Slashdot Mirror


Cold Reboot Attacks on Disk Encryption

jcrouthamel writes "Contrary to popular assumption, DRAMs used in most modern computers retain their contents for seconds to minutes after power is lost, even at operating temperatures and even if removed from a motherboard. Although DRAMs become less reliable when they are not refreshed, they are not immediately erased, and their contents persist sufficiently for malicious (or forensic) acquisition of usable full-system memory images. We show that this phenomenon limits the ability of an operating system to protect cryptographic key material from an attacker with physical access. We use cold reboots to mount attacks on popular disk encryption systems — BitLocker, FileVault, dm-crypt, and TrueCrypt — using no special devices or materials. We experimentally characterize the extent and predictability of memory remanence and report that remanence times can be increased dramatically with simple techniques. We offer new algorithms for finding cryptographic keys in memory images and for correcting errors caused by bit decay. Though we discuss several strategies for partially mitigating these risks, we know of no simple remedy that would eliminate them."

398 comments

  1. Clear the DRAM? by the4thdimension · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Could probably implement an algorithm at the operating system level that attempts to clear out DRAM except for what is actually needed for the operating system to power down/boot up. I am not sure of the exact logistics but it seems silly to just power down and leave the DRAM however it was, no matter if its instant cleared or take a few minutes.

    1. Re:Clear the DRAM? by KublaiKhan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is possible; I remember reading about a class of programs in the Jargon File that exploited certain machine code instructions to clear out the whole of the machine's memory, including itself.

      Can't remember the name of 'em, though.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    2. Re:Clear the DRAM? by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, that would stop me from physically turning off the computer and popping out the RAM, how exactly? What we need is a battery backed up hardware module that scrambles the RAM when the system loses power.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    3. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Workaround: hit the main power off switch.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Clear the DRAM? by the4thdimension · · Score: 1

      Good point... if I am being malicious I could just take the time to either find a motherboard that does not have this module or take the time to reprogram the hardware module so that it does not do what it intends to do. Obviously there are many ways around any sort of protection you can try and come up with. If you have physical access to the machine, you could always execute a way around hardware or software protection.

    5. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Workaround: hit the main power off switch.

      Workaround: yank the DIMMs while the system's on.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    6. Re:Clear the DRAM? by spun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was envisioning a hardware module that detected a power failure and wiped the RAM. The only way around that would be to pop the RAM out of a running system, which might work, or it might fry the RAM. But if the hardware module were incorporated into the DIMM, that would work.

      Really, though, who would this affect? Top secret government stuff. I bet they've just got vials of acid or explosives or something. Tamper with the case and the contents (and maybe you) go bye-bye.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    7. Re:Clear the DRAM? by theMerovingian · · Score: 1


      It is easy to write scripts that do anti-forensic stuff on logon/logoff or startup/shutdown. Even pulling the plug is often not enough to freeze a system from doing stuff so that you can gather evidence.

      --
      "If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
    8. Re:Clear the DRAM? by EvilRyry · · Score: 1

      To heck with the power button. Just rip out the memory and run!

    9. Re:Clear the DRAM? by ThisNukes4u · · Score: 1

      Workaround: Superglue/epoxy the chips to the motherboard retention mechanism.

      --
      thisnukes4u.net
    10. Re:Clear the DRAM? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Work around: Detect if intrusion switch on chassis has be activated (by pulling the chassis open). If so, forcibly shutdown the system as soon as intrusion switch has been activated. Cover memory with some sort of physical device to prevent quick removal. Should give the RAM enough time to dissipate memory contents.

    11. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or instead of a battery, you could use a thousand volt capacimator or somethin.

      The problem is, what if the attacker physically removes the memory without powering down the machine? You can probably successfully remove one card before things go haywire.

    12. Re:Clear the DRAM? by tmalone · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or we could get rid of this easy to work with RAM that computers have now and go back to the olden days when you had to curse and scream and rip your hands to shreds on sharp metal corners to get at the RAM, which, once you got at was a pain in the ass to remove. Ah, the good old days.

    13. Re:Clear the DRAM? by orclevegam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As the4thdimension already pointed out, it's a common tenant in systems security that anyone with physical access and sufficient time can disable or otherwise bypass any security system. The fact is, if they're in a position to swipe the RAM out of your computer, they can just as easily take the HD to a secure location to try to brute force it, and/or attach some probes to the RAM and just read the bits straight off it, wouldn't even need to power the system down. Hardware security is just that, hardware, so there will never be an adequate software solution to a hardware security problem. Likewise, software security means nothing if the hardware is vulnerable. It's like building a safe with the most complex and impenetrable locking mechanism ever designed, and then using 1/4" aluminum for the body of the safe, sure no one's going to crack the locking mechanism, but all it takes is 5 minutes with a power drill to bypass it.

      That being said, some sort of physical security mechanism probably wouldn't be out of the question for scenarios that actually called for it. For instance, on systems that contain highly sensitive data such as nuclear launch codes or some such, I could envision a tripwire type system on the computer case that detonates shaped charges on the HD and RAM when the case is cracked. This does open up a possible DOS attack vector, but the alternative seems to justify it.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    14. Re:Clear the DRAM? by compro01 · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    15. Re:Clear the DRAM? by asc99c · · Score: 1

      I'd assume on reboot the plan is to not reboot the installed OS but probably to boot up a basic OS from a CD that gives free access to all the memory.

    16. Re:Clear the DRAM? by fastest+fascist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Excuse me? If you had access to the system, running and encrypted bits unlocked, why on earth would you turn it off? As I see it, this might be a problem if you get stormed by an adversary and pull the plug in an effort to secure your data.

    17. Re:Clear the DRAM? by sempernoctis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ATX power supplies are required to provide power for a certain amount of time after it signals the motherboard that it is shutting down. I forget how long that is, but it is probably long enough to wipe a few encryption keys if you know what part of memory to wipe. The attacker would then have to physically separate the power supply form the motherboard or remove the RAM while the system is running. To do that they would have to have the case open, so you could have sensors for tampering with the case that cause all encrypted data to be dismounted.

    18. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Thermite grenades, actually, taped to the case. Classified computers in sensitive areas get turned into slag if the position is overrun. (From my days working for one of the giant US 'aerospace' companies.)

    19. Re:Clear the DRAM? by sempernoctis · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you had access to the system, running and encrypted bits unlocked, why on earth would you turn it off?
      Because the OS has control of the system at that point. If the terminal is locked, even though the system is on, you won't be able to access anything until you get control of the hardware away from the OS. Also, when you start poking around on a system, you always have the potential of accidentally destroying evidence, and evidence is much weaker in court if there isn't an untampered version of the disk to allow the prosecution's claims to be verified.
    20. Re:Clear the DRAM? by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      What we need is a battery backed up hardware module that scrambles the RAM when the system loses power.

      What if an attacker pries the battery off the scrambler hardware before cutting power to the system (with an insulated tool, obviously)?

    21. Re:Clear the DRAM? by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Informative

      Still, power down without shutdown, then boot up operating system without such feature and you're gone.
      The only way I see it to be sure, DRAM upon losing power uses on-board capacitor to erase its own contents, the feature built into the RAM die. Even BIOS is not sufficient if you just pull the plug and move the RAM to a different PC.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    22. Re:Clear the DRAM? by KublaiKhan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, that's it. Thanks.

      Kinda funny that that entry says "Death code isn't very useful, but writing it is an interesting hacking challenge on architectures where the instruction set makes it possible"...I guess we have a practical use for it now, huh?

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    23. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      But you can do things to mess with them and make it harder for them to access it.

      4 Files - All truecrypt same size. All named very similar. Only one is the real file all the rest are block dumps of /dev/random

      the NSA now has to choose what safe to attempt to crack. if they try and crack them all it significantly increases their time taken to do so and also eats up resources. This is assuming they can get my PC when I am logged into it and it is on so the ram would contain unencrypted contents of my encrypted files. That chance is incredibly slim.

      I say leave lots of decoys around for them to try and guess at. Hiding in plain sight is incredibly effective if done correctly.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    24. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 2

      Hardware security is just that, hardware, so there will never be an adequate software solution to a hardware security problem. Likewise, software security means nothing if the hardware is vulnerable.

      I hear things like this a lot, and I disagree. The key words in the quote above are "adequate" and "nothing", which depend on a cost-benefit analysis. Just reducing risk can be more cost-effective than eliminating risk. Encryption is often an adequate software solution to a hardware security problem because most laptop thieves either don't care about the software or aren't equipped to carry out the kind of cold reboot attack described in the article, or because the data isn't important enough to warrant more expensive physical security (such as armed guards).

    25. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, that would stop me from physically turning off the computer and popping out the RAM, how exactly? What we need is a battery backed up hardware module that scrambles the RAM when the system loses power.

      So, you can physically pop out/disconnect the battery before you physically turn off the computer. Your solution is flawed as well.

    26. Re:Clear the DRAM? by meatspray · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly certain you could leave the ram in the machine and read it while running if you were careful.

    27. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      "So, that would stop me from physically turning off the computer and popping out the RAM, how exactly? What we need is a battery backed up hardware module that scrambles the RAM when the system loses power."

      Slashdotters and their complicated high-brow technology solutions. How about we go the Luddite route and simple LOCK THE CASE? I would imagine a padlock would be a much cheaper and easier solution than "a battery backed up hardware module that scrambles the RAM when the system loses power".

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    28. Re:Clear the DRAM? by CountBrass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you've missed the point. Hard drive encryption *is* supposed to protect against someone having physical access to your machine.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    29. Re:Clear the DRAM? by ashridah · · Score: 1

      Ah yes. I fondly remember those days.

      Far too many of my computer systems got sanctified by the blood of the innocent while being built when I was a teenager.

    30. Re:Clear the DRAM? by spun · · Score: 1

      Locking the case would not stop a guy with a power saw.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    31. Re:Clear the DRAM? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``4 Files - All truecrypt same size. All named very similar. Only one is the real file all the rest are block dumps of /dev/random

      the NSA now has to choose what safe to attempt to crack. if they try and crack them all it significantly increases their time taken to do so''

      By about a factor 4, I estimate. I don't think _that_ is such a big deal. Perhaps you would do better to double the encryption key size...

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    32. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      If someone is THAT determined, I doubt anything would. And if I were the guy with the power saw, I would just wait for the administrator to come in, and start cutting off fingers with the saw until they gave up the keys to decrpyt.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    33. Re:Clear the DRAM? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly! That is why this news item is actually big news. The idea of encrypting your disk is _exactly_ that someone without the key will not be able to access the data (within a reasonable amount of time - any encryption can be broken), even if they have physical access. And encrypting your disk does indeed prevent someone without the key from reading the data. What TFA tells us is that there is a way to get the key that we may not have considered, and I'm willing to bet many of us indeed hadn't. But now that we know of this attack vector, we can work against it.

      As long as we can keep the key hidden, the encryption will protect our data.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    34. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what cheap cases gets you :P

    35. Re:Clear the DRAM? by orclevegam · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, but the point is, if the system is powered down when it's stolen, or the hard drive is removed from the system, the full disk encryption will still protect the data. This is only a valid attack vector in the highly unlikely occasion that you have access to the powered on system, and even then it's somewhat dubious as to whether you'll get the data you need off of it. As I said though, this is very interesting from an academic standpoint for the simple fact that it is something that hasn't really been thought of. That being the case though, I can already think of one way to prevent this. Simply store your decryption keys at memory offset 0000:7C00, which will ensure that the BIOS copies the boot loader over your keys the next time the system boots (on x86 systems at any rate).

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    36. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That being said, some sort of physical security mechanism probably wouldn't be out of the question for scenarios that actually called for it."

      I use a very nervous armed guard from the Barney Fife detective agency, with "shoot to kill' orders, and unlimited coffee.

      Keeps the BSA at bay.

    37. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Verteiron · · Score: 1

      Works great until they chain you down and start hammering bamboo splints under your fingernails because you won't tell them which volume is the correct one.

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    38. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Ollabelle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Had something similar when I was working for a heavy construction company. Used to take out the old hard drives and take them down to the welding shop. They always enjoyed torching a hole through the spindle and liquefying everything inside the case...

      --
      Ibid.
    39. Re:Clear the DRAM? by rthille · · Score: 1

      Hard drives need to use 1-time passwords to be very secure. Of course then you need a physical token like secure-id or an iButton or something, but at least then the dork has to lose his laptop and his keys/secure-id before the attack would succeed.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    40. Re:Clear the DRAM? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just put in firmware a key generator and encrypt everything going on the memory bus with a new key on every start-up. Bonus: also remap the memory address space randomly so that instructions and data are not stored sequentially on the same chip. For pipeline filling to work though you'll want it integrated into the CPU.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    41. Re:Clear the DRAM? by saikou · · Score: 1

      Worse :) It needs to work when anyone tries to pull out RAM out of running computer. Otherwise someone with a power drill will make a hole in a case and just rip the modules out, plug them into reading device, do a dump of the content, look for key, decrypt the hard drive, etc etc.
      It' just like when people used to yank floppies with important information out of the drive that tries to format it. Sure, some information will die. But at least some of it can be enough to restore important file/key etc.

    42. Re:Clear the DRAM? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      That is why it is a cold reboot attack. You don't have a chance to remedy it in software, you would need a hardware solution (like a capacitor on the RAM card that kept it powered just long enough to clear each cell).

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    43. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Some crypto hardware is designed with anti-tamper switches that will erase all keying data if the case is opened. There is often a front-panel switch (zeroize switch) to do the same thing upon operator command.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    44. Re:Clear the DRAM? by mlts · · Score: 1

      Even better, perhaps a memory segment which can be used as "secure RAM" which is battery backed up and cleared by hardware (either just zeroing it out or running whatever patterns) when the machine is powered off or rebooted. One could go to having the hardware generate an encryption key every boot or power cycle (storing that in a memory chip that is quickly zeroed out and hard to physically access), then having the addresses in the "secure RAM" area AES encrypted. Jetico's BestCrypt does similar functionality to this in software to protect the Windows swap file, where each boot it used a new encryption key to ensure that anything written to the on disk Windows swap file is encrypted.

      Another protection would be to have some memory manager keep an allocation table for this "secure RAM" address space. Upon reboot, the allocation table is cleared. Then, for each address that gets written, the allocation table is updated with it. If a program reads from RAM that has not been written to since the last reboot, it gets returned zeroes regardless of the true values in that memory.

    45. Re:Clear the DRAM? by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Hard drives need to use 1-time passwords to be very secure. Of course then you need a physical token like secure-id or an iButton or something, but at least then the dork has to lose his laptop and his keys/secure-id before the attack would succeed. Queue horror stories of lUsers taping the secure tokens to the back of the laptops. Think there was an article about that on thedailywtf.com a while back... now I need to go look that up.
      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    46. Re:Clear the DRAM? by theaveng · · Score: 0, Troll

      For this to work, somebody has to be able to steal my laptop, hack the double-password system, and get Windows up-and-running. Only then can they apply this "power off/power up" method of copying my RAM.

      I am not concerned; they'd have a difficult time guessing both passwords. And with the program I use (or rather the government uses), the hard drive is hard formatted after 10 incorrect guesses, leaving behind no information.

      I feel secure.

      However, I can see this as an effective method to steal other keys... like the Blu-ray key out of PowerDVD.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    47. Re:Clear the DRAM? by frogzilla · · Score: 1

      Good comments except that physical access being a weakness is a tenet.

    48. Re:Clear the DRAM? by KublaiKhan · · Score: 5, Informative

      -You- may practice proper procedure, but some contractor/low level drone/mindless bureaucrat might leave his system on screensaver (or just lock the console) when turning his back for a moment, which would allow for someone to snatch the laptop and run.

      And while your program may indeed wipe the drive after 10 incorrect guesses, there's one very significant weakness to that proposition: the program must be -running- in order to do so.

      So, in this case, the method of attack would be as follows: find someone with a laptop full of information who has it activated in an accessible location. Grab said laptop and remove it to a location where the RAM can be accessed per this hack. Then, after grabbing the key, remove the hard drive, hook it to a system you have control over, and either use the key to open the drive or, if the key is corrupted or incomplete, use the key as input to crack the drive conventionally--bearing in mind that if it is mounted in such a way that your fancy program does not activate, the program cannot erase the drive.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    49. Re:Clear the DRAM? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I say leave lots of decoys around for them to try and guess at. Hiding in plain sight is incredibly effective if done correctly. "Three books? Wait a minute. Hold it. Nobody said anything about three books.... Like-- like what am I supposed to do? Take-take one book, or all books, or... or what?"
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    50. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, but a decent lock (and generally strong case) would keep the guy with the saw out long enough for the ram to wipe itself. Assuming that the ram lost power at or before the time when he started sawing. Perhaps a better solution would be to have the BIOS wipe the RAM as part of its power-up procedure, then reboot rather than power-down when the system is attacked (which can be achieved with a highly sensitive motion sensor in the case - yes, it may go accidentally during an earthquake, but will be back up again soonish).

    51. Re:Clear the DRAM? by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Not exactly - they would have to break the erasing circuit, say, by removing the capacitor from a live board (which could be detected in hardware) - say what you will but event of losing power is easy to notice and doesn't have to be signalled from external sources. And keeping the power up + simulating connectivity with motherboard while moving the chips would be rather difficult

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    52. Re:Clear the DRAM? by cryptoguy · · Score: 1

      It would be useful if the dismount of an encrypted drive would overwrite the memory being used before releasing it. Assuming that a clean system shutdown performs a dismount, and assuming that you shut down your machine when you are leaving it unattended, you should be in pretty good shape. Of course sleep and hibernate are problematic -- not to mention merely logging off or locking the desktop.

    53. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah we called them "Chink Razor Cases"

    54. Re:Clear the DRAM? by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 5, Funny
      They always enjoyed torching a hole through the spindle and liquefying everything inside the case..

      Well, who wouldn't?

      --
      It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
    55. Re:Clear the DRAM? by DigitAl56K · · Score: 1

      I bet pulling the RAM is not even necessary. Why don't you hard boot the system (no code gets to run to erase the last used encryption key, and the RAM remains powered and perfectly preserved), and run a bootloader whose sole purpose is to digg the key out of memory.

      Memory is not overwritten at boot time unless the BIOS is set to do a full POST, and no systems I know of are configured that way because it takes too long.

      You can host your "ripper" utility in the first few kb's of memory, where there is almost zero chance that you will erase the encryption key, because normally the OS bootloader will go there, then there will be the OS kernel, driver code, etc. etc. before a driver like TrueCrypt is allocated - at least for container encryption. FDE may be a tougher case, but depending on the implementation you can probably work around any problematic issues.

      Yanking the RAM is interesting though, a "solution" would be to have some RAM on the system (e.g. in the TPM) that was specifically designed so that a) It was physically incapable of persisting information with no power, and b) there was a power supply built into the chip itself that flushed that memory with garbage on power down (i.e. it is extremely difficult to remove this power source without physically damaging the memory also).

    56. Re:Clear the DRAM? by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      But cutting in with a power saw will take at least a few seconds, maybe even minutes, and the RAM only holds the content for seconds or minutes after power down according to the article

      So they would have to power-saw in while the power is on and the hard drive is still spinning, so they then would maybe have the password out of the RAM, but there is also the chance the hard drive will be somewhat damaged during that.

      (You could even mount the hard drive in the place where the most likely attack vector of a power saw would be, so they saw through the hard drive while breaking in)

    57. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Pinckney · · Score: 1

      The only problem with this is that the data may still be recoverable even if it was overwritten before being powered down, e.g. 2t minutes of 0 followed by t minutes of 1 could potentially be detected as a 0 by careful analysis. A better solution is to flip the bits of important data every minute or so, so that no one value predominates. Source: Data Remanence in Semiconductor Devices, Peter Gutmann. http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/usenix01.pdf

    58. Re:Clear the DRAM? by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Found it. Clueless users FTW (and the WTF).

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    59. Re:Clear the DRAM? by msheekhah · · Score: 1

      Well, if your house is getting raided, snap your RAM in half. Maybe we need to think about RAM encryption too, eh? ;-)

      --
      Mark Anthony Collins
    60. Re:Clear the DRAM? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Solution: In BIOS disable all boot options except for local HDD/Raid Controller and set a BIOS password.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    61. Re:Clear the DRAM? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      What prevents me from pulling the ram out while the box is still running?

