Slashdot Mirror


TrueCrypt Master Key Extraction and Volume Identification

An anonymous reader writes "The Volatility memory forensics project has developed plugins that can automatically find instances of Truecrypt within RAM dumps and extract the associated keys and parameters. Previous research in this area has focused specifically on AES keys and led to the development of tools such as aeskeyfind. The Volatility plugin takes a different approach by finding and analyzing the same data structures in memory that Truecrypt uses to manage encryption and decryption of data that is being read from and written to disk. With the creation of these plugins a wide range of investigators can now decrypt Truecrypt volumes regardless of the algorithm used (AES, Seperent, combinations of algos, etc.). Users of Truecrypt should be extra careful of physical security of their systems to prevent investigators from gaining access to the contents of physical memory."

49 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. Burn after reading? by bazmail · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't people burn memory blocks any more? This is sensitive data handling 101.

    1. Re:Burn after reading? by DigitAl56K · · Score: 5, Insightful

      TrueCrypt has to keep the keys somewhere so long as a volume is mounted. Whatever happens, so long as it's not currently on the CPU (and potentially even if it is), something that can read its data structures is always going to be able to find the keys in RAM if the structure is known. Maybe if TrueCrypt has some crazy polymorphic engine and corresponding polymorphic data structure that changed on every run it could get very difficult, but probably not impossible, to extract them.

    2. Re:Burn after reading? by MidSpeck · · Score: 2

      Don't people burn memory blocks any more? This is sensitive data handling 101.

      I knew I should have moved to the rim of that active volcano.

    3. Re:Burn after reading? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also, you have to ask how much worth would that would be.

      If they have your RAM dump the securiy has been already lost.

    4. Re:Burn after reading? by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While not perfect, such activity can be mitigated. TruCrypt can be written to automatically unmount the 'drive' as the computer goes to sleep/hibernate/etc, and could even be written to plop the keys into a random section of RAM each time it re-connects. Hell, you could even rig an option to unmount the drive when the screensaver comes on.

      That would only leave the ability to access it when the computer is active - but then it's pretty much game-over in that situation anyway.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re:Burn after reading? by avltree · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "While not perfect, such activity can be mitigated. TruCrypt can be written to automatically unmount the 'drive' as the computer goes to sleep/hibernate/etc' for FDE, it does dismount and scrub the key during hibernation. Sleep is different though and RAM is not cleared during it. "and could even be written to plop the keys into a random section of RAM each time it re-connects." This doesn't really change anything. TC must still be able to find the key and the current drive version could be extracted from memory and reverse negineering to determine where the key currently is.

    6. Re:Burn after reading? by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not if it throws away the key and prompts you to re-enter it every time it wakes back up.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    7. Re:Burn after reading? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So ultimately, if you want to keep your data secure, you need to shut down your laptop at least several minutes before it could be potentially seized. I remember last year reading a piece about how even volatile RAM, if kept very cool, could be read with some fidelity even after a computer had been shut down, but these seem like lab conditions. I think we're along way from declaring disk encryption "crackable", providing appropriate measures are taken.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:Burn after reading? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Upon unmount, TC should write (and overwrite) lots of random junk to the ram it was using to store keys so you don't have to worry about stale ram recovery techniques.

    9. Re:Burn after reading? by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, TrueCrypt already has most of those features so they don't need to be written in

      TrueCrypt 7.1a for Windows has the following options:

      AutoDismount If:
      - User Logs Off
      - Screensaver Is Activated
      - Entering Power Saver Mode*
      - Dismount if no data has been read/written in (xx) minutes

      I haven't tested ALL of them but I know the screensaver one works. Features may differ depending on platform.

      * with a warning that the Windows OS may not properly alert applications that it is shutting down due to low battery power so this feature is not entirely dependable; this seems more a limitation of the OS than the application

      And according to the Truecrypt website: "As Microsoft does not provide any appropriate API for handling hibernation and shutdown, master keys used for system encryption cannot be reliably (and are not) erased from RAM when the computer hibernates, is shut down or restarted."

