<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SSD &#8211; FU-BAR</title>
	<atom:link href="/tag/ssd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>/</link>
	<description>Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2018 21:39:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	

 
	<item>
		<title>Obfuscated encryption fails again&#8230; No Shit, Sherlock!</title>
		<link>/2018/11/05/obfuscated-encryption-fails-again-no-shit-sherlock/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rui Seabra]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2018 21:39:05 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SSD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WTF?]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=2783</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This is obfuscation, rather than encryption, for all purposes. Major hardware vendors are involved, and «the issue is worse on Windows». No surprises, then&#8230; Glad I don&#8217;t use that poor excuse for an operating system&#8230; 🙂 It seems a few popular devices with hardware controlled self encryption aren&#8217;t really doing it good by having master &#8230; <p class="link-more"><a href="/2018/11/05/obfuscated-encryption-fails-again-no-shit-sherlock/" class="more-link">Continue reading<span class="screen-reader-text"> "Obfuscated encryption fails again&#8230; No Shit, Sherlock!"</span></a></p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>This is obfuscation, rather than encryption</strong>, for all purposes.</p>
<p>Major hardware vendors are involved, and «<strong>the issue is worse on Windows</strong>». No surprises, then&#8230; Glad I don&#8217;t use that poor excuse for an operating system&#8230; <img src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/14.0.0/72x72/1f642.png" alt="🙂" class="wp-smiley" style="height: 1em; max-height: 1em;" /></p>
<p>It seems a few popular devices with hardware controlled self encryption aren&#8217;t really doing it good by having master passwords (truly a #WTF) and faulty standards implementations.</p>
<p>«<i>SSDs from Micron (Crucial) and Samsung are affected. These are SSDs that support hardware-level encryption via a local built-in chip, separate from the main CPU. Some of these devices have a factory-set master password that bypasses the user-set password, while other SSDs store the encryption key on the hard drive, from where it can be retrieved. The issue is worse on Windows, where BitLocker defers software-level encryption to hardware encryption-capable SSDs, meaning user data is vulnerable to attacks without the user&#8217;s knowledge</i>»</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a <a href="https://www.ru.nl/publish/pages/909275/draft-paper_1.pdf">paper with all the gory details</a> for the hard core guys  and a <a href="https://www.zdnet.com/article/flaws-in-self-encrypting-ssds-let-attackers-bypass-disk-encryption/">report on ZDNet</a> for the rest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