    62. Re:Clear the DRAM? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      Pull the key out of the memory which you store it in. Easy.

    63. Re:Clear the DRAM? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      yeah, that will speed things up.

      First off, someone needs physical access within 2 minutes to ahve ANY chance of being able to do that.
      So it's security risk is a close to 0 as almost everybody could possible need.

      If you are paranoid, just clear the memory before shutting off, or have a program that does that as part of the shut down procedure.

      Fast boots will probably make this a more severe problem.

      Of course, most 'computer security' is eityher unreasonable crap, unrealistic, or remenants of the main frame.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    64. Re:Clear the DRAM? by asc99c · · Score: 1

      Workaround: swap the hard disc?

    65. Re:Clear the DRAM? by darkfire5252 · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm missing the point here, but I don't think you're looking at the scenario correctly. The idea of whole disk encryption is that someone can't access the data if they only have access to the hardware, except in the case that the hardware is powered on and the disk is mounted. If the system is up and running with the disk mounted when the attacker has access to it, then you've already 'unlocked' the drive. The system is able to fully read the disk and an attacker with access to the system can read the disk as well. Even if the terminal is locked (assuming there was some absolute way to prevent OS access to someone with physical access to a running machine), as someone mentioned already you'd be able to probe the ram physically without removing it. The key or token that is being used by the OS to access the disk has to be stored somewhere, so the attacker can masquerade as the OS and read the drive in exactly the same way. If the system is on with the drive is not mounted, then the RAM doesn't have any data in it that will give access to the drive anyhow, so it doesn't matter if they can read it or not.

      This attack must begin within minutes of the machine being powered off or the drive being unmounted (assuming the unmount command doesn't wipe the access token from memory, which it likely does). If someone has a desire to read your data that badly and they are able to physically access the machine within minutes of you leaving, then this attack would work (provided you didn't hang around for a few minutes after powering down). However, under those circumstances the attacker would also have physical access to you, and the attack that has the highest probability of success is going to involve a gun and firm instructions to unlock the drive. In a pinch, the attacker(s) could bring spare DRAM, yank and freeze the original DRAM and replace it with their DRAM, and then they could try this attack at the same time as you're being tortured for the passphrase to your key. The moral is that if the attacker is standing right next to you you likely have bigger problems than how quickly the DRAM loses voltage.

    66. Re:Clear the DRAM? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Design it like Orac: it won't operate without the key (housed in a separate device) in place, such that the key-device is a black box to the rest of the hardware and not disclosed to it.

      To defend against access to the physical hardware you make the physical hardware modular where some essential aspect could be missing.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    67. Re:Clear the DRAM? by spun · · Score: 1

      Nothing except the thermite grenade I have installed, linked to sensors on the case to detect you opening it. >:) That's one way to solve the problem, and I believe, is the actual solution used in high security/high risk areas such as forward command posts and what-not.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    68. Re:Clear the DRAM? by frinkacheese · · Score: 1


      How about using a memory controller, separate to the DRAM sticks that does not write to the memory sequentially, instead it will hold a seed that changes on each power cycle that will randomly spread the writes and reciprocal reads across the DRAM space. Then even if you get the DRAM, you will also need this memory controller in order to do anything useful.

      All it needs to do is interface the address bus on the DRAM to the system bus, when the system looks at address A the controller actually pulls up address Y, etc.

      Think of it as encrypting the address bus, instead of the data.

      If the seed is sufficiently large, the spread will be sufficiently random to thwart attack.

    69. Re:Clear the DRAM? by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1

      Yep, I beleive that's precisely what the group who hacked the Wii did. But that took alot of time and effort to pull off.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    70. Re:Clear the DRAM? by otuz · · Score: 1

      It's easy to check for random versus encrypted.
      Random is not compressible, encrypted is.

    71. Re:Clear the DRAM? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      Fine. I'll just go through the air vents and disable the sensors.

      From a suitable distance of course. Just in case I made a mistake. ;)

    72. Re:Clear the DRAM? by damium · · Score: 1

      Better to make the DRAM chip (the chip itself not the module) clear it's contents when power is applied. That way even if they pop the module out while it is hot they can't use it without clearing the data.

    73. Re:Clear the DRAM? by beav007 · · Score: 1

      You could, of course, just image the drive. Then after every screwup, you copy the drives contents back and start again. For added protection, after you've copied the drive, you mess with the image on a secondary drive and leave the original alone...

    74. Re:Clear the DRAM? by spun · · Score: 1

      Well, as I understand it, in truly sensitive applications, the thermite grenade is triggered manually as the area is evacuated. Which basically amounts to "Don't let your enemy achieve unrestricted access to your hardware, because they will find a way to get what they want." Which kinda makes this whole discussion moot, because this discussion revolves around "How to prevent an enemy with unrestricted access to your hardware from getting what they want." Which, as we know, is basically next to impossible.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    75. Re:Clear the DRAM? by LiENUS · · Score: 1

      It's easy to check for random versus encrypted. Random is not compressible, encrypted is. Encrypt something with gpg then try and compress it, i think youl'l find it quite difficult

      [root@dbserver root]# dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp.fil bs=1M count=20
      20+0 records in
      20+0 records out
      [root@dbserver root]# ls -al tmp.fil
      21M -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20M Feb 21 17:56 tmp.fil
      [root@dbserver root]# /usr/bin/gpg -z 0 --no-tty --batch --output tmp.fil.gpg --encrypt --recipient "XXX XXX <XXX.XXX@XXX>com> tmp.fil\
      [root@dbserver root]# du -sh tmp.fil*
      21M tmp.fil
      21M tmp.fil.gpg
      [root@dbserver root]# gzip -9 tmp.fil
      [root@dbserver root]# gzip -9 tmp.fil.gpg
      [root@dbserver root]# du -sh tmp.fil.*
      21M tmp.fil.gpg.gz
      20K tmp.fil.gz
      [root@dbserver root]#
      strange.. looks like encrypted isn't very compressible at all.

      [root@dbserver root]# gunzip tmp.fil.gz
      [root@dbserver root]# /bin/ls -al tmp.fil*
      -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20971520 Feb 21 17:56 tmp.fil
      -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20975344 Feb 21 18:05 tmp.fil.gpg.gz
      [root@dbserver root]#
      [root@dbserver root]# gunzip tmp.fil.gpg.gz
      [root@dbserver root]# ls -al
      [root@dbserver root]# /bin/ls -al tmp.fil*
      -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20971520 Feb 21 17:56 tmp.fil
      -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20972114 Feb 21 18:05 tmp.fil.gpg
      [root@dbserver root]#
      In fact the encrypted file got bigger when I gzipped it.
      If your encrypted files are compressible... It's time to look into a new compression algo...
      http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2003-January/016944.html
    76. Re:Clear the DRAM? by owlstead · · Score: 1

      This is what smart card IC's do although it is more scrambling than actual encryption (at least most of the time, many manufacturers don't release the specs for their implementation).

    77. Re:Clear the DRAM? by SL+Baur · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For this to work, somebody has to be able to steal my laptop You didn't even bother to read the summary, let alone the article. The main point is that nothing is secure with physical access to the machine. That's kind of always been the point. Restated, if an attacker is sufficiently interested in the data on your machine, he will be able to take it from your cold dead hands and get it.

      I feel secure. So no, you shouldn't feel secure if you have important data on that machine.

      BTW, since you claim to be using (presumably US) government security software, you know that disk formatting or dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/whatever is not sufficient to unclassify a disk that formerly contained classified material.
    78. Re:Clear the DRAM? by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, a true geek hacker solution could be done, by making your own add-in board. The board, could consist of a battery or capacitors that charge up and when the computer is powered down in any manner, the circuitry on the board fills DRAM with a random sequence of bits. This solves the problem unless the computer is opened up and the board removed while the PC is still powered up. A solution to this would be to add a prom chip to the add-in, that gets loaded into memory at boot and does a ping back to the board. If the board gets pulled, then the resident program wipes RAM. While this would be a bad thing most all of the time, it would protect systems. Of course a much more sophisticated program could be written to selectively wipe sections of RAM. It's a safe assumption that if the RAM Eraser is removed then anything in memory is going to be lost anyway, so there's really no need for anything more sophisticated, but a more sophisticated would be nicer to anyone who has to administer the computer. Also, there may not be enough time for my brute force technique, so a targeted erase program might actually be worthwhile writing. This of course, won't stop someone from just yanking the memory out of a running system. So, really you can't protect the RAM as long at the computer can be opened by any means. Wiring explosives in the system (as some have stated) won't work either, because the case could be cut in such a way so as not to trip the explosive charges and the RAM removed.

    79. Re:Clear the DRAM? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So no, you shouldn't feel secure if you have important data on that machine.

      And any way you slice it, feeling secure has little to do with being secure (TSA, are you listening?) although I have noticed that people who feel secure are generally at the most risk. Mainly, I suppose, because they don't have the knowledge to properly assess the risks they are accepting. Because if they did ... they wouldn't feel so secure.

      If you want to be as secure as you possibly can, start with the assumption that you're not.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    80. Re:Clear the DRAM? by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 1

      Which is why you rearrange the DRAM sticks before reinstalling them. (Obviously this doesn't work if the computer decides to interleave bytes, but I seem to remember that most systems only have 2x parallelism, so moving sticks 0 and 1 into slots 2 and 3 should be quite safe.)

      Or, which is why you build a simple DRAM reader/dumper, and read the data without ever booting into that RAM.

      Or, which is why you find a non-x86 system that uses the same RAM - or an x86 system that doesn't use BIOS. (Does EFI do the same thing? I don't honestly know.)

      At best, your idea is an inconvenience.

      --
      Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    81. Re:Clear the DRAM? by kylehase · · Score: 1

      The main point is that nothing is secure with physical access to the machine. That's kind of always been the point. Restated, if an attacker is sufficiently interested in the data on your machine, he will be able to take it from your cold dead hands and get it.
      He could also kill you while you are using your computer with the encrypted containers open then he wouldn't have to worry about stealing the machine within the the RAM discharge time.
      --
      You want fun, go home and buy a monkey!
    82. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      It didn't look academic to me. It looked pretty darned real. If you can recover even 90% of the key that's enough to make a brute force attack on the rest eminently feasible. And finding a laptop with the power on isn't hard. The power on my laptop is always on. I never turn the thing off. I just reboot it every month or two on the rare occasions when something goes wonky when it comes out of sleep (where the memory still has power, hibernate is when all the power is off) mode.

    83. Re:Clear the DRAM? by slashdotmsiriv · · Score: 1

      and I bet they were rapping "Damn It Feels Good To Be A Gangsta" too ...

    84. Re:Clear the DRAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, someone should write a paper about that...

    85. Re:Clear the DRAM? by analog_line · · Score: 1

      [blockquote]This is only a valid attack vector in the highly unlikely occasion that you have access to the powered on system, and even then it's somewhat dubious as to whether you'll get the data you need off of it.[/blockquote]

      One word: laptops

      Heck, I'll even throw in another word for free: cleaners

      If your work is sensitive enough that you need to encrypt entire volumes, it would be reasonable to expect that there are people out there willing to take the time to target you for a theft of that data. The special circumstances required aren't particularly onerous.

    86. Re:Clear the DRAM? by mxs · · Score: 1

      ATX power supplies are required to provide power for a certain amount of time after it signals the motherboard that it is shutting down. How, exactly, do you think this would apply ?

      More to the point, if you have physical access to the machine, why would you think that the machine will still follow ATX specs ?

      Exercise 1 : Take a pair of scissors into your hands.
      Exercise 2 : Physically "disconnect" the power supply from the motherboard.
    87. Re:Clear the DRAM? by imipak · · Score: 1

      Likewise, software security means nothing if the hardware is vulnerable. Whilst it's true that software security can almost always be defeated if hardware has vulnerabilities, it only "means nothing" in the exceptionally rare cases where you're aspiring to perfect security - ie., that your system can defeat all attacks, known and unknown, whatever the circumstances. Over here in the real world, we have 'defence in depth' which is based on two assumptions. 1. As a special class of software, security software (whether in RAM or burned into an FPGA or whatever) inherits the property of always having bugs. 2. humans (aka users and admins) are fallible, and in fact user and admin errors are the only thing you can reliably expect when designing a security model for some system. As I often point out at work, if the NSA (or KGB or similar orgs) really want to pwn you, they'll find a way to do it. What keeps me awake at nights isn't worrying about TLAs; it's the fear waking up to find a story on the Reg saying "Foo Group humiliated as web site hacked, customer data leaked by moody teenage script kiddie. Similarly the thing that bugs me about laptop security offsite is mostly malware infections resulting from connections to untrusted networks; the risk with corporate data isn't Dr Evil spiriting it away to clone our code... it's an opportunistic thief who passes it on to someone smart enough to mount the HD, spot our company name, and either blackmail us or just send it to the press. Frankly even snake-oil obfuscation techniques are probably good enough (XOR, say.)
    88. Re:Clear the DRAM? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I think physical security might work well here. Epoxy the ram into place, preferably turning the epoxy and the plastic DIMM slot into one solid piece. With that, it would be probably be impossible to get the ram out of the computer, and into something that could read it in the amount of time you have to work with.

    89. Re:Clear the DRAM? by spun · · Score: 1

      Oh hey, now there's a smart, low tech solution that would actually work. Good thinking.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    90. Re:Clear the DRAM? by sempernoctis · · Score: 1

      as I had stated, that would require opening the case, which could be detected with physical security measures on the case

    91. Re:Clear the DRAM? by mxs · · Score: 1

      If the attacker has physical control over the machine, the game is still lost. The "common" physical security measures on the case can be circumvented with a dremel -- though even that is not strictly required if your power supply has air vents you could poke scissors into (carefully).

  2. Hardware Encryption by obstalesgone · · Score: 1

    Time for memory controllers with hardware encryption.

    1. Re:Hardware Encryption by Some_Llama · · Score: 0

      yay DRM!!

    2. Re:Hardware Encryption by BillyBlaze · · Score: 1

      Mmm, I can't wait to pay more for slower memory.

  3. Fascinating... by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

    So how long does this information persist in the RAM? They say "seconds to minutes" but -how many- seconds? And what brands/types of RAM have longer or shorter latency?

    --
    In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
    A stately pleasure dome decree
    1. Re:Fascinating... by the4thdimension · · Score: 1

      Its really unpredictable. There will be bits in memory that last longer than others because bits in RAM are essentially little electrons that are either turned "on" or "off" based on the electricity (voltage) supplied to them. As we know from shocking our friends, electricity can vary in the time it takes to decay. Sometimes it goes away instantly, sometimes it lingers. Brands of RAM and types can't realistically predict this.

    2. Re:Fascinating... by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      There's probably some equation involving entropy that talks about that...

      I was thinking the construction of the RAM would be a factor--different brands would have different dies and suchlike, which would have an effect on how fast the system entropizes upon power removal.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    3. Re:Fascinating... by planckscale · · Score: 4, Informative
      If you RTFA you would know that the times can be anywhere from seconds to minutes, but that if you rapidly cool them with an inverted air duster, you can keep the info retained in the chips for 10 minutes or so. I you use some liquid nitrogen, even longer. Requires that you "cut" power to the computer. So I guess that means for a laptop, pulling the battery first, then pulling the plug, spraying the chips with liquid cool, then plopping them into another machine and booting to an evil OS that will read the contents of the memory. I wonder if even TrueCrypt's keyfile function is even thwarted. I mean even if they get your encryption passphrase, wouldn't they still need the keyfile to mount the partition? And how would they know the location of a hidden partition? Also, if someone has physical access to the computer, then there is no security. I mean why not just plop in a keylogger, or set up a hidden webcam to shoulder-surf?

      --
      Namaste
    4. Re:Fascinating... by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      My question isn't how to read 'em, but how to keep 'em from being read.

      Heating the chips would probably help, but that has its own problems.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    5. Re:Fascinating... by the4thdimension · · Score: 1

      I can see it now:

      "New XYZ brand, bit decays instantly for super security! 2x1gig for $400!"

    6. Re:Fascinating... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      It depends on many factors, including the technology, the density of the part, and the ambient temperature. Years ago I ran some experiments on 128MB SDRAM (not DDR) and found that even at elevated temperatures (60C) the minimum retention time with zero ECC errors (it was ECC memory) was around six seconds.

      I ran those tests because we were using a large chunk of SDRAM (16MB) as a RAM disk to capture log data on an embedded platform. On system failures we had the logs that led to the failure plus a small crash dump to support debugging. The hardware restart cycle was always fast enough to preserve the RAM disk image. I became curious as to how close we were to the edge, so tried a series of experiments, including extracting the blade from the chassis, watching the sweep hand on my watch, and reinserting the blade to let it boot. Even in a temperature chamber (60C is really warm...) the RAM FS was sane after a four second pack pull, allowing about two seconds for the power management to reboot the pack, that gave a six second power off window.

      On reboot, the boot monitor checked the reserved area by clearing the ECC status bits, then reading the entire reserved block, which would trigger ECC counters in the memory controller if there were flipped bits. If there were any (even one) ECC counts, it zeroed the block, triggering the kernel to rebuild an empty file system.

      So there is my experience on DRAM data retention in power off situations. YMMV.

      If someone would like to try this with DDR2 or DDR3 with ECC, it would be interesting to see your results. I have DDR2/ECC blades coming on line now, if I get ahead of my work, I may recreate this test and post back the results. Given my current calendar, it will be a while (months).

      PS: Under normal room temp, ~20C, it was very reliable at 16 seconds, and I saw a couple of tests that passed twenty.

    7. Re:Fascinating... by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      Someone mod parent 'informative'--that's exactly what I was looking for.

      I'd be very interested in hearing the results for the newer RAM types....

      So if you've got physical access to the system, it's an extremely doable prospect to carry out this hack--and even moreso if you have specialist equipment.

      This leads to another question: would it be possible to have a reasonably portable version of this 'embedded platform'? As in, something where you could open a system, power it off, pull the chip, put it into some handheld or portable box that you're carrying with you, then hit the switch and read?

      If so, that might be a -very- useful thing to have in certain situations.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    8. Re:Fascinating... by dpilot · · Score: 4, Informative

      At the time I quit working with commodity DRAM, the common spec was for 128mS data retention at 85C. For various reasons, such as guardbanding, we tested well beyond that. I'd seen further data that suggested that most of the data in the DRAM was still good for several seconds, with no refresh. I seem to remember once hearing something to the effect that retention typically increased an order of magnitude for every 10C drop in temperature. So that 128mS @ 85C becomes 1.28S @ 75C, 12.5S @ 65C, etc. Yeah, I guess I can believe the "minutes" figure if you can chill the chips. By the way, that 85C is junction temperature, which is typically 10C-20C above ambient temperature, when running at full tilt. That offset can be even higher depending on airflow, etc. That also means that if the system is quiescent, the DRAM temperature is likely to be well below 85C, with correspondingly greater data retention.

      At any rate, even with low temperatures, with such delays I'd never count on being able to get 100% of the contents successfully.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    9. Re:Fascinating... by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      True enough, but you don't need 100%--you need "enough to get the key out reliably"

      I'm sure if you brought in someone with a degree in thermodynamics, they could give you an equation for entropy in the data system over time that you could leverage into your recovery algorithm and give you some sort of confidence number in the data.

      And even if you can't get the -whole- key, if you can get at least part of it, it'll be easier to crack the system by several orders of magnitude.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    10. Re:Fascinating... by pthisis · · Score: 1

      Someone mod parent 'informative'--that's exactly what I was looking for.

      I'd be very interested in hearing the results for the newer RAM types....


      Read the article, it's got lots of nice graphs of RAM decay time for various RAMs from 2001-2007. (synopsis: The newer ones decay more quickly, but the "inverted compressed air can" trick still gives you a fair bit of time with them).