    10. Re:Burn after reading? by NemosomeN · · Score: 4, Informative

      The risk is limited to only when you are sitting at your computer. As soon as you lock your computer, the key is purged from ram.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    11. Re:Burn after reading? by E-Rock · · Score: 2

      At least for hibernation, using BitLocker on the system drive will make sure the hiberfil.sys (and I guess the paging file as well) is on an encrypted volume that can't just be copied and analyzed later.

    12. Re:Burn after reading? by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Ideally, you'd just use an OS that's secure against arbitrary programs reading out all of your RAM contents. Unforutnately Windows is not such a beast, and GNU/Linux has RAM sims mounted as a gods damned file. Unfortunately none of the mainstream OSs were designed to be secure.

      Unlike my "hobby" OS, yours do not have zero exploitable bugs, and do not employ rigorous unit tests, input fuzzing of all functions, and code coverage of every single instruction. Your OS's built in character or block device interfaces do not have simple whole-device encryption wrappers as standard -- In fact the device interfaces aren't even pluggable, ugh. Your ridiculous monolithic kernels do not use an Agent Oriented Exokernel approach to enforce compartmentalization or utilize spare privilege ring levels for efficient RAM page transfer and RPC between processes (overseen by an IPC_Agent -- Which may be replaced/wrapped in an EncryptionAgent for secure IPC). While in "standby" mode your device encryption keys are not zeroed -- And may even be "frozen" to disk during hibernation (and due to the nature of SSDs and HDDs, could forever pollute your disk with the key). You have no OS SecurityAgent to interface with UserAgent's (in)activity, so your whole device encryption does not rekey when it asks for your password at the login prompt. Your Apple, BSD, Linux (Gnome/KDE) and Windows security screen I can bypass simply by crashing them back to the desktop with a ridiculously cheap firewire device -- which doubles as as RAM dumper anyway, so you're hosed even if the security screen doesn't crash you out. No, your OS probably has USB device mounting enabled by default without requiring admin privileges so when the feds or crooks bust in and plug in their HID compliant "mouse jiggler" device, unscrew your power outlet, plug in a battery and snip the wires, they can haul off your computer away and access it at their leisure without ever getting the "enter password" prompt from your silly screen saver. Your system won't wipe its RAM or keep the encryption key encrypted via the unique OS install key, and spread across multiple RAM SIMs.

      No, since your whole device encryption is not backed by your non-security focused OS (which must be the ultimate arbiter of security in any sane application), then you are utterly fucked -- Not that you have to be fucked, mind you, just that you're noobs is all, and that's what noobs get.

    13. Re:Burn after reading? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's that Southern Cypherpunk series of books about a hacker/waitress, Mary Sue Stackdump.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    14. Re:Burn after reading? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      You can defend against such attacks with some work. First make sure that the BIOS is locked with a password and set to do a full memory test a boot. That way even if they grab the machine and hit the reset button to boot their malware CD/flash drive the BIOS will first erase the entire contents of RAM and they won't be able to stop it (make sure your BIOS doesn't allow the test to be cancelled). The password makes booting from CD/USB impossible without forcing you to reveal it either

      Unfortunately they may be able to reset the BIOS with the Clear CMOS jumper. Ideally you want the BIOS to default to the full memory test, and most don't clear the password when you use this jumper. You can download BIOS modification tools to make the full memory test the default.

      To prevent the RAM being removed and placed in another machine for reading just glue it in, or buy a laptop with it soldered to the mobo.

      To prevent PCIe attacks destroy all your PCIe slots, including the PC Card one on your laptop. Thunderbolt ports are obviously totally insecure. Firewire is also vulnerable.

      Hard work but chances are 99% of attackers would be unable to recover your keys from RAM if you made a real effort to build a secure machine.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:Burn after reading? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2

      Well, you can set Windows 7 to wipe your RAM on shutdown, at least. It takes a good minute or two for 2 GB of RAM.

      Although if you're really serious about running TrueCrypt on Windows, you should have virtual RAM disabled, too. And never hibernate. And have hidden volumes. And and and...

