aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/FAQ
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorArno Wagner <wagner.arno@gmail.com>2012-08-24 17:02:59 +0200
committerArno Wagner <wagner.arno@gmail.com>2012-08-24 17:02:59 +0200
commitd58a5c8cae5206ae4ef42c5c049397e6c87a61e6 (patch)
treeeb9531a23b15f201dadc03696938669f711d0c27 /FAQ
parent1d5788f77942214706d39fd0fb79196ef127a8ab (diff)
downloadcryptsetup-d58a5c8cae5206ae4ef42c5c049397e6c87a61e6.tar.gz
synced with wiki
Diffstat (limited to 'FAQ')
-rw-r--r--FAQ78
1 files changed, 77 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/FAQ b/FAQ
index 2ec70e9..758a7d8 100644
--- a/FAQ
+++ b/FAQ
@@ -37,6 +37,11 @@ A. Contributors
such a disaster! In particular, make sure you have a current header
backup before doing any potentially dangerous operations.
+ SSDs/FLASH DRIVES: SSDs and Flash are different. Currently it is
+ unclear how to get LUKS or plain dm-crypt to run on them with the
+ full set of security features intact. This may or may not be a
+ problem, depending on the attacher model. See Section 5.17.
+
BACKUP: Yes, encrypted disks die, just as normal ones do. A full
backup is mandatory, see Section "6. Backup and Data Recovery" on
options for doing encrypted backup.
@@ -98,7 +103,7 @@ A. Contributors
This issue has been acknowledged by the Ubuntu dev team, see here:
http://launchpad.net/bugs/420080
- Update 7/2012: I am unsure whether this has been fixed bu now, best
+ Update 7/2012: I am unsure whether this has been fixed by now, best
be careful.
@@ -183,6 +188,10 @@ A. Contributors
* 2.1 What is the difference between "plain" and LUKS format?
+ First, unless you happen to understand the cryptographic background
+ well, you should use LUKS. It does protect the user from a lot of
+ common mistakes. Plain dm-crypt is for experts.
+
Plain format is just that: It has no metadata on disk, reads all
parameters from the commandline (or the defaults), derives a
master-key from the passphrase and then uses that to de-/encrypt
@@ -1061,6 +1070,73 @@ A. Contributors
foot, you can figure out how to do it yourself.
+ * 5.17 What about SSDs or Flash Drives?
+
+ The problem is that you cannot reliably erase parts of these
+ devices, mainly due to wear-leveling and possibly defect
+ management.
+
+ Basically, when overwriting a sector (of 512B), what the device
+ does is to move an internal sector (may be 128kB or even larger) to
+ some pool of discarded, not-yet erased unused sectors, take a
+ fresh empty sector from the empty-sector pool and copy the old
+ sector over with the changes to the small part you wrote. This is
+ done in some fashion so that larger writes do not cause a lot of
+ small internal updates.
+
+ The thing is that the mappings between outside-adressable sectors
+ and inside sectors is arbitrary (and the vendors are not talking).
+ Also the discarded sectors are not necessarily erased immediately.
+ They may linger a long time.
+
+ For plain dm-crypt, the consequences are that older encrypted data
+ may be lying around in some internal pools of the device. Thus may
+ or may not be a problem and depends on the application. Remember
+ the same can happen with a filesystem if consecutive writes to the
+ same area of a file can go to different sectors.
+
+ However, for LUKS, the worst case is that key-slots and LUKS
+ header may end up in these internal pools. This means that password
+ management functionality is compromised (the old passwords may
+ still be around, potentially for a very long time) and that fast
+ erase by overwriting the header and key-slot area is insecure.
+
+ Also keep in mind that the discarded/used pool may be large. For
+ example, a 240GB SSD has about 16GB of spare area in the chips that
+ it is free to do with as it likes. You would need to make each
+ individual key-slot larger than that to allow reliable overwriting.
+ And that assumes the disk thinks all other space is in use.
+ Reading the internal pools using forensic tools is not that hard,
+ but may involve some soldering.
+
+ What to do?
+
+ If you trust the device vendor (you probably should not...) you can
+ try an ATA "secure erase" command for SSDs. That does not work for
+ USB keys though. And if it finishes after a few seconds, it was
+ possibly faked by the SSD.
+
+ If you can do without password management and are fine with doing
+ physical destruction for permenently deleting data (allways after
+ one or several full overwrites!), you can use plain dm-crypt or
+ LUKS.
+
+ If you want or need the original LUKS security features to work,
+ you can use a detached LUKS header and put that on a conventional,
+ magnetic disk. That leaves potentially old encrypted data in the
+ pools on the disk, but otherwise you get LUKS with the same
+ security as on a magnetic disk.
+
+ If you are concerned about your laptop being stolen, you are likely
+ fine using LUKS on an SSD. An attacker would need to have access
+ to an old passphrase (and the key-slot for this old passphrase
+ would actually need to still be somewhere in the SSD) for your
+ data to be at risk. So unless you pasted your old passphrase all
+ over the Internet or the attacker has knowledge of it from some
+ other source and does a targetted laptop theft to get at your
+ data, you should be fine.
+
+
6. Backup and Data Recovery