      The paper also talks about doing error-correction on partially corrupted keys, and how to locate keys in RAM.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    11. Re:Fascinating... by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA you would know that the times can be anywhere from seconds to minutes, but that if you rapidly cool them with an inverted air duster, you can keep the info retained in the chips for 10 minutes or so. I you use some liquid nitrogen, even longer. Requires that you "cut" power to the computer. So I guess that means for a laptop, pulling the battery first, then pulling the plug, spraying the chips with liquid cool, then plopping them into another machine and booting to an evil OS that will read the contents of the memory.
      What you just described sounds like a really cool idea for a high-tech spy movie... Anyone want to create Sneakers 2?
      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    12. Re:Fascinating... by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      I once built a SBC based on a 6809 CPU with a 6883 (IIRC) Video/DRAM refresh controller and 64 KB RAM, but programmed a PAL wrong, and had no refresh. Would stay stable for about 30 seconds after reboot. Easy to fix, though.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    13. Re:Fascinating... by iamr00t · · Score: 1

      why not just plop in a keylogger, or set up a hidden webcam to shoulder-surf

      hm... well, there are many scenarios (in Russia for example) when TrueCrypt is used in gray accounting operations. in this case, the authorities only get once chance to grab the hardware, assuming nobody EMP'ed the computer :) (the hardware for that is available too... for real, with a remote control)

    14. Re:Fascinating... by cryptoguy · · Score: 2, Informative

      > I wonder if even TrueCrypt's keyfile function is even thwarted. I mean even if they get your
      > encryption passphrase, wouldn't they still need the keyfile to mount the partition? And how would
      > they know the location of a hidden partition?

      Truecrypt's keyfile is only a precursor to the actual decryption key. It is not accessed after the drive is mounted. Once the drive is mounted, everything that is needed to read the disk is in memory. (namely, the decryption key).

      So, whatever drive or partition you have mounted (whether hidden or otherwise) is accessible to anyone who can read your computer's memory.

    15. Re:Fascinating... by dpilot · · Score: 1

      Knowing your luck, the keys will just happen to have been stored in the section of RAM with the poorest retention.

      Knowing the other guy's luck, the keys will just happen to have been stored in the section of RAM with the best retention.

      There's another thing to consider, and that's the number of CPUs and caching in the system. In a single-CPU system frequently-used data obviously stays in cache, but by the same token the region of DRAM that that cache maps to becomes stale, and potentially incorrect. In a multi-CPU system cache-snoop protocols may be more likely to have gotten that data flushed back out to DRAM.

      Murphy Rules!

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  4. only useful if you start off unencrypted by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    If you steal my laptop, and try to boot it, it doesn't magically decrypt anything for you to steal by reading the RAM shortly thereafter.

    So you'd need me to log & open up the TrueCrypt protected data. Then, as I see you coming to kill me, I pull the plug on the machine, but in the next 3-35 seconds, you manage to read all of RAM.

    Interesting point about DRAM holding onto memory after power is removed, but hardly a reason to worry.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by wild_berry · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you've just turned it off, I can spray your RAM with coolant and have it retain its memory for hours. Then I boot from a USB stick or DVD and use a small program to read the contents of your RAM and harvest your keys.

      The method strikes me as the best way to get past TPM devices, until they include measures to zero all RAM on shutdown.

    2. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      It has as much relevance as any other scheme that requires physical access.

      Probably a lot more relevant to, say, systems on private/secure/confidential/secret networks that may be left on pretty much all the time, but the possibility exists that someone could possibly gain access to 'em at some point, Mission: Impossible style.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    3. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea is that they might be able to get the decryption key out of your RAM, not your protected contents. Once the attacker has the decryption key, they can decrypt all your hard drive as they please.

    4. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by haystor · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stolen laptops would be the chief target I'd imagine. They are easiest to get physical access to and most likely to be considered "secure" through encryption software.

      --
      t
    5. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The situation is much worse than you make it out to be.

      So you'd need me to log & open up the TrueCrypt protected data.
      No, you don't need to open anything, just have authenticated with Windows sufficiently so that the KEY is in memory.

      I pull the plug on the machine, but in the next 3-35 seconds, you manage to read all of RAM.
      No, you have a few seconds to tens of minutes to give it power again so that the refresh circuitry kicks. After that, no risk of the data degrading.
    6. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, so if you have a desktop computer that's on all the time and a warrant is issued for that computer, that truecrypt partition you set up for just such an event becomes useless. There's ample reason to worry.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by KublaiKhan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hrm, especially if they were in hibernate mode to start with....

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    8. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 1

      Many business types will log in to access their laptop, then put it in standby to take home. If the standby routines don't erase the keys, then the bad guys can access them after they steal the laptop.

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    9. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by fastest+fascist · · Score: 1

      Um... presumably, for the contents of memory to be useful for breaking encryption, you'd need to have access to the system while it is running, with the encrypted files/drives/whatever unlocked. In this case, why would you pull the plug at all and not just copy all the data since it's right there, accessible?

    10. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by fastest+fascist · · Score: 1

      Very true, but a different thing. Dismount your encrypted volumes before standing by, if there's any risk of unauthorized access. It's common sense.

    11. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

      People still leave personal computers on all the time? Well, shiver me timbers, it looks like I've got to go get a replacement for my Sony Walkman Personal Music CD-ROM Player that I just dropped in amazement -- since we're apparently still in the 1990's or so.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    12. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      Then I boot from a USB stick or DVD and use a small program to read the contents of your RAM and harvest your keys.
      And you need my BIOS password to change the default boot device from hda.

      Then you start disassembling the laptop to reset the BIOS - or to pull the physical ram.
    13. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by undercanopy · · Score: 1

      if the system is on and running but locked... think coffee/bathroom/smoke/etc break

      --
      -- D-23994, Muff#2613
    14. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Hatta · · Score: 1

      How do you seed torrents if your computer is off? Or what if I need to ssh in from work to use EMBOSS or something? I leave my computer on all the time because it's doing something useful.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    15. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

      Why would you be doing any of these things to a computer that needs to be so secure that it's got an encrypted drive? I'm in the mindset that a computer such as that wouldn't be left on and unattended for any reason.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    16. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      if the system is on and running but locked... think coffee/bathroom/smoke/etc break I guess they have to reboot or remove the drive. In the case of theft most thieves wouldn't think about the keys stored in ram and just want the laptop.

      But if its the CIA and they know what they are looking for they could just take the ram out and steal your keys.

      I think if you were in that much trouble they would probably just torture you for the key.

      ~Dan

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    17. Re:only useful if you start off unencrypted by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      What about whole drive encryption?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  5. Simple remedy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seal the computer case in such a way that it takes (decay_time * safety_factor) minutes to go from "physical access" to "memory module in hand". How? Standard office safes usually take about 5 minutes to break... put your sensitive computer(s) in those.

    Bonus points for thermite of course.

  6. Physical Access by MosesJones · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So lets thing what physical access means in these cases.

    1) They have your desktop computer
    2) It is on
    3) You've entered your crypto keys

    Is it me or is this just a little tenuous? In a data centre they'd have to drag the thing off the rack and on your personal machine they'd have to physically take it off you, because waiting for you to shutdown and then walk-away would be too long. So the solution is to shutdown the machine and THEN put your coat on and pack your bag.

    I can also get people's Crypto keys by threatening them with a knife or putting a CCTV camera over their workstation. There are "easier" ways to get the keys if you have physical access to the environment that are much simpler and reliable.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Physical Access by nachoboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't expect to have time to do anything if the feds bust down your door and want your boxes. Plus, now your machine doesn't even have to be turned off for someone to remove it to a forensic lab: introducing HotPlug.

    2. Re:Physical Access by mypalmike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      on your personal machine they'd have to physically take it off you

      Like when your laptop is stolen while it's in sleep mode. This is rather a common situation.

      --
      There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
    3. Re:Physical Access by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      2) It is on
      3) You've entered your crypto keys


      These two are likely true for every kind of whole-drive encryption, unless the encrypted drive is unmounted every time you walk away. As for 1), it's true if you lock the console and walk away from the computer, which quite a lot of people do.

      Best workaround would be for A) operating systems to support fixing keys in a single spot in memory and B) drive encryption systems to automatically unmount and scramble the key (in the same place its always been, rather than wherever the OS felt it should be copied to on write) after X minutes of inactivity (prompting the user for the key again when they want to use it again).

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    4. Re:Physical Access by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative
      Think laptops. Laptop users with a half-decent OS don't turn their machines off, they just put them to sleep. When you turn the machine on, you enter your passphrase and it mounts the encrypted disk volume. When you close the lid, the OS locks the machine. You can't get in again without entering your pass phrase. If someone steals the machine, they can't log back in without knowing your password. If they shut the machine down and boot from a different disk then they can't access your data because it's encrypted and turning off the machine wiped the decryption key from RAM.

      Except, apparently, it didn't. With the new scenario, the thief takes the cover off the machine and then pulls the battery. They then cool the RAM chips and dump the contents. They can then scan through the dump looking for the decryption key. Once they've found it, they mount the encrypted volume from another OS and get at all of your confidential data.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Physical Access by Charan · · Score: 1

      1) They have your desktop computer
      2) It is on
      3) You've entered your crypto keys

      I use FileVault on my Powerbook so that if it did happen to walk away, my personal data would stay safe. This computer stays on (suspended) with me logged in all the time, so it fits your criteria perfectly.

      This attack throws the switch on my plans.

    6. Re:Physical Access by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 1

      If you've put your laptop in standby, and the laptop is stolen, there's now a non-zero probability that the bad guys can access your encrypted data. The disk encryption people need to make sure that the standby routines erase any and all keys, and reprompt for access when the system comes out of standby.

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    7. Re:Physical Access by sempernoctis · · Score: 1

      More reliable: hardware keystroke logger...how many of us actually check the back of our machines every time we use them to make sure there aren't any suspicious devices plugged in?

    8. Re:Physical Access by Yath · · Score: 1

      So the solution is to shutdown the machine and THEN put your coat on and pack your bag.

      You're going to turn it on later, right?

      Let's say you've taken your disk-encrypted laptop home and you're doing work on it. Thugs break in, throw flash grenades, yell, etc. You cut power to your laptop just before they grab it... they rip it open, freeze the contents, then pop out the drams. They put the drams in another machine and read your key, and thus have access to your hard drive. Damn. And you thought turning it off would help.

      If you say you wouldn't take your sensitive data home this way, then what was the point of encrypting your hard disk in the first place?

      --
      I always mod up spelling trolls.
    9. Re:Physical Access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Think criminal investigation. I don't believe I have anything illegal on any of my computers, but given the quantity of laws, I don't really know. I encrypt all my drives just to be sure, and to try to protect the other people who use my hardware remotely.

      If the police came busting in with a search warrant I could easily see a situation in which the RAM modules could be popped very shortly after the power was turned off. Now I doubt that this technique will filter down to the average police forensics people for a couple of years, but it is a worry.

    10. Re:Physical Access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Those are all the normal common conditions when trying to crack DRM.

    11. Re:Physical Access by Erioll · · Score: 1

      I would guess it's even worse in the case of laptops, as most of those have a "hibernate" feature, which basically dumps all of your RAM directly to disk and powers down COMPLETELY, which means that even if they don't turn it on, they can just read the RAM image dump that's on the disk. Completely separate from what's talked about here, but seems like it's something that would work.

    12. Re:Physical Access by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      I can also get people's Crypto keys by threatening them with a knife or putting a CCTV camera over their workstation. There are "easier" ways to get the keys if you have physical access to the environment that are much simpler and reliable.

      That dont work with better systems. I have a thumbdrive that MUST be present for my passphrase to work, it contains a crypto key file. without it and my passphrase (which I can obscure from a camera even a hidden one easily by simply taking precautions) access to the files are not possible, I have 10 of those thumbdrives, which one has the key and are you sure I used a key?

      Threaten me? you'll get keys that will get you into something, just not what I want hidden. I love the plausible deniability function of the good encryption systems. You get thrown off the track, I dont get knifed, and I win.

      gotta love it.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    13. Re:Physical Access by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's nonzero. But if it's in standby and they can crack your login/password thats easier than taking it apart. 95% of laptops stolen are stolen for the hardware not the data. But the other 5% could contain some seriously valuable info. The fix you mentioned sounds reasonable, however I'm not sure standby mode is something software can detect, I'm not sure about half the time XP even remembers!

    14. Re:Physical Access by smallfries · · Score: 1

      All of your comments are answered in the article that you haven't read.

      In particular it is not simply a research issue - they have a fully automated attack on a usb flash drive.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    15. Re:Physical Access by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Which is why you should alway unmount your encrypted volumes before you powerdown/hibernate/standby which would ideally clear the contents of memory which contained the key. This would only work in a surprise attack where the user had enough time to poweroff the machine.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    16. Re:Physical Access by manywater · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same as you when I read this article. And I agree with you on the desktop computers. But then started thinking further. In most cases disk encryption is used on laptops. And many laptop users don't shutdown their system but leave them on standby modus. If such a laptop gets stolen, the users' session is activated when the system is accessed. Powering down the system and bringing it up with from a different source would make reading previous information stored in RAM theoretically possible if what they claim is true.

    17. Re:Physical Access by pla · · Score: 1

      Don't expect to have time to do anything if the feds bust down your door and want your boxes.

      I do not ever physically leave my machine while I have a TC volume mounted (it takes about half a second to do a dismount all). I also don't have my computer in the same room as my front door. If they knock to get me away from the machine, volume unmounted. If they break down the door, it takes considerably more than half a second to get to my computer room.

      That said, your link looks pretty impressive - I've can't count how many times I've wished I had something like that, to move machines to another room (or from a failing UPS to a replacement). Out of my price range, but pretty cool none-the-less!

    18. Re:Physical Access by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      Like when your laptop is stolen while it's in sleep mode. This is rather a common situation.
      Really? I thought most disk encryption software disabled suspend & hibernate modes specifically to prevent this. (Truecrypt/Ubuntu-dmcrypt to anyway.)

      Goes back to the practice of unmounting encrypted partitions when they're not in use. Truecrypt file/folder encryption will do this for you in setting/preferences.
    19. Re:Physical Access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how many of us actually check the back of our machines every time we use them to make sure there aren't any suspicious devices plugged in?

      Theres a lot of space inside the keyboard shell these days, most likely the State Of The Art is to open the shell, cut the usb cable and splice in a new keyboard controller with its own flash ram.

      Of course, with USB, you might check to see if your keyboard manufacturer/model changed ;)

    20. Re:Physical Access by CoreDump01 · · Score: 1

      Suspend-to-RAM is obviously a no-go on a laptop with encrypted drives, but hibernate is supported by at least dm-crypt quite well. I use it every day since a few month now. The only thing you notice is that hibernating takes a lot longer with an encrypted swap partition but that's it. Resume is only possible if you can unlock the partition(s) after power-on via password or key.

    21. Re:Physical Access by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      This is /. I don't have to RTFA! However I did and to do the attacks you need PHYSICAL access which isn't trivial. If you got physical access then all bets are off on what you can do to a machine. Grabbing the keys this way (cold reboot) only helps you until they change the keys, if you have physical access then you would be better off planting a trojan to grab data for the longer term. If they can steal the chips or the data and take them back to a lab then they can run all the error correction and key crackers they mention but they can't crazk those in a few seconds. The article also states "At normal operating temperatures, we generally saw a low rate of bit corruption for several seconds, followed by a period of rapid decay. Newer memory technologies, which use higher circuit densities, appeared to decay more quickly than older ones". Can you USB boot in several seconds??? Here is what they said "We found that the dimensions of the decay curves varied considerably between machines, with the fastest exhibiting complete data loss in approximately 2.5 seconds and the slowest taking an average of 35 seconds.....Can you USB boot and copy in several seconds?, they couldn't.."We succeeded in dumping 1 GB of RAM to a flash drive in approximately 4 minutes." So the results will vary, the DDR2 decays fastest and those chips are pretty common in desktops & laptops. There is also the bit about ECC memory, it's harder in some ways as it's commonly cleared immediately on bootup. I agree the approach WILL work, it's just not a practical approach when you have physical access and can boot the machine.

    22. Re:Physical Access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although it's not fast(double encryption), the solution to this would be

      1. Fully encrypt the hard drive to prevent most attacks
      2. Things that need to be especially protected can be encrypted in a virtual drive on the encrypted one that is only mounted when needed (and/or automatically dismounts and scrambles keys when sleep/shutdown/x period of inactivity goes by.)

    23. Re:Physical Access by russotto · · Score: 1

      You're going to turn it on later, right? Let's say you've taken your disk-encrypted laptop home and you're doing work on it. Thugs break in, throw flash grenades, yell, etc. You cut power to your laptop just before they grab it... they rip it open, freeze the contents, then pop out the drams. They put the drams in another machine and read your key, and thus have access to your hard drive. Damn. And you thought turning it off would help.
      My disk encryption system should wipe the key from RAM on sleep. So I just sleep the laptop and they're screwed.
    24. Re:Physical Access by fuzznutz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't expect to have time to do anything if the feds bust down your door and want your boxes. Plus, now your machine doesn't even have to be turned off for someone to remove it to a forensic lab: introducing HotPlug.


      How about if I hit the reset button instead of the power button? The POST clears the DRAM during the pre-boot sequence.
    25. Re:Physical Access by RollingThunder · · Score: 1

      That is one handy little device; thanks for the link!

    26. Re:Physical Access by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Yes, this being slashdot I realise that I didn't (skim-)read the paper properly, or in fact, err *cough*, your comment :) Two application for this spring to mind, one is the stolen laptop scenario that everyone has mentioned. If your laptop has TruCrypt for example then this is an interesting way around it that other approaches (with physical access) would have trouble doing. The other application (which I think they mention) is forensics. If the police break into a house and confiscate a running machine with an encrypted harddrive then this would seem to be the easiest approach to gain access to the data. Where this is weaker than other physical access approaches is the assumption that you're not going to give the hardware back (quickly)...

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    27. Re:Physical Access by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Yep, they will monitor you, wait for you to be connected, then bust in your door. people would have a hard time turing off their machine.

      Maybe the encrypted drive can unmount automatically after a cert period.

      I wonder if you can detect your power source has changed? that would foobar hot plug.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    28. Re:Physical Access by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      So you plug in a USB device that appears as a mouse and it emulates mouse movements to prevent the screensaver from kicking in. That works great until the system is programed to go into panic mode when a new device is attached.

      Also, it's patent pending? Great, I'm sure they'll easily get a patent for an obvious solution. In the few seconds between reading your post and clicking on the link, I already came up with a solution to the problem. Then the page came up and...surprise! It's exactly what I was thinking.

    29. Re:Physical Access by wodon · · Score: 1

      Remember the person trying to get the computer might not be a thief.
      You are making the assumption that the owner of the computer will have a chance to pull the plug on a machine.
      If there is suspicion that a suspect will try and delete data most LEOs will not politely knock on your door and serve a warrant.
      It is surprising how fast these guys can bust in a door and clear a house, most people only have a chance to stand looking shocked let alone get to shut down their machine.
      From this it looks like the process could be: Dump Keys, image drive, decrypt in the lab.

      On a side note, the Wiebetech Hotplug is one of the coolest forensics gadgets I have ever seen, can't work out if it is genius or insanity though.

      --
      It's My Tea and I'll Drink it if I Want To!
    30. Re:Physical Access by MrKane · · Score: 0

      "An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi"

      Sorry it's off topic, but...
      If everyone takes the Eye of the person next to them,
      everyone can still have two eyes (.?)

      Unless there's some selfish One-Eye b4stard in the world. heh.

    31. Re:Physical Access by marquis111 · · Score: 1

      One way around this that I can think of is to modify the power supply itself so that the device reboots itself every hour or so. Inelegant, annoying, and potentially data-corrupting, but effective for devices that run off of a CD/DVD, such as Knoppix.

    32. Re:Physical Access by ista · · Score: 1

      Plus, now your machine doesn't even have to be turned off for someone to remove it to a forensic lab: introducing HotPlug. HotPlug only works in places where you could introduce an UPS to the plug connectors while they're still (electrically live) connected to the socket.

      However, many other countries do use power plugs and wall sockets where you can't get access to the plug connectors while the plug is
      still in the socket. E.g. see CEE7/7, which is the de-facto-standard for many european countries or
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_AC_power_plugs_and_sockets for various plugs and sockets. Some of them might be intercepted via HotPlug, but
      I guess that at least for CEE7/7 or IEC connectors it might be quite hard to "HotPlug" them.

    33. Re:Physical Access by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      I have to say, thanks for your reply. I've since been using dm-crypt on my two Ubuntu laptops (the full encrypted install) with hibernate mode set should the lid be closed. i.e someone unplugging it and walking out my house with it.