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  2. at least this is old fashioned forensics work... by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Way too tedious (and requiring physical possession of the hardware after encryption passwords/etc have been entered!) for the modern NSA -- they'll just install keylogging hardware that communicates over radio frequencies and not the internet if they need your encryption key. Then, your hacked ethernet/bluetooth port will also send them image of your drive over RF or some other discreet channel. Who needs this!?!

  3. Still working as intended by MidSpeck · · Score: 2

    While good to know these types of attacks exist, TrueCrypt's security model is still holding strong. http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/security-model

    1. Re:Still working as intended by al0ha · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wouldn't be claiming this until the audit is completed.

      http://istruecryptauditedyet.com/

      --
      Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
    2. Re:Still working as intended by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      "I wouldn't be claiming this until the audit is completed."

      Why not? Nobody else has cracked it, so unless and until the audit is completed, it is indeed "holding strong".

    3. Re:Still working as intended by al0ha · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry bad logic. Nobody has any idea of Truecrypt's integrity as the entire project has never been peer reviewed and nobody knows all of the persons who contribute to it, so until proven it can't be and hasn't already been compromised, nobody can be confident of its security.

      Nobody has claimed to have compromised Truecrypt, that is true, but as we know the NSA and other spook orgs would never admit it if they have and for all we know one of the anonymous developers works for a spook org.

      --
      Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
    4. Re:Still working as intended by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Suppose I find a vulnerability in some software. I've got two choices

      1) Make it public and at best get a mention on slashdot when it is fixed.

      2) Sell the details to either the NSA/GCHQ etc or to criminal types. In which case no mention on slashdot, but cash up front.

      See the problem with security - any security - is that revealing vulnerabilities to the project so they can be fixed is likely to be much less lucrative than selling them other people who want to exploit them.

      If I were cynical here's what I'd do

      1) I'd sell details of the exploit to whoever paid the most (Russian Mafia/NSA etc) using an untraceable identity. At this point the vulnerability starts to be exploited by them.

      2) I then wait until other security researchers notice this or look like they're about to figure it out. However before they can figure it out completely I report it to the vendor with my normal identity. E.g. Microsoft and Google for example pay cash, so I'd get that.

      3) Then even later I'd then announce it publicly at Black Hat and say the vendor hadn't fixed it quickly enough so I've decided to go public. For an open source project (e.g. TrueCrypt) I'd submit a patch and say "Look, I fixed this before anyone knew about it") and make the Black Hat talk about that. So I skip the vendor report stage completely because they won't pay me. However I'd keep stage 1 i.e. "flog it on the open market to the mafia", because that's where the money is.

      This - call it Irresponsible Disclosure - optimizes my income - I get it from the criminal types and the vendor if they pay it. It also optimizes my publicity.

      Of course the downside is that if the NSA/FBI etc think you're doing this they'll seize your laptop when you go through customs

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/20/0332243/whitehat-hacker-moxie-marlinspikes-laptop-cellphones-seized

      Then again, that's no bad thing for publicity too - tech sites will cover it as "Fascist government harassing well meaning security researchers". And of course if you get detained for a few hours just use it as an opportunity to negotiate a deal with them to sell the exploits to them exclusively. The government has loads of cash and may well use it to buy up your worthless one man company in return for you agreeing to sell to them exclusively in future.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  4. What would be sweet... by DigitAl56K · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Given that we're in an era of low-cost portable devices (Raspberry-Pi, BeagleBoard, etc.), it would be really nice if TrueCrypt could implement a driver that passed data off to an external, open-source device for processing that held the keys in its own memory, and provided no other service than to perform the cryptographic functions and hand back the data. It would be slower, but at least then you don't have the keys in memory on a general purpose computer running browsers, java, flash, adobe reader, etc. etc.

    Take one of those devices and attach a small screen to them and you could enter your passphrase using a keyboard attached directly to them, and use a keyfile on a flash stick plugged into the USB port too. The distro powering all of this could be minimal and audited.

    1. Re:What would be sweet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      And dont forget to put the RPI inside a Faradey Cage....

    2. Re:What would be sweet... by DigitAl56K · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's already a market for Pi cases, I don't see why not..

