NASA To Encrypt All of Its Laptops
pev writes "After losing another laptop containing personal information, NASA wants to have all of its laptops encrypted within a month's time with an intermediate ban on laptops containing sensitive information leaving its facilities. Between April 2009 and April 2011 it lost or had stolen 48 'mobile computing devices.' I wonder how long it will be before other large organizations start following suit as a sensible precaution?"
Obviously it took them this long because it's not rocket science.
You know, we've been doing this for four years where I work. And yes, I know everyone here is going to espouse Truecrypt as the one true solution, but the simple fact is NASA is run as a corporation... as such they'll probably go for a solution that's vendor supported. The fact that they're NASA will probably mean they'll get a pretty decent price on the software too.
Now, the downside of full-disk encryption (which many lazy corporations do instead of home directory only) is that it does increase the load on your system, slow it down and make recovery if/when it breaks a royal pain. Our helpdesk has an almost constant stream of laptops coming and going through their hands that they have to decrypt and re-encrypt because something got out of sync. Time consuming, and leads to downtime for the users. I've often suggested home folder only encryption... but the higher ups want it all encrypted... right up to the point that their laptop is down for two days because they've broken it.
By the way, another horrible side effect of whole disk encryption is that our experience says that it'll kill SSD's pretty rapidly. Our average SSD life is less than a year at this point because there doesn't seem to be a good full-disk encryption software that properly implements TRIM... so spinning disk or hybrid disk is the way to go.
This is not a new policy. The implementation of full disk encryption has been underway for some time. We are doing laptops first, then desktops. The current fire drill is because a laptop with PII was stolen at NASA HQ and it was one that had not yet had full disk encryption installed.
NASA IT staff are as overworked and under appreciated as anywhere. If NASA had wanted full disk encryption done sooner, they could have added the resources to make it happen. And that would have taken resources from missions, like Curiosity and the James Webb telescope. It's all about priorities.
Resources == salaries. Do you pay two IT guys or an engineer/scientist?
This is not a new policy. The implementation of full disk encryption has been underway for some time. We are doing laptops first, then desktops. The current fire drill is because a laptop with PII was stolen at NASA HQ and it was one that had not yet had full disk encryption installed.
NASA IT staff are as overworked and under appreciated as anywhere. If NASA had wanted full disk encryption done sooner, they could have added the resources to make it happen. And that would have taken resources from missions, like Curiosity and the James Webb telescope. It's all about priorities.
But therein lies the problem. It should not be underway for some time. It should have been in place as an iron-fist de-factor rule a long time ago.
I sympathize with you and the other IT folks. Underfunded and under appreciated IT and dev folks alike. It is shitty, and I know what it's like (been there, don't that.) But, to not have laptops encrypted? To furnish unencrypted laptops? There is some serious break-ups there man. Why? Because, however overworked your team might be, I have a hard time believing that IT will furnish an un-imaged laptop, as-is from the vendor/supplier, to the user. I'm sure IT images the laptops, so it stands to reason that the imaging will include encryption.
If the laptops are being furnished as-is from the vendors, that's a fuck-up.
If the laptops do get imaged, but do not get encryption, that's also a fuck-up.
Any government agency has some type of security and information assurance program and guidelines. And in them, encryption of laptops must be there somewhere. If that is the case, then it is a IT fuck-up. If it is not, then it is a IA fuck-up.
I'm not necessarily blaming you or any specific IT person, but this is a serious crap-o-lah that goes against what is pretty much standard practice with any agency or defense contractor (I work for one), or even for commercial companies. It's simply crazy.