  7. Why don't just reset the motherboard? by sharp_blue · · Score: 1

    From TFA:
    Our research shows that data in DRAM actually fades out gradually over a period of seconds to minutes, enabling an attacker to read the full contents of memory by cutting power and then rebooting into a malicious operating system.

    But then, just reset the CPU and boot into a memory analysis program, without powering it down. Why bother with potential DRAM errors?

  8. A market opportunity? Workarounds exist. by davidwr · · Score: 1

    New! Improved! Our memory forgets!

    Seriously, between overwriting data that is no longer needed, storing sensitive data such as keys encrypted in a daisy-chained manner that includes chain elements on different chips and even in different subsystems such as the graphics controller or on-cpu buffers, and having a small amount of memory storage that really does disappear the minute you pull the plug, this should be a non-issue.

    The latter may require extra hardware but the rest can be done on existing equipment.

    --

    Daisy chained encryption:
    Old way: Decryption keys for your opened encrypted disk are stored in RAM.
    New way: Decryption keys for your opened encrypted disk are stored in RAM but in an encrypted format. These encrypted keys have a few bytes stripped out to make decryption impossible. The stripped bytes are stored somewhere else, such as in the CPU cache. The keys to unlock the decryption keys are stored somewhere else, such as on the graphics card.
    The only place everything is brought together for any length of time is in the CPU or CPU cache. During actual disk access, the cleartext key to the disk is stored in the CPU or its cache, then immediately erased.
    Such a system isn't foolproof but it's a lot less vulnerable to a "I had my container open when the cops came to my door equipped with forensic RAM-reading equipment so I pulled the plug on my computer" attack than the old way.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  9. Complete Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is just an excuse for some company to sell some kind of snake-oil "RAMWiper" product and try to scare rubes and idiot nontechnical CTOs into believing that they need it.

    We've said it time and time again. If the bad guys can get physical access to a machine (which it seems they would need here), all bets are off, and there's nothing you can do about it. Period. The trick is preventing physical access.

  10. Trusted Execution by chadskinner · · Score: 1

    Intel has a technology called TXT that would clear the memory in situations like this before handing control over to the boot medium.

    http://www.intel.com/technology/security/

  11. Physical Access by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

    That's the hard part, so any hack using this method almost has to be an inside job. How many hackers can actually walk into a location, take down the system, open it up and remove the memory DIMMS? In every data center I've worked at someone with that level of access is pretty well checked out, or if they are a vendor they are escorted and watched carefully. Pulling DIMMs out an puting them into liquid nitrogen is surely going to be noticed. It's not like you carry a Dewar in your pocket. Sure you can spoof the system once in a while but you got to be a damned good imposter. If it was your personal/corporate laptop/desktop and you had "Geek Squad" working on a problem you may have an issue. Also, consider the data in RAM is binary and could be anything from OS Code to App Code to data, you really have to know how the layout of how the chips store and access info as well as the structure of the information (what's code, whats data) and how to identify each type of information. Bit decay is also a problem, when you reach a certain time the bits start to decay, and you can't always tell with certainty it's a 1 or a zero. That decay time will vary by mfg, technology, speed of chips, etc. Once you have access to a machine deep enough to pull chips there are MUCH easier hacks, backdoors, trojans, malware, booting your "custom" OS off a thumb drive, burning files to a "backup CD", etc. are all much easier. It's RESEARCH not (yet) a reasonable way to hack the system.

  12. Use capacitors by StCredZero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You could use a capacitor to power this mechanism instead of a battery. It wouldn't need to last very long -- just long enough to scramble the RAM on power-down. It would be more reliable than a battery.

    1. Re:Use capacitors by Amouth · · Score: 1

      unless the battery is made by Sony - cause last time i checked PCB was flamable - and am confident that you could set it to catch fire on power loss the memory would be useless..

      although that would be a brain dead setup to have... i could so see manufactures labeling it a "feature"

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    2. Re:Use capacitors by Hatta · · Score: 1

      This is what needs to be done then. Every motherboard should contain a capacitor hooked to a circuit that will scramble the ram on power off. Further, the ram needs to be encased in a tamper-resistant enclosure that's hooked to a switch that will trigger the previously mentioned circuit if it is tampered with. Perhaps include some sort of photosensor that will scramble the ram if it's exposed to light, or better yet, fill the RAM enclosure with an inert gas and scramble the RAM if it's exposed to oxygen.

      Any chances of seeing any of these measures in consumer motherboards? I doubt it. But we'll probably be seeing them in future media players/game consoles, etc, to protect the DRM keys.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Use capacitors by wolferz · · Score: 0

      A battery could likely be removed with the system on. A capacitor can be bypassed and forced to give up it's charge early.... also with the system on. If some one malicious gains physical access to your computer it is game over... period.

    4. Re:Use capacitors by AchiIIe · · Score: 3, Informative

      I agree that the capacitor is the way to go. As a reminder, all harddrives are fitted with an emergency capacitor. If the hard drive looses power while the head is traveling there's a risk for a head crash. Thus, once power is lost, the capacitor will fire up the motor for one last push toward the parking space. if you have an external hard drive listen for the click that happens right after you pull the power.

      --
      Nature journal lied in Britannica vs Wikipedia Ask to retrac
    5. Re:Use capacitors by stuffeh · · Score: 1

      A capacitor is a battery, one thing you do to one can be done to the other. Why try to patch the problem when you can design something to fix it? What you would need is some sort of mechanism for the chip to empty the states the memory is in when the voltage drops from removal/shutdown. But that will require totally new design of ram and I think increased power for the circuit to recognize if there is power or not. But what do I know, IANAEE (I am not an electrical engineer.)

    6. Re:Use capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps include some sort of photosensor that will scramble the ram if it's exposed to light, or better yet, fill the RAM enclosure with an inert gas and scramble the RAM if it's exposed to oxygen.

      If your secrets are prone to being seized by the people who would have the capacity of legally doing it, this probably would not pose much of a threat--especially if this technology was pervasive.

    7. Re:Use capacitors by tweak13 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I heard that mechanism in hard drives explained to me as using the spindle motor as a generator to get the heads parked. Makes sense, there's a lot of inertia in the spinning platters that you may as well use.

    8. Re:Use capacitors by noidentity · · Score: 1

      As a reminder, all harddrives are fitted with an emergency capacitor. If the hard drive looses power while the head is traveling there's a risk for a head crash. Thus, once power is lost, the capacitor will fire up the motor for one last push toward the parking space. if you have an external hard drive listen for the click that happens right after you pull the power.

      By emergency capacitor, do you mean flywheel, as in, the disks spinning at high RPM that pack considerable energy? I've never seen any large capacitors on hard drives.

    9. Re:Use capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      OK. I "pulled the power" but all I heard was KKKKKKKKKKKKCCCCCCCC--CLUNK. Powered up the drive and heard Click-Click-Click-Click. Must be a bad capacitor.

      Oh, and I cannot get my data anymore.

    10. Re:Use capacitors by noidentity · · Score: 1

      You could use a capacitor to power this mechanism instead of a battery. It wouldn't need to last very long -- just long enough to scramble the RAM on power-down. It would be more reliable than a battery.

      OK, so I just need to remove this scrambling module's capacitor before abruptly curring power to the system and removing DRAM for analysis. Wouldn't it make more sense for the software to clear any sensitive data immediately after it's done with it?

    11. Re:Use capacitors by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 4, Informative

      erm... I have taken many hard drives apart, and I've never seen a cap in them (modern ones, at least) that would have enough power to turn the platters or energize the voice coil of the read head armature. It's been a while since I've seen anything other than surface-mount components.

      Usually what I find is a rare-earth magnet at one end of the voice coil's travel that locks the read heads away from the platter in the absence of voltage in the coil; this is aided as well by the torque exerted on the armature by the trace ribbons that feed voltage to the coil and read heads. Note that this magnet is separate and distinct from the two that control the lateral motion of the read/write armature.

      The 'clink' that you hear is the armature knocking up against the magnet. If you take the cover off, you can recreate the sound yourself, even without power.

      protip: HDD voice coils make great crude galvanometers.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    12. Re:Use capacitors by awing0 · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I've torn apart a lot of drives and never found anything bigger than a surface mount capacitor in modern drives. I believe the platter keeps its momentum long enough to let the head reseat by magnetic force.

      --
      Cthulhu Saves.
    13. Re:Use capacitors by Britz · · Score: 1

      With access to the machine one could disable said capacitor and then power down the machine. But, I aknowledge that this would provide an additional barrier.

    14. Re:Use capacitors by zoltamatron · · Score: 1

      Okay, but if you have enough physical access to the computer to remove the ram chips.....then why don't you just remove the capacitor before you do your stunt?

      --
      Tolerance does not tolerate intolerance, or hypocrisy.
    15. Re:Use capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of the hardisks that I have disassembled, only a small fraction had a magnet to hold the heads in the parked position, and none of them were strong enough to actually pull the heads over, and most certainly not if the drive was mounted vertically (which is permitted with most if not all modern drives). Most drives actually have some plastic spring/hook mechanism to hold the heads, and I suspect that actually the spindle motor is used as a generator to move the heads to the park position.

    16. Re:Use capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A capacitor is not a battery. The two perform similar functions, but in completely different ways.

    17. Re:Use capacitors by vought · · Score: 1

      You could use a capacitor to power this mechanism instead of a battery. What about if they just used the freakin' TPM that's on the MacBook's board?

      From what I understand, the key would never be stored like this in RAM if the TPM's security model were in force.
    18. Re:Use capacitors by mlush · · Score: 1

      protip: HDD voice coils make great crude galvanometers.

      amtip: HDD magnets make the best fridgemagnets

    19. Re:Use capacitors by theelectron · · Score: 1

      And the platters make great wind chimes (just hang 'em from the control board) On second thought, maybe I shouldn't admit to this...

  13. from an attacker with physical access by wiredog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the attacker has physical access to your system, it's not your system.

    1. Re:from an attacker with physical access by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if someone devises a way to take your belongings without your consent? That'd be scary! I propose to call that kind of action "theft".

    2. Re:from an attacker with physical access by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``If the attacker has physical access to your system, it's not your system.''

      Which is why you encrypt the data you put into that system, so that whomever wants to read the data has to enter the passphrase that only you know, first.

      Except that they don't, because they can read it from RAM. But that, to me at least, is new information. It's certainly not obvious like "they can boot from a rescue CD and become root on your system without knowing your password".

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    3. Re:from an attacker with physical access by Cock+Knocker · · Score: 0

      ok but that shouldn't mean that now it's also his /data/.

    4. Re:from an attacker with physical access by xebecv · · Score: 1

      You mean if somebody has physical access to your hardware on day-to-day basis? We are not talking about that. As several posters mentioned before - stolen laptop is the main concern here. If the disk is encrypted with a good key, this cold-DRAM-reading is the only viable and relatively easy method of stealing sensitive data from it. The best solutions I've read so far today about: 1. Getting rid of the somehow marked sensitive information from memory, while switching to sleep mode or to locked mode. This method will need lots of code change and full cooperation of OS and application developers. 2. Using capacitor based backup power on motherboard to wipe memory clean at the moment of power loss. This method is easier to implement but less reliable, since you can pop RAM from the motherboard while it is still on, or just destroy that capacitor before power off.

    5. Re:from an attacker with physical access by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      If you have physical security on your machine, why are you encrypting your drive at all then?

      The whole point of drive encryption is to deal with situations in which you don't have complete physical security over your box. This attack completely blows it out of the water. The attack can be performed with a USB thumb drive with some software on it and a power-off, power-on reboot.

      The only solution I can see is DRAM that purposefully scrambles itself when it loses power. Even that's not a perfect defense, but it raises the bar to the attacker with millions of dollars level.

      The current attack can be done trivially by somebody with hardly any resources at all. And it might even be able to be done and information copied off without you even realizing that something had happened to your laptop.

  14. CPU cache? by Westley · · Score: 1

    One potential workaround, which would probably require support from Intel/AMD: store a short encryption key in L1 cache. It doesn't need to be big, or use "proper" encryption - just enough to make the DRAM key useless unless you've got the cache memory.

    I would hope that the CPU could clear this cache as it powers down (even in a non-orderly manner).

    Then again, I realise that people who aren't experts (and I'm definitely not an expert) very rarely make suggestions which actually fix significant security holes...

    1. Re:CPU cache? by mzs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      VIA had a while back some registers that you cold tweak to lock L1 cache lines. I don't know if modern VIA chips still have this. In the X86 world I do not know of anything similar from Intel or AMD. You might have better luck using unused registers in the CPU (debugging registers) or external chips (chipset UART regs say) but then you really would not be able to use those anymore, but there may be enough legacy registers around not really used anymore to make it work with the penalty of it being very slow.

    2. Re:CPU cache? by grape+jelly · · Score: 1

      L1/L2 caches probably wouldn't be the best place to store keys since they're really just SRAM (static RAM). That is to say, the state of the memory will remain when power is lost, unless it's explicitly overwritten. If you wish to learn more about how memory storage is implemented on CPUs (registers, L1/L2 caches in modern machines), see wikipedia's article on Flip-flops (electronics).

    3. Re:CPU cache? by Westley · · Score: 1

      That would be where my comment of "I would hope that the CPU could clear this cache as it powers down (even in a non-orderly manner)" comes in :)

    4. Re:CPU cache? by gillbates · · Score: 1

      That is to say, the state of the memory will remain when power is lost, unless it's explicitly overwritten.

      That is not what 'static' means. It means that the state of the flip flop doesn't change absent a reset signal, hence, the circuit is static as long as power is applied. Unlike DRAM, where the memory cell is a capacitor which gradually loses its charge and needs to be refreshed.

      SRAM is probably the best place to store the key, because recovery of SRAM contents, while sometimes possible, is much harder. Unlike capacitors, which are designed to store a charge, the state of SRAM is designed to be stable when power is applied. That is, a pair of cross-coupled transistors prevent another pair of cross-coupled transistors from turning on. Determining which pair of transistors was turned on after power is removed is much more difficult than checking the residual charge on the capacitors used in DRAM.

      --
      The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  15. Nothing can be encrypted 100% of the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At some point, data needs to be in its plain original form to be operated on. I guess it all depends on how close to the heart of the "execution core" you want the encryption to be used. The closer you keep the data encrypted, the bigger a performance hit you're going to have. Call it the "plain-text hole" if you will.

    1. Re:Nothing can be encrypted 100% of the time by obstalesgone · · Score: 1

      This is my suggestion precisely. In critical circumstances, move the encryption just outside of the execution core.. just past the internal CPU caches and into the memory controller. The keys should be regenerated on reset assertions, and memory caching modes would have to be used correctly to assure that info written to devices other than system ram is not encrypted.

      It's got a huge performance penalty, but it's simple.

    2. Re:Nothing can be encrypted 100% of the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the performance penalty isn't that bad if you have a big enough cache.... this has been around for awhile (I think it may even exist in some consumer electronic game consoles) there are additional security problems as well with such encrypted memory systems.... think merkle trees.

  16. Not necessarily such a bad thing... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    The class of devices most likely to be affected(and I'm really not sure that I mind at all) will be the various systems designed with the assumption that the user is the enemy(many cellphones, set top boxes, etc, etc.) Those tend to have fairly small amounts of memory and, since the "attacker" is the owner, plenty of leisurely physical access. I just can't get too worried about that class of attacks, though. When "security" means locking me out of my stuff to benefit some third party bottom line, insecurity is good. This comment applies to the majority of attacks that require somewhat exotic physical access. Remote vulnerabilities and trivial physical attacks are dangerous; but more sophisticated local attacks are what we used to call "user tinkering" and I have every desire for their success.

  17. Secure DRAM by StCredZero · · Score: 1

    Another option -- just make DRAM that drains all of its memory cells to ground when the power goes off. Every bit of DRAM is just a tiny capacitor, so this would erase the whole chip in an instant. If you could arrange for this to happen, then the DRAM would be be erased, unless you somehow supplied your own power to the DRAM chips.

    1. Re:Secure DRAM by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, this is the problem; even with a ground, there's a charge held. DRAM isn't a charged-coupled device (CCD), instead, the charge drain doesn't work quickly, allowing DRAM to be read for a short while until things go to zero. The only protection you can give (see other posts) is to forcibly write a charge to all locations, or a sufficient number to scramble the eggs. All DRAM will eventually have cell decay to an unreadable point when the vcc is dropped. Several aforementioned schemes tell how to keep vcc on (capacitors, batteries, who knows-- maybe a DRAM fuel cell-- give your DRAM a drink). SRAM, photo-sensitive RAM, flash, and other ROM-ish RAM devices 'hold' a charge somewhat indefinitely depending on the technology in the device. DRAM eventually loses a detectable charge.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  18. Firewire and USB can access memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Heck, with physical access to a running machine, jack into the firewire or USB port and you have clear access to reading and writing all the memory you want.
    I wrote a small paper here http://www.friendsglobal.com/papers/FireWire%20Memory%20Dump%20of%20Windows%20XP.pdf for a forensics class on using firewire to access memory, subverting the operating system.

    All bets are off once physical access is gained. Best bet would be to store the keys, somehow, in the CPU's caches and never let it stay in main memory.

    1. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Holy crap, that's way more surprising than TFA. I knew Firewire could DMA, but I didn't know it could just initiate a request on it's own like that, without the CPU and OS even allowing it. That needs to get fixed.

      All bets are off once physical access is gained.

      I guess so, but up to now I've ass/u/me-d that one is only vulnerable from the time of physical access, forward. This read-memory-after-poweroff stuff sure makes it hard to defend against the stolen laptop scenario.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    2. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      I agree. Pulling out the DIMMs or rebooting the computer are pretty silly attacks. In addition to FireWire you can read directly from memory using the PCMCIA or ExpressCard slot. Using ExpressCard you can probably read the contents of a typical laptop in less than 1 second. Plenty of time to attack the laptop of the guy sitting next to you on the airplane when he gets up to use the lav.

    3. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You leave laptops just sitting on your seat back tray while you hit an in-flight restroom?

      Even if wasn't concerning an attack that needs power, that's asking for the laptop to grow legs and do a jig away from your seat singing "zippty-do-dah" and throwing confetti while you're taking care of your green apple two step.

    4. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1

      In my experience, everybody leaves their laptops on the seat when they use the head. What do you do? Stuff it in your shoe?

    5. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
      1. USB doesn't provide a DMA mechanism. This is something only FireWire is capable of (and is part of the reason why FireWire is generally faster than USB in practice.)
      2. This is a well-known design issue with FireWire, and only certain types of controllers are vulnerable.
      Kudos for mentioning another interesting attack vector, but this is hardly an unavoidable one; just secure the FireWire controller, which is done in some designs.

      This "cold RAM" idea is also interesting, though; in theory, you could design a floppy you could insert before cold rebooting that would find encryption keys for you, without even having to disassemble the computer. (I doubt it would work very well in practice, though.)
    6. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem very likely that anyone could reasonably get away with stealing a laptop during a flight. The owner would immediately report the incident to the flight crew; there would be numerous of witnesses in close proximity to the theft, and a relatively limited number of potential suspects. There is also no discreet way off a plane other than the main exit, where airport personnel and/or the crew will certainly be searching for the stolen equipment -- which, even in the case of a small laptop, is not particularly concealable.

      I don't see that the GP really has much to worry about.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    7. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1
      What!?

      A "servlet" is susceptible to attack since malicious software running on the target can identify and stop it
      or trigger a logic bomb.

      It is possible the "servlet" could be maliciously submitted to malware and virus protection houses. The
      code would be inspected and signature detection profiles pushed out to millions of computers world
      wide. Thus a target with active, running virus protection might automatically stop a live forensics
      investigation.
      An owner of a system who does not want unauthorized software running on his computer is "malicious"? Just because some company sells this openly doesn't prevent it from being malware.
    8. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by afidel · · Score: 1

      Ok, that is just so geeky and so hackish as to be wonderful.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    9. Re:Firewire and USB can access memory by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      At the very least the list of possible suspects is much narrower for theft from a plane than for almost any other kind of theft -- you know it had to be one of the other passengers, all of whom are precisely identified in the airline's records. That's true regardless of the size of the item or how many people may be watching. Also, I believe that regulations require that at least one crew member remain on watch at any given time during the flight; they may not be able to identify the thief, but they can probably narrow down the list quite a bit.