    3. Re:What would be sweet... by jonwil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      An even better idea would be to eliminate software from the equation completly.

      Have a hardware device that contains the keys in secure storage that's on the same die as a fast hardware AES implementation (so they cant be read out by someone with full physical hardware access). Or alternately have the keys on some sort of removable storage that plugs directly into the specialized hardware (so as not to expose the keys to the host machine). The hardware would sit between the disk controller and the secure drive and basically MITM all data flowing in either direction and encrypt it as it went to the drive/decrypt it as it came from the drive).

      Done properly it would prevent a lot of attacks including the attack described in TFA.

  5. Re:Memory dump lol by avltree · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nothing that you mentioned would prevent someone from taking a memory dump of your machine.... With firewire, pci slots, or other DMA-capable hardware slots, memory can be captured with physical access and no user credentials required. With (root) user credentials, memory can be captured through projects such as LiME that are kernel modules that dump physical memory to disk or over the network.

  6. Re:Memory dump lol by Desler · · Score: 5, Funny

    A billion people not in your parents' basement?

  7. Re:Well shit by avltree · · Score: 2

    hibernating is okay if you use full disk encryption as the hiberfil.sys will be within the encrypted filesystem.

  8. Re:DMA attack by avltree · · Score: 2

    The DMA part is not new, but several other aspects are: 1) Other tools only find AES keys, the new plugins find any algo that truecrypt uses as it inspects the truecrypt data structures in memory to find the values instead of scanning memory hoping to find a key 2) Volatility shows you files that were being accessed (along with their full path) inside the TC mount 3) All of it is automated for Windows XP through 8 and the server versions

  9. In other words by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Shut your machine OFF before you get to the border; don't put it to sleep.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:In other words by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Only if they have probable cause to compel you to supply the password. Have you ever used Truecrypt in disk mode? You have to enter the volume password first thing after the BIOS.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:In other words by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Informative

      "And when the spooks turn it back on, the key gets copied into RAM again because that's part of the bootup process, and necessary if the system is to read the disk and finish booting."

      No, it isn't. Have you ever actually used TrueCrypt?

      When the program quits normally (or after a configurable time period), the key is GONE. It may linger in RAM for a very brief period but then it's gone. Truecrypt stores the key only in RAM, so when a machine is shut down, again the key is GONE. If your machine is on sleep or hibernate, the RAM might be preserved, but otherwise no. GP said "turn it off". Turn it off and the key is GONE.

      Booting up has zero effect on this; the key is not stored anywhere on disk (unless YOU stored it somewhere on purpose, which would be dumb).

    3. Re:In other words by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Only if they have probable cause to compel you to supply the password. Have you ever used Truecrypt in disk mode? You have to enter the volume password first thing after the BIOS."

      Nope. Check out the recent court cases, and past Supreme Court cases. Probable cause is NOT sufficient to compel you to turn over your password. Only a court can do that, and in order to do that legally, the court has to have a great deal more evidence than mere probable cause. In fact they have to pretty much know in advance that the drive contains material that proves you broke the law.

      Forcing someone to give up their password raises 5th Amendment questions. Pretty much the only time they can do that is if they ALREADY KNOW beyond reasonable doubt that something illegal is there, because in that case you would not be incriminating yourself; you are already "incriminated".

    4. Re:In other words by hawguy · · Score: 3, Informative

      RAID 5 across the internal drive and and 2 external USB drives. Ship the USB drives via separate methods (UPS, FedEx, USPS, whatever) and reassemble on the other end of the trip. Any one missing portion of the volume can be recovered, but no recoverable portion travels as a single unit. And TrueCrypt the whole thing from a USB-stick installation of TC, with keys stored on the USB stick with TC, but not with any of the portions of the actual protected data. Throw in a fake TC volume on the USB stick for indirection.

      (And yes, external drives can be put into RAID configurations. Heck, there are videos of floppy RAID setups out there.)

      Yes, it's a pain in the ass. But it shouldn't be impossible. If your data is worth that much to keep out of the hands of some numbnuts at DHS/ICE that has "TURRISTS!" on the (lack of?) brain, then it shouldn't be too much to ask, really.

