does more than sleep, not power off.
in addition, if you swipe the whole laptop and it's in sleep mode, all you need to do is bring it to another machine where you've turned off all post clearing and swap the memory (frozen, if you want). | |
|
 dave Premium,MVM join:2000-05-04 not in ohio
·Verizon Online DSL
·Verizon FIOS
| This is excellent news. When I were a lad, you used to be able to power-off a computer, leave it for a day, power it up again, and continue running, since the core memory would have retained its content without power applied. Maybe those halcyon days will return! | |
|
 |
 mikenolan7 Premium join:2005-06-07 Torrance, CA | Two important lessons here for most of us: 1. don't travel with your laptop in sleep or hibernate. Shut it down. 2. don't ever leave your laptop running in a public place and step away (duh). | |
|
  Shamayim I already have a Messiah. Premium join:2002-09-23 | Can't wait to read Bruce Schneier's evaluation of this attack. | |
|
 mikenolan7 Premium join:2005-06-07 Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| I don't remember where I got it, but I have a cheap little two piece laptop travel security item. You put one piece in the bag with the laptop, and the other in your pocket. If you get more than a few feet away, it starts beeping at you. I would bet that more laptops get left somewhere, and "found", than get stolen. | |
|
  swhx7 Premium join:2006-07-23 Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| An encryption co-processor, with tamper-resistance like the TPM, would avert this problem.
Trusted Computing hardware, in the form of Trusted Platform Modules (TPMs) [22] is now deployed in some personal computers. Though useful against some attacks, todays Trusted Computing hardware does not appear to prevent the attacks we describe here. Deployed TCG TPMs do not implement bulk encryption. Instead, they monitor boot history in order to decide (or help other machines decide) whether it is safe to store a key in RAM. If a software module wants to use a key, it can arrange that the usable form of that key will not be stored in RAM unless the boot process has gone as expected [31]. However, once the key is stored in RAM, it is subject to our attacks. TPMs can prevent a key from being loaded into memory for use, but they cannot prevent it from being captured once it is in memory. But imagine something like the TPM, but designed for bulk encryption and decryption instead of DRM. As with the TPM, the key could stay in the chip and only values derived by use of the key would come out. Even within the chip, an encrypted version of the key could be useless without a passphrase. But the hardware owner would have the ability to read/write the key by special procedures (thus avoiding the evils of Trusted Computing), and it would be designed to encrypt/decrypt unlimited data at high speed, offloading this work from the main processor. It could be designed such that the time to break into it without triggering a self-destruct mechanism would far exceed any volatile memory retention; and the non-volatile data would be useless without the passphrase.
I know that devices similar to this exist today - e.g. Intel puts an IPSec co-processor on some NICs. It could become a widespread security mechanism in future. | |
|
 |   jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by swhx7 :An encryption co-processor, with tamper-resistance like the TPM, would avert this problem. Is it just me, but I from TPM I only get two particular words into my mind: Hardware backdoor.
I wouldnt trust any TPM to store my encryption keys. It just seems so perfect place to put all kinds of funky hardware backdoors and tempest-enhancing features in that TPM. No thanks. | |
|
  refused
join:2005-10-10 Redding, CA
| quote: To reconstruct an AES key, we treat the decayed key schedule as an error correcting code and find the most likely values for the original key. Applying this method to keys with 10% of bits decayed, we can reconstruct nearly any 128-bit AES key within a few seconds. We have devised reconstruction techniques for AES, DES, and RSA keys, and we expect that similar approaches will be possible for other cryptosys- 2 tems; we have correctly recovered keys from several popular disk encryption products.
wow -- "Ubuntu" - an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". | |
|
 premio
join:2002-02-17 Antelope, CA | WOW! wonder if GuardianEdge is vulnerable. I never realized these software products store their keys in memory that is so easily obtainable. | |
|
 |  darthboy
join:2007-12-31 Canada
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough With regards to the posts saying that a computer's POST will wipe out RAM contents:
that's presuming the malicious person plugs the RAM into another computer. Surely there're standalone devices that are able to extract the RAM contents? Engineers, anyone? It probably depends on how much the data's worth before anyone would try this.
However, if a malicious person has physical access to your computer, it's no longer your computer anywayz.  | |
|
 |  |   jansson_mark Markus Jansson Premium join:2001-08-05 Finland
| Re: Disk encryption may not be secure enough said by darthboy : With regards to the posts saying that a computer's POST will wipe out RAM contents: that's presuming the malicious person plugs the RAM into another computer.
Actually, its presuming that user has time to restart computer and do the POST, BEFORE attacker can get physical access to the RAM chips in the computer.
quote: Surely there're standalone devices that are able to extract the RAM contents?
Yes, ofcourse.
quote: However, if a malicious person has physical access to your computer, it's no longer your computer anywayz. 
That is poor quote. The point of encryption is to ensure that even if someone graps your computer, they cannot get the files. If you can have total physical security of your computer, there is no reason to use whole disk encryption or any other file encryption in the first place! | |
|
 |
|
 |