      If you're particularly paranoid, just ask the passenger next to you to watch your equipment while you're gone. Then if it goes missing you have either an eyewitness or a very likely suspect.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
  19. guess what by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    there's no such thing as absolute security

    all security does is build a wall. someone can always climb over it, somehow. the question for you is merely do you want a white picket fence? or do you want a 10 foot chain link fence with barbed wire on top?

    locks on doors merely keep honest people honest. anyone determined to break into your house will find a way

    don't invest your energy in a failed concept: i can have absolute security. you can't, it's always an arms race, forever

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:guess what by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely right about the arms race. While you have physical security of the machine hacking on the RAM is unlikely.

      Additionally, it might be good to remember that the PC architecture has a lot to do with the options you have for securing the machine. If your CPU allows physical separation of user memory and machine use memory there are more options. In fact, you can build a kind of sandbox for the machine to run inside of in a protected way. If your encryption is hardware based, it's possible to put the encryption software and memory in yet another physical location. In this way it is possible to treat different memory locations physically different than others. This would allow for safe wipe of memory at shutdown as well as protected memory for encryption use. Remember kids; 640K is NOT enough for everyone.

    2. Re:guess what by PieSquared · · Score: 1

      "all security does is build a wall. someone can always climb over it, somehow. the question for you is merely do you want a white picket fence? or do you want a 10 foot chain link fence with barbed wire on top?

      locks on doors merely keep honest people honest. anyone determined to break into your house will find a way

      don't invest your energy in a failed concept: i can have absolute security. you can't, it's always an arms race, forever"

      A lock on your door will only keep honest people honest. But a full security system that calls the police will start to scare off casual thieves. Armed guards on patrol and putting what you want to protect in a safe will stop all but the most dedicated of thieves. Two walls, the first a 10-foot-tall concrete wall and the second a twenty foot tall solid stone wall topped with razer wire, with a hundred-yard-wide fire-filled pit between them filled with fire-proof crocodiles and periodic auto-lazer-turrets complemented by constant watch from overlapping guard towers who can call on several helicopters and a battalion of tanks all ten miles from your house will stop anything short of an invading army.

      And some data might be worth that. For a computer, full-disk encryption and a measure to melt the entire computer if anyone tampers with the case might reduce the chance of even a dedicated hacker getting your data before destroying it all but zero. And spending a few hundred dollars a year to protect information worth millions doesn't seem out of line. Sure, it isn't perfect security, but if it reduces the chance of compromising data when a laptop is stolen from 100% to 1%... well that might be worth an annual fee for your place in the arms race.

      --
      Does a line appended to your comment give your post meaning in and of itself, or only in relation to those without?
  20. Very real concern by Deagol · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I run my FreeBSD (7.0RC3) system with some geli-encrypted volumes, and one-time encrypted swap and /tmp. Very little data can leak out to non-encrypted space (yeah, /var/tmp is one).

    However, for grins one day, I decided to run "dd if=/dev/mem bs=1m count=[mem size] | strings | grep [whatever]" and found not only various passwords, but URLs for sites visited *weeks* ago, even after reboots. So, I installed the "secure_delete" port and ran "smem". No luck -- some stuff got wiped, but some remained in memory. So I booted to a memtest86 CD-ROM, and ran the full test (this test does all kinds of writes/reads to memory). Then, I booted *back* to the normal system, and I was *still* able to recover juicy bits from /dev/mem. WTF?

    We need a kernel module for the common OSes that can encrypt virtual pages (is that the right term?) so that whether in core or paged, they won't be vulnerable.

    1. Re:Very real concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And where is that kernel module going to keep the key that will decrypt those pages when they are needed ?

      I think you need to think your cunning "I'll encrypt my password" scheme all the way through.

    2. Re:Very real concern by froseph · · Score: 1

      Something like Overshadow?

    3. Re:Very real concern by yabos · · Score: 1

      Mac OS X has secure virtual memory. I don't know if anyone has tested this to see if it actually provides any security but on my system it's a single checkbox "Use secure virtual memory" in the security preference pane.

    4. Re:Very real concern by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      Mac OS X has secure virtual memory. I don't know if anyone has tested this to see if it actually provides any security but on my system it's a single checkbox "Use secure virtual memory" in the security preference pane.
      I believe that's only for swap files, not for physical memory. Swap files on disk tend to be a greater concern because the memory doesn't decay after a few minutes, but can be read for quite some time, even if the file is deleted.
      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    5. Re:Very real concern by yabos · · Score: 1

      Also, I'm pretty sure that the implementation is like File Vault where an AES encrypted disk image is created and that's used as your swap volume. So, theoretically it should be fairly secure. I'm not sure what it uses for the key but it's likely your account password.

    6. Re:Very real concern by Deagol · · Score: 1
      That's very cool indeed. However, after thinking about it, even something simpler might work. Would it be possible to amend the kernel API so that when a page is released from use, it could do a secure wipe on each physical page? Not nearly as thorough as a system where plain-text pages never hit the ram chip, but it may be a relatively easy stop-gap measure to use in the interim. You could even use an extended file system attribute to designate which exec'ed binaries are affected by such a system.

      Then again, I've been waiting for years for an in-kernel system where only signed-binaries can be run, and that seems nowhere in sight. This stuff must be enormously difficult to do, or the pool of people wanting such features is immeasurably small.

    7. Re:Very real concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Maybe you are finding the contents of your browser's history and other crap from the VFS cache?

    8. Re:Very real concern by Cruicky · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you are running "dd if=/dev/mem bs=1m count=[mem size] | strings | grep [whatever]" on the machine, your search term will be stored in memory, so you are certain to get a result. You would need to take a memory dump, then run strings on that instead, preferably after it's been transferred to another machine.

    9. Re:Very real concern by Deagol · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Indeed -- however, I am not *that* dense. ;)

      It's pretty easy to tell, though, that if you do my procedure and grep for "example" then see "http://www.example.com" in the result, which hasn't been visited in weeks/days (even after reboots and power-downs), then it's clearly appears to be lingering in RAM.

      Someone mentioned browser cache, but that's set to be cleared each time Firefox is loaded. Perhaps file system slack space is the culprit here.

      Someone else mentioned the VFS cache, which I don't know enough about to comment. Would such meta data be preserved on disk and end up in memory after a restart of the OS? Certainly, I know that without wiping inodes, that file names can persist on disk. For the curious, this can be seen by deleting a uniquely-named file from a directory, then doing a "dd if=[dir] | strings" which shows strings of current and deleted filenames. (Oddly enough, this worked for UFS, but not for my ZFS volume -- must handle things much differently.)

      I do agree that your dump-to-file-then-grep method is much more sane than mine and less prone to false alarms.

      In any case, this is a most interesting topic.

    10. Re:Very real concern by Hillgiant · · Score: 1

      ...Then again, I've been waiting for years for an in-kernel system where only signed-binaries can be run, and that seems nowhere in sight. ...

      Hrm... I thought they were already working on something like that.
      --
      -
    11. Re:Very real concern by dezert_fox · · Score: 1

      Encrypting virtual memory would be LUDICROUSLY, UNUSABLY, SICKENINGLY slow. But you could do it.

    12. Re:Very real concern by rabiddeity · · Score: 1

      Very little data can leak out to non-encrypted space (yeah, /var/tmp is one).

      Just curious; if you have a separate /tmp partition, is there a reason you can't symlink /var/tmp to /tmp? Or more accurately, is there a reason one shouldn't?

    13. Re:Very real concern by Deagol · · Score: 1

      I just noticed that this is exactly what I did. Traditionally, I believe that /var/tmp is meant to be a little more persistent than /tmp. For example, 'vi' usually keeps "recover" files in /var/tmp, so that if you're editing a file and you lose your connection or the machine crashes, you can use the "-r" option to recover what you were working on. On a one-time-key encrypted /var/tmp, you would obviously loose those files each time the system restarted. I think this is a fair compromise for my system, though.

    14. Re:Very real concern by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

      /var/tmp is supposed to persist past reboots.

  21. I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by gillbates · · Score: 3, Insightful

    we know of no simple remedy that would eliminate them...

    As part of a secure programming course I recently took, we were instructed to overwrite keys with zeros when done using them. It's that simple - you don't leave the key in memory for any longer than you need it.

    When the machine is powered down, your application's exit routine zeros all of the memory, and then free()s it. Nothing that good programming practices can't address.

    Generally speaking, it's the keys on the disk(!) that are the problem. Without two factor authentication, you need merely to scan disk sectors...

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When the machine is powered down, your application's exit routine zeros all of the memory, and then free()s it. Nothing that good programming practices can't address.

      Unless of course the machine is, you know, simply "powered down".

      Pulling the plug isn't going to let your application do squat.

    2. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by swilver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are ways to turn off computers that bypass "Start > Shutdown"

    3. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by Nebu · · Score: 1

      As part of a secure programming course I recently took, we were instructed to overwrite keys with zeros when done using them. It's that simple - you don't leave the key in memory for any longer than you need it.

      When the machine is powered down, your application's exit routine zeros all of the memory, and then free()s it. Nothing that good programming practices can't address.

      You're assuming that when you write code to zero out the keys, the CPU will actually zero out the keys. One situation in which this assumption may be false is if you're using an optimizing compiler which statically analyzes your source code, and sees a "write to memory" instruction, for which that write will never be read. Since no one is ever going read that value you just wrote, it may decide it's not worth writing in the first place, and optimize it out.

      Then there's all sorts of OS-level optimizations which may intefere with zeroing memory. For example, the OS may temporarily put your program's memory space to a paging file, because it's running another process which needs a lot of RAM. Then, when it's your program's turn to run again, it'll load the contents of the page file back into memory. Your program says to zero out the memory, and it does so, and simply marks the pagefile as being "dirty" (i.e. containing garbage data), but does not bother to actually zero it out (not yet anyway, it may do so later on, when it's used up all the other dirty pages, and needs a new page to write upon).

    4. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea... unless someone does something unexpected like not shut the system down correctly. Pulling the power cord or battery circumvents your solution, as well as actually pulling the memory of a running system.

    5. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize its easier to recover data that has been zeroed vs data that has been overwritten by random bits, right?

    6. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by mpapet · · Score: 1

      you don't leave the key in memory

      Yes, for the unwashed masses this would be a high-water mark in "system security." And judging by the lack of informative comments on the topic of key storage, it appears none of you have ever heard of a smart card.

      Smart cards store keys quite reliably, among other very valuable tasks. Another fabulous task is to shift authenticating out of the OS all-together and use two smart cards. The first provides peer authentication, the second is the first token's peer and user authentication. It's not a simple task to pass truecrypt through the smart card, but well within most programmer capabilities. The entirety of which is way, way outside the capabilities of your average black hat or law enforcement agent.

      Sadly though, no one really wants anything like it, much less are they willing to pay for it. It's fun to talk about and everything, but that's about it.

      Slightly OT: This guy in particular is doing great things with smart cards. http://snakecard.com/Logical_access.html

      --
      http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    7. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by ediron2 · · Score: 1

      Assuming you didn't overlook exploits involving a power cord (see everyone else's comments), the other practical reality you seem to overlook is that the computer needs the key while doing multimedia and games DRM, encrypted files or file systems, encrypted hard drives, and encrypted communication sessions (SSL, VPN, SSH).

      Short-burst key uses like package or signature validation and email/file/doc encryption are what you're talking about -- for them, memory purges can force attacks to require interrupts or dual-memory-access tricks or split-second timing on top of memory-snapshot exploits to get the key in the brief time it is exposed. But the era of short-burst key usage is gone-baby-gone.

    8. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by yeremein · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For hard disk encryption, you need to keep the key in memory. Can't ask the user for a password every time you read a sector.

    9. Re:I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned... by spiko-carpediem · · Score: 1

      The problem can still be addressed with proper programming, by overwriting key memory locations after each prolonged time key hasn't been used. But the user would have to enter keys more often. And the encrypted disks shouldn't be constantly read, as is the case with playing mp3 files from it or running badly written programs.

  22. Countermeasure here: by jetmarc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This attack is very powerful.

    It's not possible to "clear the DRAM" (as others have suggested), because the attacker will boot his own CD and not give control to your OS after the reset. Thus you won't be able to clear anything.

    Anything? Not so quick, my dear! For the CD to boot, first there is the BIOS. And BIOS needs memory as well (for the menus, the screen, the ElToro floppy image etc).

    Now the countermeasure is obvious: Keep the sensitive key material in memory areas that is erased during the early boot procedure. Then the attack complexity is raised from "no hardware required" to "specicialists hardware necessary, no guarantees given".

    It might seem difficult to find out which memory is of that category. But it isn't, either! Just prepare two boot CDs. One that fills all memory with a known pattern (eg 0x55). Boot it. Then reset and insert the second CD, which identifies all memory areas that have lost the known pattern. These areas have either suffered DRAM fade, or they have been overwritten during the BIOS boot process. Use heuristics to find out which of the two was the cause. Done!

    As simple as that.

    Regards,
    Marc

    1. Re:Countermeasure here: by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 1

      Anything? Not so quick, my dear! For the CD to boot, first there is the BIOS. And BIOS needs memory as well (for the menus, the screen, the ElToro floppy image etc). Now the countermeasure is obvious: Keep the sensitive key material in memory areas that is erased during the early boot procedure. Then the attack complexity is raised from "no hardware required" to "specicialists hardware necessary, no guarantees given".

      I'm pretty sure you can manufacture a specialist DRAM read/dump module for a tens of dollars in China. So while it would be for specialists, access to such hardware will be available and at relatively low costs. So it won't stop the people you're trying to protect your from.

      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
    2. Re:Countermeasure here: by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 1

      Protecting/clearing/overwriting portions of the memory during BIOS boot would work, unless the attacker cooled and moved the DRAM into their own system where the BIOS does not use the same areas, or perhaps the attacker is looking for other information besides the disk encryption key. I think you've already considered this, but it's worth a specific mention.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    3. Re:Countermeasure here: by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Your technique defends against your BIOS. I guess that's better than nothing, but it doesn't generalize. You can't count on the attacker's machine overwriting even a single bit.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    4. Re:Countermeasure here: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you RTFA?

      The specialist hardware you refer to is a can of compressed air and another PC. Not so specialized, huh?

    5. Re:Countermeasure here: by Adam+J.+Richter · · Score: 1

      While identifying and using an area overwritten by your BIOS is good idea, I think it would not be that hard to work around.

      Modern computers store their BIOS in "NOR" flash, a type of flash that can be read and written just like memory, only much more slowly (but costs more per bit than the "NAND" flash used in USB sticks). When the computer boots, it actually starts executing straight from the flash. It should be possible to load a custom BIOS that does not write to RAM at all, only storing its data in the CPU registers and in flash. You would have to be very careful, but it could be done with commodity hardware without physical modification, and in such a way that you could provide a mechanism to restore the flash back to its normal operation later.

      Also, there is a more trivial solution for the type of computer that has more than one memory socket and where the memory is not interleaved, as is typical for desktop computers but not for notebooks. Just put the memory to be analyzed in the socket that is not overwritten by BIOS.

      I suspect that a better solution here would be to store the key in SRAM. I believe that Via C3 chips and probably their relatives have a configuration option where some of the cache RAM can be used instead regular SRAM, mapped into a particular memory page.

    6. Re:Countermeasure here: by Bratch · · Score: 1

      Someone did mention the BIOS copying the boot loader:

      Re:Clear the DRAM? (Score:5, Interesting)
      by orclevegam (940336) on Thursday February 21, @01:27PM (#22505486)

      Yes, but the point is, if the system is powered down when it's stolen, or the hard drive is removed from the system, the full disk encryption will still protect the data. This is only a valid attack vector in the highly unlikely occasion that you have access to the powered on system, and even then it's somewhat dubious as to whether you'll get the data you need off of it. As I said though, this is very interesting from an academic standpoint for the simple fact that it is something that hasn't really been thought of. That being the case though, I can already think of one way to prevent this. Simply store your decryption keys at memory offset 0000:7C00, which will ensure that the BIOS copies the boot loader over your keys the next time the system boots (on x86 systems at any rate).

      Line: 27
      Error: 'currWin.parent' is null or not an object

      --
      Beware of the Redittor who loans you a Sharpie.
    7. Re:Countermeasure here: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont really understand why you can't "clear the DRAM"...
      It's as simple as writing random bits into memory before shutting down the system.
      Boot CDs can't do shit after that point, if your data is encrypted.

  23. Hardly the problem by wsanders · · Score: 1

    Time for memory controllers that just zero out RAM on power up. I think most do anyway.

    Worse, on most running OSes there are all kinds of deallocated and leaked chunks of memory that have god-knows-what in them. As root, you could browse through all this, or just trigger a dump.

    This is fun to know, but really, if someone is going to get physical access and rip the RAM out of your machine for its secrets and then plop them into a specially-crafted dead-RAM reader, you've got bigger problems, like the CIA or FSB is on your ass already, and you probably have guys with guns at the data center door anyway they'd need to take out to get at the machine.

    Otherwise, just steal the whole machine and read the disks. Much easier, and there's probably just as much interesting stuff on the disks.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:Hardly the problem by orclevegam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You kind of missed the point. The argument is that even with full disk encryption it's possible to reboot the system to a special OS that reads the encryption keys out of the RAM before it decays allowing the contents of the disk to then be decrypted. Of course, this overlooks the obvious problem that first you need to get your hands on the running system that already has the password entered and the disks decrypted, and then further allows you to reboot it using an alternative boot mechanism. Most often you run whole disk encryption on things like laptops so that in the event it gets stolen the data on it can't be recovered. Lets imagine how you would pull this attack off in this scenario. First, you need to find a laptop thats powered on, and decrypted, so most likely someone is using it. Next, that person needs to somehow leave the laptop sitting someplace (with sensitive information) powered on, and to be gone long enough for you to swipe it. Also, when you do swipe it, you must ensure that it stays powered on until you get it to wherever you have your forensics setup at. Next, you need to have a floppy, cdrom, or USB stick with your specially crafted OS on it and somehow get the system to reboot into that special OS (mind you at this point you probably don't know for sure if the laptop is using full disk encryption, or even what brand). lastly, you have to be lucky enough to get the specific data you want off the memory before it degrades and you lose it forever. Now, is this possible? Yes. Is it likely? Not even in the slightest. This is an interesting academic exorcise, but means exactly jack in real world security.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    2. Re:Hardly the problem by obstalesgone · · Score: 1

      I don't think I missed the point at all, and I didn't say anything about disk encryption. I said "memory controllers with hardware encryption". I am suggesting encrypting the contents of RAM, not the contents of a disk.

      New keys could be generated every time a reset line is asserted.

    3. Re:Hardly the problem by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      If you can manage to steal it while it's still on, and decrypted, then there's no reason for any other kind of attack. Just ensure that you keep the machine powered on, and that there isn't any kind of time-out mechanism on the decryption, so that the key is lost. What you would actually require this attack for, is for if you go to steal the laptop, and someone cuts the power so that it's decrypted. Then, in a rush, you turn it back on and boot up into your special OS, hope that it doesn't overwrite the memory where the key was stored. However, once the machine in powered back on, whatever data managed to be in memory would probably stay there until overwritten, or until the machine was powered off.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:Hardly the problem by russ1337 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Next, you need to have a floppy, cdrom, or USB stick with your specially crafted OS on it and somehow get the system to reboot into that special OS (mind you at this point you probably don't know for sure if the laptop is using full disk encryption, or even what brand)
      So simply setting the hard drive as the only boot device in BIOS, and password protecting BIOS could slow down the attacker enough. (they'd have to disasemble the laptop, reset the bios, reboot).