      Just beware the $5 wrench.

      Since parts of your data will still be recoverable from a single RAID-5 volume, you have little to gain by splitting up a RAID-5 volume set, unless you don't care that someone can recover up to one third of your data.

      If you want your laptop to be unreadable without one of the external drives, you'd be better off storing random data on one or more external drives to use as a one-time-pad. Without one of the OTP drives, the data on your laptop is unreadable (for bonus points, encrypt the OTP to reduce the chance that someone can intercept it and copy it). You can fill each OTP drive with the same random data so you only need to receive one of them to recover your data, or fill them with different random data so you need all of the drives to recover data.

    5. Re:In other words by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      can the border goons compel someone to boot the machine (supplying whatever passwords are necessary to do so) to enter?

      No legal power to compel, but refusal is "suspicious behaviour" and is going to fuck up your trip until some real lawyers show up and say the court battle isn't worth the prize. Your name will go on a watch list and goons the world over will give you grief for years to come, but your porn collection will remain private.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    6. Re:In other words by steelfood · · Score: 2

      If you have a pagefile, there's a chance it could still reside in the pagefile. Do not use a pagefile if you're using truecrypt.

      There are also possible caching mechanisms behind the scenes that may also store parts of the key or the data contained in the truecrypt volume. There's nothing you can do about it, really. Best you can do is wipe your drive's free space periodically.

      But it doesn't matter. If you're a target, you're done. Your mouse, keyboard, and monitor all leak signals through the cable and user interface. Software can analyze the sound of your typing and determine to some ungodly degree of accuracy the typed message Software can capture the emissions of your monitor to reconstruct a fairly accurate picture of your screen.

      All of this really is to prevent abuses like the NSA giving your opponent an advantage when you run for public office. Or making your love life hell after you break up with an NSA employee.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  10. Moral of the history by robmv · · Score: 2

    The moral of the history: if you have sensitive encrypted information on your laptop, never travel on standby mode, always turn off or use hibernation over an encrypted file or partition

  11. more FUD from Slashdot's owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    -a KEYLOGGER is an infinitely greater risk to the use of ANY encryption system, and keyloggers are trivially inserted into a PC via almost unlimited numbers of hardware and software methods.

    -gaining access to the current RAM of a system is just about the most convoluted and 'expensive' method of a targeted attack. The contents of RAM, of course, are lost once the system powers down. If you are targeted, there are a million easier ways of gaining your password. Many simply use the placement of hidden cameras. At the other extreme, remote equipment can be used to recreate your screen content via EM radiation emitted by the display and drivers.

    If Truecrypt is coded properly, it can attempt to keep the 'key' within the caches of the CPU only, and avoid 'write-back' on most processors. If RAM must be used, there are numerous obfuscating RAM usage methods that can prevent the key from living in predictable sequences of RAM bytes. However, you can assume Trucrypt is doing such as much as is useful. Truecrypt FAILS the moment the user is a LIVE (as in current Truecrypt user) target of a 1st class US intelligence operation. Gaining the password from a person who is still entering the password on a regular basis, when money is no object, and the Law is bent as is required, can be taken for granted.

    The owner's of Slashdot promote stories like this for one reason- to DISCOURAGE as many people as possible from bothering with Truecrypt in the first place. If naive sheeple THINK Truecrypt is as compromised as the NSA back-doored products from Microsoft et al, they'll 'think' they might as well use the Microsoft or similar product, because of ease of use.

    EVERY anti-Truecrypt story is NSA FUD. EVERY commercial encryption package, for instance, allows warrantless searches at the border to reveal the use of encryption, and allows the agents to strong-arm the KNOWN existing passwords from you. However, despite what the vile shills tell you here, used properly there is ZERO trace of actual encryption use on your laptop with Truecrypt, so the probability of warrantless hassle is reduced to as close to zero as you are going to get.