      As someone pointed out to me a few days ago: Firewire (usually?) has DMA access, so it would be possible to interface the laptop via firewire and do a full memory dump. Then go to work on that to get the key. - requires physical access to the powered laptop of course. Of course, if you have no firewire devices you could have a script do a 'shutdown -H now' on detection of a firewire device.
    5. Re:Hardly the problem by obstalesgone · · Score: 1

      My post seems silly now that I realize you weren't responding to me. haha

    6. Re:Hardly the problem by orclevegam · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmm... it's kind of assumed that there will at least be a screensaver password enabled that would prevent you from accessing the data directly. On the topic of preventing the new OS from reading the data though, why not store the decryption keys at 0000:7C00. Anyone familiar with how boot loaders work knows that that's the address that the boot loader gets copied into by the BIOS, so if you store your sensitive data there simply booting a new OS would wipe it out.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    7. Re:Hardly the problem by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Probably because of the fact that when you ask the OS for a chunk of memory, you don't get to specify what it's address is. With virtual memory systems, you likely wouldn't even know the real physical address of the memory you're writing to. Also, by the time you have booted into your favourite OS, that memory segment is probably being used for something else.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:Hardly the problem by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Probably because of the fact that when you ask the OS for a chunk of memory, you don't get to specify what it's address is. With virtual memory systems, you likely wouldn't even know the real physical address of the memory you're writing to. Also, by the time you have booted into your favourite OS, that memory segment is probably being used for something else. It is possible to request specific memory offsets, it just requires co-operation of the OS to do so. Likewise the address probably is being used, but it should be possible to get the OS to help out with that. If you're doing full-disk encryption your already having to load in a stub driver at boot just to get the OS into a working state, so reserving a chunk of memory shouldn't be that big a deal, and it becomes even simpler if you're using a hypervisor.
      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    9. Re:Hardly the problem by wsanders · · Score: 1

      >> You kind of missed the point. The argument is that even with full disk encryption it's possible to reboot the system to a special OS that reads the encryption keys out of the RAM before it decays allowing the contents of the disk to then be decrypted.

      Well, I didn't want to go on and on in my original post, but if I can mess with the boot settings, I can just install a rootkit that can read memory on the running system, and scarf up the contents of memory at will while the system continues to run. *Probably* a lot easier, and for sure a lot less likely to be noticed. So I'm not losing any sleep over somebody being able to read my power-cycled RAM, although it is interesting.

      --
      Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    10. Re:Hardly the problem by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I tend to agree with you, in that this isn't really that big of a deal. It's interesting research, but from a practical standpoint really doesn't mean much. I do disagree about the rootkit thing though. Yes, on most systems in use now it's relatively trivial to install a rootkit, but in theory at least (and we're already well into theory with this attack), the user could be running a secure OS that prevents you from installing a rootkit, or otherwise accessing the running system without user intervention, in which case this is possibly a valid attack vector. Of course the BIOS should probably be locked down, but even assuming it isn't doing something as simple as storing the encryption keys at 0000:7C00 as I stated in another post would likely prevent this sort of thing. Some people suggested a number of other possible preventative measures in the comments for TFA but the authors shot them down by saying an attacker could pull the DRAM and put it in specially crafted hardware to read the data off it. Personally I say that's kind of a stupid argument as if the attacker has that much access he's already won as there are a number of busses and such he could probe and just rip the data as it streams by anyway. This is really the key problem when talking about security. No matter how secure you make the system, there's always some way to bypass it, you just keep moving into increasingly unlikely or time consuming scenarios.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
  24. auto-turret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But the auto-turret I have guarding my computer would get you before you escaped.

  25. Dirty fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Solder RAM to board.
    Password the BIOS, boot only from local disk.

  26. Already Screwed by immcintosh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If somebody has the kind of access to cut power to your system and then immediately reboot with a malicious thumb drive, they probably have enough access to install something like an inconspicuous hardware keylogger, which I would be much MUCH more worried about than this if you're doing something sensitive enough to warrant it.

    And aside from that, couldn't you just encrypt the important parts of your memory and swap as well as your hard drive? Seems like that would defeat this quite handily, and again, if I were doing something so sensitive I'd probably be taking such precautions.

    Honestly though, aside from people doing stuff like maybe international or corporate espionage, I can't imagine where any of this would be a problem.

    1. Re:Already Screwed by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      If somebody has the kind of access to cut power to your system and then immediately reboot with a malicious thumb drive, they probably have enough access to install something like an inconspicuous hardware keylogger, which I would be much MUCH more worried about than this if you're doing something sensitive enough to warrant it.
      Well, consider a stolen laptop. I'm a lot less worried about them installing a keylogger on their own (stolen) computer, than I am worried about them reading my dm-crypt key from apparently-not-quite-dead RAM, thereby being able to read /home. By stealing the disk, they now own the disk. My encrypting the disk, I thought I still owned the data. Apparently not.
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    2. Re:Already Screwed by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      I have trouble imagining a situation where they would feasibly be able to effectively use a stolen laptop within the few seconds after the theft (assuming it was stolen immediately after being powered off) that this attack would work. It's not like they could steal a cold laptop out of your bag and do this, they need to do it immediately after you have been using it. That means they need to be ready to swipe it straight off the bat and have the necessary software ready to use on the spot.

      Honestly, like I said in my previous post, I really don't see many situations where this would a real concern.

    3. Re:Already Screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're encrypting physical memory... who encrypts the encrypters? :-)

      The best solution I could think of for something like this would be to try and shove the encryption key into a special register on the CPU. Getting unauthorized access to a register is non-trivial; even with physical access, to bypass the hardware, you need special microscopic equipment, which I doubt you could employ before the SRAM cells decay.

      This would require changes to the machine architecture, however, or changes to calling conventions that would essentially drop a register for any other use. And it'd need to be big enough for all the sensitive crypto data, too (though here is where your suggestion could prove useful, by having a minimal area that provides, say, a simple randomized XOR mask for a larger amount of sensitive information).

    4. Re:Already Screwed by LiENUS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm I'm done working with this sensitive data I think I'll put my laptop into suspend mode and leave this coffee shop to go home. But first let me go order one more for the road... Oh no I'm back with my drink and my laptop's gone. Good thing I encrypted my hard drive, my work will just buy me a new one and since all of the sensitive data was encrypted no problem I'll just pull the latest copy from the server and resume my work, none of the customers need to know that that all 1.5 million social security numbers, birth dates and addresses were stolen because it's impossible to decrypt the data on the drive.

    5. Re:Already Screwed by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      I have trouble imagining a situation where they would feasibly be able to effectively use a stolen laptop within the few seconds after the theft

      It's not clear that it's just "a few seconds." Other posters have stated figures where, depending on temperature, it might be minutes.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  27. New feature for motherboard venders by seth_hartbecke · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Full memory encryption. Set a chip on the memory buss, it encrypts/decrypts all the data as it passes between the CPU and RAM chips. At first this would be something like old MMUs before they were built into the CPU itself. They sit on the address bus and add/subtract offsets. This would sit on the data bus and do some simple crypto. Put a capacitor right next to it, first time the chip powers up it selects a random key, when the motherboard looses power the capacitor keeps the chip running long enough for it to overwrite the key that it was internally storing.

    Then if they manage to break into your super secure datacenter, wheal in their tank of liquid nitrogen and pump your server full of it just so they can steal your RAM chips...it still doesn't get them anything.

    (If you read the paper, they talk about how if you cool the chips with liquid nitrogen they keep their contents with power off and removed for 'several hours'...they argue that simply modifying the bios to zero at startup isn't sufficient as they may physically *remove* the ram chips before you have a chance to zero them)

    --
    END
  28. In 1986... by Rick+Richardson · · Score: 1


    I pulled a PIC-4 uP out from a circuit. The DRAM stayed non-refeshed for 2 minutes...

  29. You are making several wild assumptions here by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    You are assuming that...

    a) Your average cop who is seizing your PC is well-read enough to know about this technique
    b) The cops came totally unannounced to you
    c) Your PC is left on all the time with your encrypted partition mounted, or that the cops moved through your house so fast (30 seconds according to the article) that you don't have enough time to turn the machine you are using off for long enough for the DRAM to lose it's charge.
    d) You don't have a BIOS boot password set on the PC (any BIOS password would take at least 30 seconds to bypass by opening the PC and clearing the BIOS)

    In short - if you have data that is important enough to keep secret that it is on an encrypted partition, you shouldn't be leaving it mounted all the time ANYWAY. You should mount it when needed and unmount it as soon as you don't. Thus there won't be any keys in memory to steal.

    1. Re:You are making several wild assumptions here by sshir · · Score: 1

      And the problem with most of what you said - it's illegal.
      What GP specifically mentioned is that the system (with secret data) was on when the warrant was issued/received (systems with unmounted encrypted volumes not discussed here - so no point mentioning that).
      Doing "stuff" with your computer after the warrant was received is "tampering".

    2. Re:You are making several wild assumptions here by Hatta · · Score: 1

      a) Your average cop who is seizing your PC is well-read enough to know about this technique

      If you have data that require military grade encryption, you're probably trying to keep it away from people with military grade decryption techniques.

      b) The cops came totally unannounced to you

      Such as the sneak-and-peek warrants allowed by the PATRIOT act?

      c) Your PC is left on all the time with your encrypted partition mounted, or that the cops moved through your house so fast (30 seconds according to the article) that you don't have enough time to turn the machine you are using off for long enough for the DRAM to lose it's charge.

      This is a fair point, you should leave encrypted partitions unmounted as often as possible. But what use is data if it's not available?

      d) You don't have a BIOS boot password set on the PC (any BIOS password would take at least 30 seconds to bypass by opening the PC and clearing the BIOS)

      What good would the BIOS password do when the computer is already on and they can just rip out the RAM?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:You are making several wild assumptions here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Knock knock knock..."
      Unmount volumes, shut down (or rip the power cord out, depending on paranoia)

      "Oh hello officers..."

      If you're that paranoid in the first place, chances are this will be a relatively ineffective attack vector, more proof of concept than one with significant use. It might be used by government agencies against spies or terrorists, or sufficiently advanced and funded corporate spies.

  30. Well known problem to security experts... by gweihir · · Score: 1

    ... at least those that are worth their money. What was unknown is the exact amount of time you have and what can be done to extend it. Interesting reseacht for those alone. The basic vulnerability has been known for a long, long time.

    Fix: None, really. Just don't overestimate the capabilities an attacker needs to get your data. Also note, that if a computer has been switched off for some time, the risk fades. Protecting laptop disks with disk encryption is not a lot less secure now and still a good idea.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  31. Here is our rule of thumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you lost the machine and someone else can now be reasonably assumed to have taken the machine, you have already lost the war and the data contained within. There are other ways to bypass encryption methods on HD's. The real trick is to not keep valuble information on local hard drives. There is a reason Jesus invented TCP/IP and network storage. Not only do you get the bonus of having all your "special stuff" backed up, but your laptop is basically a dumb terminal and the loss or theft of it only incurs the cost of having to replace the laptop. Your data then lives safely in your data center

    It's called a good set of policies and procedures with an informed staff. Hell you don't even need an informed staff, just map their home directories or "my documents" folder to the network. Then even the monkeys get it right.

  32. Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Easy fix: install a BIOS/boot ROM with a non-bypassable memory test of all memory. This will clear all memory at power-up before reading the boot device.

    1. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm afriad they already hot-swapped that out for another BIOS before the reboot...

      Basically, physical access == game over.

    2. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Animats · · Score: 1

      I'm afriad they already hot-swapped that out for another BIOS before the reboot...

      Most BIOS parts are soldered in today, rather than being socketed. So you have to open the case, find the BIOS ROM, cut a few key pins, and get the correct test clip onto the device with a suitable BIOS part on a board attached to the test clip cable. Before the DRAMs run down. This is possible but requires substantial preparation, tools, and skills.

    3. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remove the RAM chips and install them in another system. Great idea though.

    4. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy bypass - open case remove ram, insert into reader.

    5. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, please.

      Why, exactly, must the attacker boot with the RAM in your computer instead of his own?

      10 points for effort, though. :P

    6. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would that prevent the attack described in the article - cutting power; getting RAM out of the computer; then putting them into a device controlled by attacker? No code nor any changes to the RAM would be executed.

    7. Re:Fix: install BIOS with a memory test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's possible to access memory chips without using them as main memory.
      ex: We have cardbus adapters that are used for testing memory chips. The original idea/tech came from the old RAM drives for old laptops. We've been using them for years to test memory. (Different adapters for different types of memory).

      Haven't tried it, but if I cooled the memory, placed it in the adapter quickly enough, I should?? be able to read everything.
      What is/isn't in your BIOS or machine wouldn't matter.
      Of course if the memory isn't easily removable (soldered), no luck.

  33. obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is not possible to secure anything from an attacker with unlimited physical access to a system whether or not it is a bank vault or computer. I would have thought this is obvious. The best you can hope for is making the attacker's time and the expense required prohibitive or preventing physical access in the first place. Unfortunately attacker's tools tend to improve over time like the technique descibed here.

  34. Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by mordenkhai · · Score: 1

    If it was such a big deal that your RAM be secure why dont RAM makers make special "Secure RAM" kits with a small (I am not an engineer, please forgive my ignorance)battery and have it detect power down, and then expend the battery to alter the RAM contents, write all 1's or something? An OS solution wouldn't work if the power was pulled, I expect nearly all legitimate uses of RAM dont need the contents after power down so chances are anyone trying to get at em has nefarious plans.

    1. Re:Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      If it was such a big deal that your RAM be secure why dont RAM makers make special "Secure RAM" kits with a small (I am not an engineer, please forgive my ignorance)battery and have it detect power down, and then expend the battery to alter the RAM contents, write all 1's or something? An OS solution wouldn't work if the power was pulled, I expect nearly all legitimate uses of RAM dont need the contents after power down so chances are anyone trying to get at em has nefarious plans.

      What happens if I take the battery out before powering down?

    2. Re:Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by oyenstikker · · Score: 1

      If you got to the machine before powering down you can read the memory anyway. This is to protect against reads _after_ the machine is shut down.

      But, presumably, the battery (or more likely, a capacitor) would be integral to the memory unit.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    3. Re:Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      If you got to the machine before powering down you can read the memory anyway. This is to protect against reads _after_ the machine is shut down.

      So what exactly is this? Something that's going to protect you from the 30 secodns to a couple minutes after the machine is shut down but before the DRAM fades?

      If I can get to the machine within 30 seconds of it turning off, surely I can get to it 30 seconds before that!!

      The real security holes here are for all the time that its running, from encrypted disk, and presenting a strong multifactor login, or when stealing a laptop in standby or hibernate....in these cases I can kill power and rip the chips before they fade to grab the keys.

      Now as others have mentioned there are multiple attack vectors here and this is but one of them, but its remarkably efficient. Installing a keylogger and then waiting for another opportunity isn't always possible (especially if you've stolen a laptop), and while there likely a number of hardware hacks to read the memory of a running system, this one is decidely lo-tech and simple.

    4. Re:Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by oyenstikker · · Score: 1

      If I can get to the machine within 30 seconds of it turning off, surely I can get to it 30 seconds before that!!


      No. I was alerted by your impending arrival 30 seconds beforehand, so I shut it off.
      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    5. Re:Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Ah. So its a two stage system. I didn't realize a security guard was part of the system.
      Although that begs the question, if you've got a security guard... you probably don't need the battery-erased ram setup.

    6. Re:Secure RAM via onboard scrambler? by oyenstikker · · Score: 1

      There is no security guard. If my computer is turned on, I stay with it. If somebody starts breaking into my house, I turn the computer off.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
  35. Re:Clear the DRAM? It wouldn't matter at all. by AFormalEvent · · Score: 0

    They don't run the shutdown scripts, they cut the power to a running system. that's why it typically only works when the computer is on. Also, Dram ~is~ cleared at boot, as it will be over written by new data, but their boot-time software takes care of that.

  36. Use a CPLD and a holdup system by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    This is an easy fix. Simply put a PLD between the RAM and the memory controller, and have a battery backed supply that runs the memory for a short time after poweroff. When power goes away, the battery backup circuit holds up the PLD and the RAM long enough for a state machine in the PLD to scrub the memory.

  37. Macbook Air... by Wooky_linuxer · · Score: 4, Funny

    has the RAM soldered in the motherboard! I knew Apple was thinking of our security all along!!!

    /*ducks*/

    --
    Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
    1. Re:Macbook Air... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      Here's my idea...

      Have the entire motherboard embedded in 5" thick block of acrylic. laced throughout this block would wires running in every direction and layered such that there's no gap larger than 2mm. Then have these wires wired such that breaking anyone of them would cause the system to immediately dump high voltage current across the motherboard, thus rendering it dead.

      Yeah, it would mean any single component failure would mean replacing the entire setup, but if your willing to go to these extremes, you can afford a forklift replacement.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    2. Re:Macbook Air... by syousef · · Score: 1



      has the RAM soldered in the motherboard! I knew Apple was thinking of our security all along!!! /*ducks*/


      Dude, Mac isn't free. Ducks are not the way. Penguins are.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  38. Put the key in SRAM. by Skapare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Put the key in a small piece of SRAM. When it gets used to encrypt something, be sure the place of its usage gets wiped back off real fast to minimize the chance of it being exposed to the cold attack. Split data up with different keys for different data, so if a key is exposed, only a minimal amount of data is lost. Another option is to double or triple encrypt the data being sure never to have more than one key at a time in DRAM.

    So where do we get this SRAM? A CPU register that is not used, and not saved, for any current purpose is one possible place. For a large amount of SRAM, check out your video card buffer.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  39. Simple fix, no? by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Make the BIOS clear RAM on power-up.

    Wait, doesn't it already?

    Wait, did the researchers bypass BIOS?

    Well, if they did, then adding some crap to DRAM to kill it on power loss is the only way. Probably.

    It was once an axiom of system security, that if you gained physical access, all was lost. This evolved from keyboard and console attacks to floppy- and CD-boot attacks, USB keys, stealing the hard drive, you know the drill.

    Ultimately, if you can cart away pieces of the machine, your last line of defense is gone.

    The only other variable to control is time. Make the DRAM die quicker, or is it time for a 'better' memory technology?

    And this is such great stuff, the TEMPEST guys will now have to re-write their procedures, with both a power-off and wait 30 seconds, and a re-power-on and wait for login prompt, then shutdown again.

    Sometimes I hate h@xrs, and sometimes I realize they do me a service, albeit while they intend to just do me.

    How ironic. My captcha is 'honest'. This cannot be coincidence.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    1. Re:Simple fix, no? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stuff on DRAM to clear it on poweroff might be ok, unless the people can disable the clearing capacitor before they plug the DRAM off.

      Another thing that might work, might be to split the key on multiple DRAM chips. Not all chips will likely cool at the same pace and there's bigger chance that some key-parts will not be recovered.

      Other methods:
      1) Salt the key/location and not keep it in clear text in RAM when not in immediate use.
      2) Hide & distribute the key location. Keep pointers to each bit, and change them to point to bits that match that key -> key in randomly distributed bits around memory space. -> higher chance of some key bits being in "unrecoverable" area.
      3) Include several false keys in RAM -> decryption test to verify if actual key

      With 99.9% accuracy after 10 minutes at -50C -> 0.1% destruction of the key bits needs to be big enough to make brute-forcing the rest of the key impossible.

    2. Re:Simple fix, no? by Dwedit · · Score: 1

      You pop the RAM out and stick it in another machine which does not clear the RAM.

    3. Re:Simple fix, no? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Then you'll need 'SecurRAM', which detects the desocketing and clears the contents.

      Oh, hell, let's just cut off the hands of anyone caught messing with your machine, ok?

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  40. Who are you protecting yourself from ? by ixe13 · · Score: 1

    This attack is probably very real and interesting research, but you have to ask yourself who are you protecting yourself from. A stolen computer with an boot password protected, encrypted hard drive will be formatted long before it hits the streets and that will be the end of it. If you are concerned about government agencies reading your encrypted files, there so many other way to get to it... Especially if you have access to the hardware. Old school ICE (in circuit emulation) will give you 100% reliability and defeats Bitlocker/TPM. Password protect your encrypted drive and move on...

  41. DRM attack vector by crow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While an issue for whole-disk encryption, this is also an issue for DRM. Just flick the power while the interesting media is being decrypted, and even if the OS had been protecting the key in some "safe" location, you can now find it. It might be little more tricky, but if you can pull the RAM on a video game console, you can do the same thing.