  12. TC is usually still mounted after sleep anyway by rduke15 · · Score: 2

    TruCrypt can be written to automatically unmount the 'drive' as the computer goes to sleep

    It could, but it isn't. I was shocked to discover that my TC volume was still mounted after resuming from sleep. After all, notebooks get stolen, and that is why I have my passwords and SSH keys in a TrueCrypt volume. And notebooks are not normally shut down but put in sleep mode instead. So I discovered that the way Truecrypt worked made it's encryption quite irrelevant...

    I fixed the problem on my Ubuntu notebook with a "tc-unmount" script in /etc/pm/sleep.d/ but I guess not many people do that. In Windows, I think there is a configuration setting for unmounting on sleep, but it was not enabled by default last time I looked.

    So, while it may sound impressive that it is possible to extract the keys from RAM, it is usually unnecessary. The volume may simply be mounted and directly accessible, even after sleep.

    1. Re:TC is usually still mounted after sleep anyway by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I use Truecrypt for the entire harddrive on my laptop. And when it hibernates, I have to feed it my Truecrypt password to get it back awake.

      Presumably, the difference is that I use whole disk encryption, rather than just a part of the disk....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  13. What about a face recognition trick? by Entropius · · Score: 2

    It seems like the attack vector people are worried about here is "people get physical access to your machine while the key resides in RAM and extract it".

    Could you program Truecrypt to maintain a continuous watch via a laptop's built-in webcam for the physical presence of someone at the keyboard (face detection, say), and upon detecting that the person has moved, dismounts the volume, overwrites the section of memory storing keys with random bits (to protect against "put the RAM modules in the freezer" attacks), kills the bulk of the Truecrypt software, overwrites it, and then kills itself? You could add other failsafes if you wanted, I suppose (based on the machine's microphone input, perhaps), but the idea is to have a dead-man's switch that will automatically dismount the partition and remove the keys from memory when Something Goes Wrong, so the keys are only around when you are actually sitting there working, and as soon as you aren't there, they are wiped.

  14. Re:So does this mean the TrueCrypt hijacking busin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even better, start not just having one TC volume, but many. Separate your stuff out by what you are doing, and unmount it when you are done. Word documents for client "A", open that specific volume, make an edit, unmount. Excel spreadsheets? Same thing.

    This way, if the computer gets taken and the master drive image key slurped off, it means control of the OS, but not much else.

    Even better, to prevent data leakage (/tmp files), the next step up is having virtual machines or Evalaze-sandboxed applications that channel all writes to one volume, that is easily unmounted.

    TrueCrypt is just one tool in a toolbox.

    Of course, there is the fact that people may not have to worry about seizure. My biggest security threat are the meth-heads who will break into a place just to grab stuff to take to a pawn shop or fence in order to stop their DTs. They don't care what's on the machine, so basic encryption turns a hardware + data theft into just hardware lost... which is easily replaced by insurance.

  15. Re:Memory dump lol by AndroSyn · · Score: 2

    Yes, TrueCrypt implies windows.

    The parent implied that his use of Linux and ecryptfs somehow protected him from this type of attack, which really it doesn't, just this particular implementation of this attack.

    My point is, that other full disk encryption implementations are typically vulnerable to the same sort of attack, that is the encryption key is going to be stored in memory.

    There are in fact tools to extract keys over firewire(or other methods) for a variety of operating systems, not just Windows and TrueCrypt, consider Inception

  16. Hardware Key to Encryption by pcwhalen · · Score: 2

    You mean like the Yubikey?
    http://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/yubikey/

    Don't forget: you can still encrypt with a keyfile you keep on a microSD card in your wallet. [copy to a USB stick in a lockbox, in case you lose it or get robbed.] Then, they can have your key, they still need the file.

    --
    Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
  17. Re:Key recovery from memory by Smerta · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nice try, NSA.

  18. "Any Port In A Storm" by westlake · · Score: 2

    Shut your machine OFF before you get to the border; don't put it to sleep.

    The first question to ask is "Why you are carrying high risk/high value files across an international border?"

  19. Encrypt your pagefile by Prune · · Score: 2

    If you're using TrueCrypt but without full disk encryption, encrypt your pagefile: http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/143662-page-file-encryption-enable-disable.html

    --
    "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."