  42. Sounds like... by securityfolk · · Score: 1

    ...someone canceled their WoW account, and has free time on their hands ;)

  43. You can probably read the memory via Cardbus! by tamyrlin · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The problem is much worse on laptops actually. Most laptops have some sort of CardBus slot nowadays. This is basically a PCI interface. The idea is to create a CardBus interface which allows you to dump the physical memory of the laptop using DMA. No need to freeze any memory, just insert your custom made card into the computer and wait for it to copy the memory contents to flash memory or something similar. There are a few question marks here though:
    • Is the Cardbus slot always enabled or must the OS enable it? (If the OS has to enable the cardbus slot you can be safe if the OS doesn't probe the slots when the screen is locked.)
    • If the OS enables the Cardbus slot can it stop the device from doing bus mastering before the device has been identified and a driver has been loaded? (If so you only have to mimic a card which the OS has drivers for to work around it though.)
    Creating a cardbus card isn't exactly rocket science. You could probably do it in a weekend with off the shelf components for less than $200 unles Murphy is feeling creative... :)
    1. Re:You can probably read the memory via Cardbus! by amorsen · · Score: 1

      The problem is much worse on laptops actually. Most laptops have some sort of CardBus slot nowadays. This is basically a PCI interface. The idea is to create a CardBus interface which allows you to dump the physical memory of the laptop using DMA. It's generally easier to just buy a firewire cable. Admittedly that only works if the computer a) has a firewire port and b) has the driver loaded. That's true for a lot of laptops though.
      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    2. Re:You can probably read the memory via Cardbus! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      True, although it is worth noting that this (and the equivalent FireWire attack) can be mitigated on laptops with newer AMD CPUs (and possibly the latest Intel ones if VT-d is now shipping). Newer AMD chips (or, more specifically, their on-board memory controllers) have a Device Exclusion Vector (DEV) which is a simple bitfield with an entry for each page in physical memory indicating whether a each device is able to DMA to or from that page. A well-behaved OS will set this up so that no device can access any memory unless the driver explicitly permits it. As long as the OS keeps the pages containing encryption keys in the 'never let any device access this' part of memory it will be safe.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:You can probably read the memory via Cardbus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The memory controllers probably have undocumented diagnostic modes, and with the right CE lines pulled in the correct order, memory access is assurred. The DMA in Video cards, gross bandwidth, and ample (fast) memory would make graphics cards cheap effective 'snatchers' of memory.

      Too bad the memory researchers did not mention what happens when you send a nice high voltage ringing spike on memory vcc. Easy to add a capacitor 'dump' circuit. Keys should be held in CPU registers - faster memory = smaller retention period.

    4. Re:You can probably read the memory via Cardbus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you super cool the parts, turn off the power, pull the parts out of the machine (assuming DIMM here...), and insert them into a DRAM test fixture to be read out remotely. In that case, neither the OS nor the BIOS come into play. The DRAM attributes are stored in SPD, so initializing the DRAM controller in time to preserve the data would be easy. Use something simple like U-Boot to preserve and dump the content, and you have all the data.

      Physical access to the hardware makes it difficult to depend against hacking.

      The link to 'hot plug' in the list above is very interesting. I built an extension cord to accomplish something similar a few years back. I just fashioned a couple of brass lugs with slots cut in them and hooked them to a cord. I then pulled the plug for the target machine part way out of the socket and forced the brass lugs over partially exposed plug blades. Then I plugged my extension cord into another empty duplex outlet, the hardware was then driven from two places (check that both outlets are on the same phase). Then just move the plug to the new outlet, and pull the lugs.

      CAUTION: if you don't know what having both outlets on the same phase means, don't try this, as it will result in a spectacular display of sparks and tripped breakers if they are not.

  44. This is pretty epic... by ComputerPhreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To everyone saying 'if someone has physical access you're hosed anyway'... that simply isn't true. If you have a laptop and encrypt your data correctly, it was thought that it was mathematically infeasible to recover the data if your laptop was stolen. But with this (new?) technique, if it works well enough to be reliable, you could still be fucked even if you took the precaution of encrypting everything.

  45. Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by this+great+guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is yet another attack that the developer of loop-AES thought about while typically every other disk encryption tool out there is vulnerable. Loop-AES is the 3rd most popular disk encryption tool in Linux. See the KEYSCRUB=y option in its README file:

    If you want to enable AES encryption key scrubbing, specify KEYSCRUB=y on make command line. Loop encryption key scrubbing moves and inverts key bits in kernel RAM so that the thin oxide which forms the storage capacitor dielectric of DRAM cells is not permitted to develop detectable property. For more info, see Peter Gutmann's paper.

    I have used loop-AES as a full disk encryption tool on my laptop for 2+ years. I am glad I took the time to carefully research which tool would the most secure before deploying it ! For example even TrueCrypt and dm-crypt are vulnerable to other (arguably minor) security issues that loop-AES is impervious to: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.cryptography/2321

    Surprisingly, the research paper TFA talks about doesn't even directly mention loop-AES (its name only happens to be in the title of a webpage in the reference section describing a safe suspend/resume setup when using disk encryption).

    1. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 2, Informative

      Presumably, moving bits around in memory doesn't help in this case because the exact memory image is retained. Additionally, the code that moves the bits around is also present, making it straightforward to locate the bits and reassemble the key.

    2. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by sholden · · Score: 1

      The data has to be being decrypted in the normal use, which means the key is somewhere in RAM. Since this attack is basically "take a snapshot of the RAM, and find the key in it" it will still apply. If loop-AES can decrypt the data then someone with a snapshot of all the internal state at the time can too.

    3. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by Mike1024 · · Score: 2, Informative
      This is yet another attack that the developer of loop-AES thought about while typically every other disk encryption tool out there is vulnerable. [...] "Loop encryption key scrubbing moves and inverts key bits in kernel RAM so that the thin oxide which forms the storage capacitor dielectric of DRAM cells is not permitted to develop detectable property. For more info, see Peter Gutmann's paper."

      I'm afraid it doesn't. Here is the code from Gutmann's paper:

      Flipping:

      while( TRUE )
      {
      acquire keyMutex;
      key ^= 1111...1111;
      keyState ^= 1;
      release keyMutex;

      sleep( 60 );
      }


      Using:

      acquire keyMutex;
      if( keyState == 1 )
      key ^= 1111...1111;
      encrypt/decrypt;
      if( keyState == 1 )
      key ^= 1111...1111;
      release keyMutex;


      The code above protects against detectable 'wear' that occurs if RAM holds the same value for a long time. With inversion, the RAM holds normal and inverted values for equal time, and therefore doesn't wear in one direction or the other.

      The attack described in the article relies on removing the RAM from a targeted machine (or rebooting the target machine) and capturing the contents of RAM before it has a chance to clear (which takes a few minutes, they report). In the example of the code above, they would capture both 'key' and 'keyState' and would therefore know the key, and if the key was inverted or not (of course, even if they did not know whether the key was inverted, it would be trivial to try it both inverted and uninverted).

      I suppose in a system with a write-back cache, it might be possible to keep the key permanently in the CPU's cache, where this attack would be substantially less practical. However, caches are not supposed to be used like that, so it may be difficult to implement.
      --
      "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    4. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by mzs · · Score: 1

      It could be scrambled in such a way as to not appear as a key. Then unscrambled into a register. The paper talks about that as a decent countermeasure. It would slow down the encryption/decryption though.

    5. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The paper does however make it very clear that "Gutmann's paper" discusses a *completely different* problem.

    6. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by sholden · · Score: 1

      You have the binary that runs, you have all the internal state. Doesn't matter what it does you can also do the same thing.

      Unless there's some way to force part of the state to not be in RAM or disk (a register as you said, but I don't think you can reserve a register on these fancy new "run more than one thing" machines...)

    7. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Peter Gutmann's paper seems to address a different problem, related to physical changes to the semi-conductor when the same data is stored for a long period of time. That attack (usually) requires special equipment to measure minute changes in the hardware behavior, is not easily reversible once the data is burned in, and the data stays recoverable for a much longer period of time.

      In the current paper, the problem relates to the speed at which DRAM loses it's charge when not refreshed. This attack does not require special equipment and it does not require the same data to be stored for a long duration, which means that the KEYSCRUB method option will not help. On the plus side, the effects are easily reversible (just overwrite the memory) and the data last for a shorter period of time.

      This current problem seems much harder to address, but the key expansion method seems to be easily implementable in the encryption software without affecting the kernel or any other software components, and can provides a fair bit of additional security.

    8. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by this+great+guy · · Score: 1

      I think you are right. After I read the full paper, I now think it might be possible to use this attack against loop-AES with KEYSCRUB=y. The reason I am unsure is because loop-AES appears to XOR the sensitive key with 0xfffffff... instead of random data as I thought (which raises the complexity of the attack somewhat).

    9. Re:Another attack loop-AES thought about ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gutmann's paper was about ram burn in. Something TFA actually answered if you read past the first page. This attack is based on the vary simple idea that the DRAM will still be readable like it normally is for enough time to circumvent (almost) any software level precautions you could think to take. Using known address spaces limits the scope of the attack from a simple USB key style attack to requiring an additional machine. But thats far from special hardware. It also has the disadvantage of giving the attacker a known place to look.

  46. Re:Another win for OSS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was a rubbish troll. Sorry, but you fail it.

  47. Not only DRAM but SRAM too by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

    I found (admittedly some 20 years ago now) on a very simple computer with SRAM memory that, after powering it off and on again, a significant percentage of the contents of the memory were still the same. Naturally, the longer you left it the more random the results became. Of course, it was CMOS RAM, so the transistors would have some capacitance which would account for the, err, memory.

    1. Re:Not only DRAM but SRAM too by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used that method to defeat the XOR encryption on an Apple II program. One sample of the decrypted data and the ability to read the encrypted data and it was simple to derive the XOR cypher for decrypting the whole disk without disassembling the code in the patched DOS.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    2. Re:Not only DRAM but SRAM too by owlstead · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's called Static RAM (not synchronous RAM) and it, err, does that.

    3. Re:Not only DRAM but SRAM too by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm well aware of what the "S" means.

      It's static as in not dynamic (i.e. not with a capacitor that has to be regularly recharged). What I should have said was "CMOS SRAM". I suspect that other (ancient) technologies, e.g. ECL RAM might not behave the same way.

    4. Re:Not only DRAM but SRAM too by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      You almost make it sound like retaining its contents when powered off is what defines SRAM. It doesn't of course, the Static refers to the fact that, unlike DRAM, it doesn't need its contents periodically rewritten. Non-volatile memory, NVRAM, is the stuff that's designed to keep its contents when powered off.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    5. Re:Not only DRAM but SRAM too by owlstead · · Score: 1

      True, but the older SRAM really lived up to its name, I could restart the computer and be pretty sure that everything would still be there.

  48. Who is this "we" exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, this is not about "our" ability turn off the PC and pop out the RAM while the Department of Homeland Security is busting down the door. This is about thieves, corporate saboteurs, or Evil Gubbermint Agents bypassing or breaking drive encryption when they already physically own your box. No hardware module is going to help - your drive won't even be in your PC in many cases, it'll be in their box which they will keeping rebooting until this technique (or similiar) works.

    1. Re:Who is this "we" exactly? by spun · · Score: 1

      Okay, you posted AC so I feel no compunctions against pointing out how blindingly stupid you are. How can the bad guys take your hard drive, put it in their machine, and get your encryption key out of it? Hell, put a thermite grenade triggered by a tamper switch inside the case. Problem solved.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    2. Re:Who is this "we" exactly? by Sunrun · · Score: 1

      The implication from TFA was that, if the target machine was preventing booting to anything but the internal hard drive, the attacker could open it and remove the hard drive and replace it with their own, which would presumably have the memory-dump/sift-for-keys software on it so they can get the keys from the rebooted RAM. Then they could either replace the target hard drive back into the target machine or, now having the keys, use them on it once installed in a different machine.

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -- Voltaire
    3. Re:Who is this "we" exactly? by spun · · Score: 1

      Ah, so you would put a new hard drive in and boot from it to use the sift for keys/memory dump software. Unless I'm missing something, you've now wiped the key from RAM, the only place it is ever stored.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    4. Re:Who is this "we" exactly? by Sunrun · · Score: 1

      With respect, you are missing something.. This is the main point of the article, in fact: that the bits don't actually decay appreciably inside of about the first minute after power is removed from the memory module(s).

      Admittedly, the hard drive swap would have to be performed relatively quickly (under a minute, based on the average decay time listed in TFA/TFPDF), but since much disassembly can take place before putting the computer into a powered-off state (i.e. opening cases, removing covers, etc.) and since most computer manufacturers have been making it blood simple to replace hard drives in their computers (including laptops) -- often without need of a screwdriver (except laptops) -- this doesn't realistically present much of a challenge. Actually, it's even easier than that since all we're really talking about is opening the case/cover, getting to a point where the data and/or power cable(s) can be removed, powering off, removing the data and/or power connectors and reattaching them to the attacking drive and then powering back on.

      Even if that process takes more than a minute, the window of opportunity before the data bits in RAM start to decay can be greatly extended (by almost an order of magnitude) by "pre-freezing" the RAM prior to the power-down via application of a refrigerant (e.g. from an air-duster can held upside down so as to expel its contents as a liquid instead of a gas).

      The other important piece of this is of course the custom memory-dump/key-sifting software, which in this case is run from a micro linux distribution pared down to the bare essential task of dumping the apparent memory contents to a file and then sifting through those contents for very well known patterns of code which constitute encryption keys of a specific type. The article is noticeably lacking in low-level specifics in this regard, but the implication is that when running it overwrites so little of the system's memory space and in memory addresses not likely to contain or which cannot possibly contain the desired data that recovery becomes a virtual certainty.

      And this is all only if the system's rightful owner has locked the BIOS to disallow booting to anything other than the internal hard drive. It's much easier in all other scenarios.

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -- Voltaire
  49. Epoxy by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems like the best defense would be applying epoxy to the memory so it couldn't be removed from the slot. If you make sure all the connections are covered as well, they wouldn't be able to place a tap, either. (At least without a lot of time being spent slowly drilling through the epoxy.)

    It would make it impossible to replace your memory, but you could always move the HD to another system. If you care that much, then you should be willing to pay for a new system if someone tries to compromise your data.

    --
    Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
  50. Who said anything about turning off the power? by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

    I'm sure there's some way to hotswap a normal RAM module without frying it, even if it involves attaching extra ground wires for a while.

  51. Sony IBM Cell by epine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Cell processor yet. I guess everyone hates it.

    The first power word that a toddler learns is "mine!" It's the capstone to a complete working vocabulary: mommy, daddy, more, enough, and mine. My laptop, my hardware, my data, my privacy. The word "mine" has a direct bypass to the neurological circuit "you can't make me", which as adults lingers as a deeply-rooted fascination with rubber-hose cryptography, and bravado propositions such as "if the Feds bust through your windows". Wrong answer.

    Let's look at this from Sony's perspective: my media, my hardware, my design, my copyright, my profits. But guess what? They have a small physical access problem. Millions of zit faced kids with access to liquid nitrogen can get their paws inside the PS3.

    This is why an entire SPU is locked down on the PS3 for security / DRM purposes. The SPU contains 256K of SRAM which is carefully guarded. The instruction set is synchronous and deterministic to guard against timing attacks. They were aware of power attacks as well. These can be partially mitigated in software for critical routines by executing non-conditional instruction sequences and then discarding the portions of the computation you didn't want. By design, the SPU doesn't dance on the power line the way most modern speculative out-of-order processors do to begin with. You can't use latency effects, because the local SRAM has constant access time. You can't use contention effects because there aren't any below the level of DMA bursts, which are controlled by a companion processor within the SPU. Plus I think it is possible to schedule SPU-SPU and SPU-memory DMA transfers deterministically, if you really need to. None of this was accidental.

    The hardest part of the problem is bootstrapping the secure SPU with the security kernel. I've forgotten how they went about it. There must be some kind of decrypt key buried in the Cell hardware which functions during initial code upload during processor initialization.

    In the long run it might be an unwinnable battle, but the PS3 certainly has a far better facility to maintain data security in the complete absence of hardware security than your average PC.

    Why can't the average hacker Harry wants to enjoy the same security as Sony/IBM, why can't you achieve this? You've already got the PS3 in your living room. Impediment: the secure system init decrypt key is probably burned into the silicon. It's probably a one-way key, so even if you crack the key, you won't be able to encrypt a replacement block of your own code that matches the decrypt key. But let's suppose you break that too. Problem: Sony knows the decrypt key for the SPU initialization sequence. Game over.

    Let's suppose you figure out how to physically change the silicon with an initialization decrypt code known only to yourself. Congratulations, you now enjoy the same protection for your secrets that Sony enjoys for "Untraceable". In doing so, you have now upgraded yourself to a sufficiently threatening fish to swim in a tank in Syria, where your nervous system will be similarly reconfigured.

    Ew, I feel like I've just written the script for "Adaptation".

  52. HIB disable and shock-monitor by davidwr · · Score: 1

    HIB can be disabled in most OSes. This disables USB mice.

    Hardware shock-detectors can be added. If your computer moves, the OS knows and can take appropriate action.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  53. Why not the CPU? by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

    Even better solution: Provide cryptographic support in the CPU and store the keys there, or lacking that just some extra storage for key schedules. Only 240 bytes of storage are needed for a full AES-256 key schedule, twice that for fast encryption and decryption with the most common implementation.

    It would be much harder to extract the key schedule from the CPU hardware with the system running, and much easier for the CPU to wipe the storage upon loss of power. As long as the OS wiped the key and passphrase (or any other key source) from RAM upon startup, the key should remain secure.

    This could probably be implemented with a few MSRs (model specific registers) for backward compatibility while still retaining a high speed software implementation of the cipher.

  54. I do not thin' it means what you thin' it means. by The+Monster · · Score: 4, Informative

    it's a common tenant in systems security that anyone with physical access and sufficient time can disable or otherwise bypass any security system.
    Does it pay rent?

    I think the word you're looking for is "tenet".

    --

    [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
    SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

  55. At the risk of getting tedious... by gillbates · · Score: 1

    The class covered those things as well: lock the page in memory, and ensure that the compiler doesn't elide the call to memset(buffer,0,len) by reading back the data. A recent discussion on a crypto mailing list discussed this latter issue at great length, and the consensus was that while theoretically possible, no compiler actually elided calls to memset(), even if the compiler could prove that the memory would never be accessed again.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:At the risk of getting tedious... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Tedious or not, this is quite interesting to people who don't do regularly deal with this kind of stuff. While I did think of avoiding this attack by removing the keys from memory as soon as they're not needed any longer (plus some obfuscation maybe), I didn't think of paging and the like.I did learn a bit from this subthread, which means that it's not entriely without merit.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  56. Static forgets with no power. by pentalive · · Score: 1

    Static RAM remembers only as long as it has power. But it does not need an active refresh signal, just power. Flip flops need power to retain their state.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_RAM

    Dynamic Ram needs both power and an active refresh signal.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_RAM

    You may be thinking of Flash ram, as is used in thumb drives. This uses electrically erasable programmable read only memory (eeproms)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory

  57. Memory is reliably addressed; just wipe it. by CarpetShark · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Memory is reliably addressed -- writing to the address you wrote to earlier will change the same physical part of the ram. There are already existing tools that erase passphrases after a certain period without use. All you need to do is make those tools also scrub the addresses used to store it. A simple patch would cover that.

    What's more of a problem is: how to make this timeout+prompt for passphrase thing work with disk-level encyption regardless of whether you're a console or in a GUI, on an otherwise decent OS like unix? I wouldn't trust Windows to implement disk-level encyption safely anyway, so all bets are off there. But unix still has serious issues regarding the simple presentation of a dialog box to the user no matter what part of the system they're looking at, in a reliable and secure way.

    1. Re:Memory is reliably addressed; just wipe it. by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 1

      Is it?

      Program A writes a bunch of stuff to RAM. Program A goes idle. OS says "okay, they're idle, I need more working room" and flushes Program A's state to disk.

      Does the OS necessarily wipe the data at this point?

      If not, is there some way that Program A can realistically "erase its data", obviously pulling a working copy back into main memory, but without hitting the same page? (Theoretical chain of events: OS needs more disk cache pages, OS uses Program A's old memory for this, OS only uses half the memory leaving Program A's old data still intact but with the other pages still allocated, Program A decides to clear its memory and ends up merely clearing a new copy. Obviously if the OS decides to give pages to Program B they'll be wiped before Program B gets them, but if the OS is planning on using them privately does it still bother?)

      I don't actually know about the details of this, but it all obviously requires OS-level guarantees that I've never heard of before. (Admittedly, partially, because I've never gone looking for them.) So, is this guaranteed not to occur?

      --
      Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    2. Re:Memory is reliably addressed; just wipe it. by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      Program A writes a bunch of stuff to RAM. Program A goes idle. OS says "okay, they're idle, I need more working room" and flushes Program A's state to disk.


      It's good thinking, but thankfully the people who write (properly done) apps that store passwords in RAM already thought of this, and so standard practice is to keep passwords in non-swappable memory areas.
  58. this seems must useful as a way to crack DRM by mikeabbott420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This seems most useful as a way to help crack DRM and bypassing OS level 'trusted computing' type measures. Since it requires a machine operating with the key active it isn't much use for things like decrypting a stolen laptop.

    --
    This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
  59. sram? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    way back when i was working on sparc 10s there was a battery backed sram board you could buy that would queue up all your disk writes to... if you lost power it would flush once the driver reloaded thereby preventing your journal-less fs from going fubar.
    could there be an adaptation like this? is sram vulnerable? is there a sram/cache area of the machine that you could allocate to store keys that would be assured of corrupting when you lost power?

  60. Just when you thought you were safe! by Puffy+Director+Pants · · Score: 1

    Zombie Memory attacks! Seriously, for most people this is a non-concern. The effort required to develop an attack this way is comparable to your average IMF mission. I suppose it might conceivably be an issue for those in high-security environments, like those who use NSA linux, but damn if anybody else really needs to worry about it.

  61. A novel idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where does this really have much of a security risk? Seems to me you would have to have a ready system setup to receive the ram and copy the data. And since you want data that someone was working on they would have just barely finished working on it. So inorder to really get anything valuble you would have to shut down someones computer within minutes of them accessing something, open the case, remove the ram, insert it into another system or what ever you have set up to copy it, and then copy it all in only a few minutes. That looks highly unlikely to me.

  62. It rather depends... by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ...on how you define "absolute". A one-time pad cannot be broken, even if you had a theoretically infinitely fast computer. (It would decrypt to every possible string of the same length with equal probability, with no means of telling which one was the one you wanted.) If you want to add extra security, then introduce a negotiated random offset into the pad and a negotiated random step-size.

    Is that absolute security? Well, an outsider couldn't break the encryption. To do so requires the pad. There are no shortcuts. That's pretty absolute. And even with the pad, you need the offset and stepsize. I've been told of systems where these were mechanically random - the one-time pad tapes synchronized themselves remotely at a speed that was effectively non-deterministic, consuming a non-derministic amount of tape to do so, giving you the random offset and step size.

    Ok, well is that perfect? Since not even the people with the machines could tell you in advance at what speed or at what point the synchronization would lock, that's pretty damn secure and could not possibly be known in advance. Thus, an attacker cannot have prior knowledge of the key being used. Nobody can, even if they have all of the physical components.

    Yes yes yes, it's secure, but is it perfect? It all depends on what you mean by perfect:

    1. It is "perfect" in the specific sense that a total outsider (ie: no prior knowledge) CANNOT decrypt the message, even in infinite time.
    2. It is "perfect" in the specific sense that a third party with the tape but not the synchronization mechanism CANNOT decrypt the message, even in infinite time.

    It is not "perfect" in the general sense, because if person A can decrypt the message with some information in their posession (A'), then person B can also decrypt the message with that same information (A').

    If you have N people in a group, how many of that N must be honest in order to guarantee that information from A to C reaches C even if at least one traitor B exists in that group, where C is not a traitor? The answer is (N/2)+1.

    Now, if (N/2)+1 out of N must be honest, can we improve on our encryption system? In order to get the pad to C, we could make a copy and break it down into random-sized fragments (that may or may not have holes), such that you need (N/2)+1 fragments out of the original N in order to rebuild the tape in the correct sequence. Even if everyone else was a traitor and cooperating with each other, they could not reconstruct the key.

    Now, to prevent said traitors tampering with the key, each fragment needs to be securely digitally signed. This means that A must have a key that everyone else can test against (and therefore decrypt) but nobody else can derive. Both the intended target and all traitors will thus know which fragments are real, but a traitor will not be able to make a fictional fragment look real.

    Is this perfect now? It depends so much on what you mean by perfect. It's now impractical to attack in transit, provided the algorithms themselves do not have weaknesses which push below the assumed security threshold. Provided both source and destination are themselves genuine, AND provided both source and destination have internal compartmentalization such that if/when attacked, the attacker will not be exposed to the encrypted message, the decrypted message or the decryption key, you have an admirable level of security.

    But is it perfect? Define perfect. I would consider any system that is so secure that it would never form a part of the attack vector for the forseeable future to be - in any practical sense - perfect. No matter how much you added to it, it would make no difference to what anyone did or how anyone acted. It's perfect in that attackers would spend their resources attacking anything and everything else. Even if it were "perfect" in some abstract, theoretical sense, it would not add ANY additional security to the system. To me, that is perfect in the meaningful sense.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  63. Won't work, but something else might work by Wolfier · · Score: 1

    If I just
    1. pull the plug
    2. pull your RAM
    3. insert your RAM into my computer

    How about
    1. use a master password to generate a passphrase at login-time.  This passphrase is stored in and only in the memory controller.
    2. this key will be used to real-time encrypt the RAM contents with a symmetric key cipher - so plaintext would only exist on the FSB between the CPU and the Northbridge.
    3. this small, special storage in the memory controller is guaranteed to be zeroed within a short hard limit if not powered.

    Of course you can design new RAM that does this, but assume this new RAM is more expensive, sparing a KB or two of some special storage just for the key would be enough.

    Of course, the short key vs the large memory capacity, and the fact that memory is used piece-by-piece, would mean a lot of potential for known-ciphertext-attacks.

    However, cracking with partially-damaged ciphertext is quite a bit more difficult than with either intact ciphertext or damaged plaintext.

  64. Re:I do not thin' it means what you thin' it means by orclevegam · · Score: 1

    Yes that was the word I was looking for, thank you.

    --
    Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
  65. Or a different DRAM design by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1

    It would be relatively easy for DRAM to be augmented with internal circuitry that nukes the ram cells if they have not been placed in slef-refresh mode.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  66. well said by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    context is key i guess

    in the realm of casual slashdot comments, i think my words ring true and yours paranoid

    but in the realm of a healthcare company's IT dept discussing what to do about the laptops of travelling executives containing member's medical information, my words would ring irresponsible and lazy, and yours ring prudent and exemplary

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  67. Re:HotPlug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a nifty idea! Plug a UPS into the power strip to provide power, and unplug power strip from wall. Voila, UPS kicks in and portable power. I wonder what it would take to DIY that concept. Love the mouse jiggler USB plugin to keep the target computer 'active'

    Note to self: plug all computers directly into wall socket. That way, they have to tap into the power from behind the wall outlet before moving the computer. (They already thought of that.)

    (retrieves fresh tinfoil hat from microwave)

  68. It is NOT a capacitor... Check your facts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is NOT a capacitor. Mod parent -1 misinformation

    Modern day hard drive uses the disk platter(s) as a fly wheel and use regenerative braking energy via drive motor + driver circuit to park their drive heads.

  69. Easy proof of concept: Three lines of code by unassimilatible · · Score: 1
    Boot up your old Apple II. Type some password somewhere. Reboot.

    Now, type three lines of code:

    10 X=0
    20 X=X+1
    30 GOTO 20
    Scan the screen printout and see if there is anything that scares you! Sure managed to scare my computer teacher and muck up my HS's lab computers back in the 1980's, hee hee. Good old Corvis.
    --
    Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
    1. Re:Easy proof of concept: Three lines of code by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      Boot up your old Apple II. Type some password somewhere. Reboot.

      Now, type three lines of code:

      10 X=0
      20 X=X+1
      30 GOTO 20
      Scan the screen printout and see if there is anything that scares you! Sure managed to scare my computer teacher and muck up my HS's lab computers back in the 1980's, hee hee. Good old Corvis. Hmm... Are you not missing some form of "PRINT PEEK(X)" statement?
      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    2. Re:Easy proof of concept: Three lines of code by Stanza · · Score: 2, Interesting


      I suspect he is.

      I remember on my Apple II, when you first turned it on, the screen was filled with inverse '@' symbols. Then the screen would quickly blank (or be replaced by spaces) and the startup sequence would go.

      But if it hadn't been off for very long, not all the memory would go to zero (chr$('\0') is the inverse '@'). So, if you turned your computer back on with in a certain time, you could either see the screen it had when it shut off, or more likely, rows of the screen would be inverse '@'s, and rows would be the previous screen. Sometimes with garbage characters interspersed, depending on how long the computer was off.

      I never did investigate how long the non-screen portions of the memory lasted, but the screen-portions (starting at $300, I think) would be gone in ten seconds.

  70. Nothing to get your panties in a bunch about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While interesting from the standpoint of creating Teh Ultimate Secure System (tm), this is really nothing for anyone to get their panties in a bunch about.

    If an attacker has physical access to your machine, it's pretty much game over anyway. HOW they go about exploiting that compromise of security just becomes academic.

    The computer part is, realistically speaking, the lowest level of importance for security anyway. The top level would be securing access, the next level would be user training (to protect from social engineering attacks), and then far lower in importance is the actual technical computer or networking issues. Because if an attacker can get neither local nor remote access, they can't even start.

  71. NSA *does* worry about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remnants in memory are a known problem. I worked for a while at a big hardware company, and when designing systems with national security clients in mind we did worry about this.

  72. Countermeasure: VIA C3 has built-in SRAM by Adam+J.+Richter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I believe that the C3 processor made by VIA and probably other processors in that family allow some of the cache to be configured as SRAM and mapped into physical memory. So, you could store the key in SRAM, which I believe really will lose its data upon power loss, although you may also want to take countermeasures such as those used in loop-AES to avoid detection by physical changes to the chip if key is store for a long time in the same place.

    Newever VIA processors also have some hardware AES support available under Linux, which they call "Padlock. So, if they still retain the SRAM feature, then, at that would make a pretty good choice for the little fanless mini-ITX Linux box that receives your email.

  73. Just in case there are doubters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have done this before when i was using a Live Linux (Slax) for file recovery purposes.
    When i booted up the OS, when the GUI was turned on, i saw some of the remains of my desktop from Windows.
    And several other times in booting up the GUI, i saw the previous image stored.

    I am honestly surprised this hasn't been done more than this, or maybe it has and it just hasn't been documented...

  74. That's it I am not using DRAM anymore on my comput by Pepebuho · · Score: 2, Funny

    I 'll compute on my head

  75. Except by geekoid · · Score: 1

    they need to gain access withing 60 seconds of turning off the power, and that's best case. Most likely they need access within seconds.

    That mean as soon as you shut down, someone would have to jump in and reboot. really not going to happen is it?

    If someone has gotten in, they would just point a gun at your head and make you give them access..or just step away from the keyboard.

    Not a big deal.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Except by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      Except if we're talking about a laptop which is carried around in suspend mode --- this is a good argument for hybernation.

      1. swipe laptop in suspend mode w/ encrypted hd
      2. yank the memory and use the techniques in TFA to find the encryption key
      3. decrypt HD
      4. profit!

      (assuming what's on the HD is worth selling / blackmailing)

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  76. data at "rest" only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you've missed the point. Hard drive encryption *is* supposed to protect against someone having physical access to your machine.


    To your machine or your hard drive? Most disk encryption is for protecting "data at rest".

    Another effective attack against disk encryption is a Trojan: when you mount the encrypted drive the Trojan, running under your credentials, can access the data just as easily as you can. They don't even need physical access, only logical access.
  77. Re:HotPlug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One could rig the wall outlet with a pressure switch to kill power if the plate is tampered with. Actually I'm surprised this isn't a safety feature on existing outlets. Or you could set it up so that only one of the outlets is hot, in which case the "outlet seizure" method wouldn't work. Or use a relay to kill power through one plug if current flows through the other.

    Sounds pretty cat and mouse to me. They think up an attack, someone else will think of a defence.

  78. Panic Button (was Re:Secure DRAM) by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    For this reason anyone who is worried they might suddenly be raided might want to install a panic button. Pressing it would erase the encryption key from memory instantly, then set about wiping the rest of the computers RAM.

    Have it also activate if the case is opened or a special suicide password is entered (in case you leave your PC on at the login prompt or screen saver).

    Either that or just wire your doorbell to small bomb strapped to your RAM. That way when the CIA ring your bell...

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Panic Button (was Re:Secure DRAM) by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Seems a bit stark....

      I know of one organization that has an old-fashioned color TV degaussing tool that erased their tapes very nicely. I'm sure there's an equivalent method for DRAM. Perhaps the heel of a good boot.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  79. DRM is deader than ever! by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 1

    I read the paper today and was rather depressed that this seems to be all bad news for us folks who value our privacy in that it makes our encryption more vulnerable. Then I saw the bright side: It makes *everyones* encryption more vulnerable including DRM schemes. So even if they do lock us out using DRM you can cool the RAM and get it out of the machine (or just clip on and read it out after power-off of the host system) and read out the encryption keys used by the DRM.

    Overall I think this may be a very worthwhile trade. The chances of someone actually performing this attack on my physical hardware while the encryption key for my encrypted volume is in RAM are slim. I keep it unmounted when it is not needed. And they need to have physical access which means they are either feds or really determined crooks.

    But my chances of being able to benefit from cracked DRM via this method are great. It only takes one person to do it and millions of people will have access to the hardware.

  80. Take my files please by subnomine · · Score: 1

    I don't care if somebody does get my files...It's my password I want to protect! I'd be embarrassed if anybody knew it was L3zp0Rn. Do mom's read Slashdot?

  81. Re:Bad Movie Plot by groffg · · Score: 1

    I disagree. If you've read the paper, you'll see that the researchers use refrigerant (compressed air bottle turned outside down so contents come out in liquid form and very cold) to sustain the contents of the DRAM for several minutes (rather than the seconds that that data would last at room temp). The Princeton researchers seem to know what they're talking about in their paper, so I'd say this is a credible threat.

    Having said that, it still requires a certain amount of effort, timing, and, ideally, luck. Also, it does not appear possible at all (using this attack vector) when using on-board encryption such as Seagate's Momentus drive.

    What to expect in the future? The attack is hardware-based, and a real solution will be hardware-based as well. FDE software can go so far as to use obfuscation tactics to make analysis more difficult in the meantime, though the threat will still exist so long as the hardware is vulnerable.

  82. Legislating Encryption by Benjamin_Wright · · Score: 1

    This story is another reason why state legislatures should not mandate encryption as a data security procedure.

    --
    Benjamin Wright, Dallas, Texas, benjaminwright.us
  83. More to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, one more thing to do when the authorities come bangin' at the door, you now have to dismount all your open encrypted volumes first. (as well as secure erase */tmp, */temporary internet files, */cache, erase and clean restore registry files etc etc etc etc etc )

    Wiping the password cache is not enough: the password/keyfile is only used to decrypt the master key, which is then used to decrypt the volume. The password itself does not decrypt the volume.

  84. Reminds me of the Commodore 128 by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    If you got the wrong sort of garbage in RAM on a Commodore 128 there was no way to reset it. You had to unplug it and go for lunch while the RAM lost its contents.

    --
    No sig today...
  85. Why work so hard? by MRAB54 · · Score: 1

    Sure this is an interesting idea, but lets be honest, it's not plausible. If you have physical access to a sensitive machine, or network for that matter, there are plenty of other avenues to explore that would require 1/100th of the complexity this article speaks of with a greater "success" rate.

  86. If we're only talking seconds... by xenobyte · · Score: 1

    The immediate solution is obviously to just make it hard enough to open the case of the computer - make it take too long to get at the RAM and extract it.

    So... Make sure all enclosure screws are in, add the padlock there's usually a eyelet for, and obviously make sure to cut the power as soon as you realize it's a raid. I know TrueCrypt has a very nice hotkey mechanism that will dismount one or all crypto drives upon activation, and I know most OS's are able to actually power down the system at the end of the shutdown sequence. So, make it possible to use a hotkey or (even better) an external trigger (like a physical intrusion detection system) to dismount drives, scramble the memory used for keys and go straight to a full powerdown. That would competely invalidate this cold attack.

    --
    "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
  87. Hmm by goldcd · · Score: 1

    Maybe. But just imagine an office full of people who've wandered off to lunch leaving their clients locked. Shove in a small USB key and hit the power button - grabs keys and dumps drive to disk in a reasonably short time (and you can just wander off out the way whilst it's dumping). They come back and all they notice is that their machine has mysteriously rebooted. Alternatively you could just install an FTP client that'll happily trickle out the contents of their machine throughout the afternoon. Brute force decryption, as far as I'm aware the only previous way of cracking the HD would involve removing the machine and making the theft easily visible ("Where's my laptop gone?"). I'm not quite sure why the linked article was so excited about cooling the memory to keep it stable for minutes - yes it's very clever being able to move it to another machine, but somewhat pointless. Should've just focussed on "I can rip off your encrypted drive with a reboot"

  88. Just use a virtual machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A virtual machine that owns the encrypted drive and fills its allocated memory with 1s on own shutdown should do the job. There are zillions of ways to get it quickly down, you can even use a timeout.

  89. TROLL? Re:Clear the DRAM? by electrictroy · · Score: 1

    I'd like to know who marked "theaveng" posting as a troll?

    That wasn't a troll. In fact it was quite informative to learn how the U.S. government protects its laptops.

    --
    The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
  90. Solution: soldering iron by Catbeller · · Score: 1

    Hard connect the RAM sticks to the motherboard. Oh, and armor the connection path so that cracking it off destroys the RAM.

  91. Broken link to the original paper by Jirka77 · · Score: 1

    Hi all, can anybody please send me the original paper? It's not accessible anymore: http://citp.princeton.edu.nyud.net/pub/coldboot.pdf wget http://citp.princeton.edu.nyud.net/pub/coldboot.pdf --16:14:16-- http://citp.princeton.edu.nyud.net/pub/coldboot.pdf => `coldboot.pdf' Resolving citp.princeton.edu.nyud.net... 140.192.249.204, 128.6.192.156, 128.31.1.13 Connecting to citp.princeton.edu.nyud.net|140.192.249.204|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 502 Bad Gateway 16:15:04 ERROR 502: Bad Gateway. Thanks a lot Jiri

  92. Re:Another win for OSS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twitter, is that you? The only thing missing is the dollar signs.

  93. Not storing the key in the RAM by agge · · Score: 1

    what if you dident store the key in the ram instead you store it in a removable flash memory maybe one where you nead your finger print and password to unlock the key and its is only unlock so long the flash memory is connected or the computer is on? The flash memory should also be tamper proof and impossible to read whit out the korekt finger print and password.

  94. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  95. another countermeasure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good discussion above. For the fun of it, here is one way sensitive data might be destroyed when your lair is under assault. You already know this if you've seen the dumbest movies of 2007.
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=5F6W7U2Mwuo
    Jump to about 4 minutes.

  96. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  97. Re:HotPlug by toddestan · · Score: 1

    My personal favorite way to fight this would be wire up the outlet the computer is running from to 230V, while of course giving no indication that it's anything other than a standard outlet. Most computer equipment will run on that, but it stands a pretty good chance of blowing up their UPS if they don't check for it first.

  98. Does PGP Protect against this? by anglico · · Score: 1

    If I remember correctly, when setting up PGP, it mentioned this type of attack and their countermeasures. From the Help File:
    " Passphrase Erasure
    When you enter a passphrase, PGP Desktop uses it only for a brief time, then erases it from memory. PGP Desktop also avoids making copies of the passphrase. The result is that your passphrase typically remains in memory for only a fraction of a second. ..."
    " Memory Static Ion Migration Protection
    When you mount a PGP Virtual Disk volume, your passphrase is turned into a key. This key is used to encrypt and decrypt the data on your PGP Virtual Disk volume. While the passphrase is erased from memory immediately, the key (from which your passphrase cannot be derived) remains in memory while the disk is mounted. This key is protected from virtual memory; however, if a certain section of memory stores the exact same data for extremely long periods of time without being turned off or reset, that memory tends to retain a static charge, which could be read by attackers. If your PGP Virtual Disk volume is mounted for long periods, over time, detectable traces of your key could be retained in memory. Devices exist that could recover the key. You won't find such devices at your neighborhood electronics shop, but major governments are likely to have a few.
    PGP Desktop protects against this by keeping two copies of the key in RAM, one normal copy and one bit-inverted copy, and inverting both copies every few seconds. ...."