4 ms·

Wow. SubC’s software engineering needs some work. They thought the camera’s file system was unencrypted, when it was encrypted. They didn’t know where the keys

by cbsks 10mo ago

Wow. SubC’s software engineering needs some work. They thought the camera’s file system was unencrypted, when it was encrypted. They didn’t know where the keys were to decrypt it. It turned out the key was written unencrypted to a UFS storage device. There was a file written to /mnt/nas/Stills, which indicates that the camera was to writing to a remote file system that wasn’t mounted.

userbinator 10mo ago
They thought the camera’s file system was unencrypted, when it was encrypted. Unfortunately this situation is likely to get more common in the future as the "security" crowd keep pushing for encryption-by-default with no regard to whether the user wants or is even aware of it. Encryption is always a tradeoff; it trades the possibility of unauthorised access with the possibility of even the owner losing access permanently. IMHO this tradeoff needs careful consideration and not blind application.
- jiggawatts 10mo ago
  This is why I always shake my head when the Reddit armchair security experts say "The data wasn't even encrypted!? Amateur hour!" in response to some PII leak. Sure, sure buddy, I'll encrypt all of my PII data so nobody can access it... including the web application server. Okay, fine, I'll decrypt it on the fly with a key in some API server... now the web server had unencrypted access to it, which sounds bad, but that's literally the only way that it can process and serve the data to users in a meaningful way! Now if someone hacks the web app server -- the common scenario -- then the attacker has unencrypted access! I can encrypt the database, but at what layer? Storage? Cloud storage is already encrypted! Backups? Yeah, sure, but then what happens in a disaster? Who's got the keys? Are they contactable at 3am? Etc, etc... It's not only not as simple as ticking an "encrypted: yes" checkbox, it's maximally difficult, with a very direct tradeoff between accessibility and protection. The sole purpose of encrypting data is to prevent access!
  - londons_explore 10mo ago
    I like the approach of mega.nz... Server stores encrypted blobs. Server doesn't have the keys. Entire application is on the client, and just downloads and decrypts what it needs. Obviously your entire application stack needs to be developed with that approach in mind, and some things like 'make a hyperlink to share this' get much more complex.
  - Terr_ 10mo ago
    Nah bro, you just gotta use homomorphic encryption! /s That said, encryption at rest is still good in terms of theft or mis-disposal.
  - dh2022 10mo ago
    Re: encrypting data that would be served via web server: why would anyone bother to encrypt data meant to be shared externally worldwide? It makes no sense to begin with…
    - deleted 10mo ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]
- UltraSane 10mo ago
  This has already happened to Windows users when BitLocker disk encryption is enabled by default and they do something that causes the encryption key to be lost. You can have the key saved in your Microsoft account.
  - userbinator 10mo ago
    You can have the key saved in your Microsoft account. I find it very hard to believe that those who want their disk encrypted also want Microsoft to have the key.
    - UltraSane 10mo ago
      Microsoft isn't going to release it without a warrant. But you have to trust their security not to leak it.
      - paradox460 10mo ago
        Unless the JeDI contract is up for renewal
        UltraSane 10mo ago
        What does that have to do with bitlocker?
londons_explore 10mo ago
> They thought the camera’s file system was unencrypted, when it was encrypted. Willing to bet plenty of hn readers are unaware of encryption going on at lower layers of the tech stack than they're aware of. For example most hard drives encrypt all data, even when not commanded to, as a way to do 'data whitening' (ie making sure there are even numbers of 0's and 1's in the data stream and not some pattern which might throw off tracking.) The encryption key is simply stored elsewhere in the drive - or nvram or in the firmware. But it means if you extract the physical magnetic surface and read it with the right microscope, you might well find the data encrypted with no available key.
- ryan-ca 10mo ago
  To my knowledge, encoding avoids runs to avoid desynchronization in a way that isn’t encrypted.
  - londons_explore 10mo ago
    This used to be done, but since ~2000, disks were expected to support on-device encryption, and by making encryption always-on no encoding is needed.
  - rocqua 10mo ago
    This is line coding, often used on wired connections. But reading a hard drive trace isn't quite a wired connection, so the trade-offs are different. Most notably with line coding when using positive and negative voltages it is quite important for the average voltage to be zero to avoid building up a charge difference. Whitening can often be used if the downside to an imbalance or long runs is much lower. Notably in RF this is often about avoid harmonics with a little bit of symbol timing advantage thrown in. Whitening doesn't really require encryption though. Weak cypher streams xored into the data work fine. Even a repeated 256 bit string is quite alright. Whitening using any non trivial encryption key seems weird to me. AES with a key equal to the current offset in ECB mode already feels over-engineerd.
    - londons_explore 10mo ago

by cbsks 10mo ago

userbinator 10mo ago

They thought the camera’s file system was unencrypted, when it was encrypted. Unfortunately this situation is likely to get more common in the future as the "security" crowd keep pushing for encryption-by-default with no regard to whether the user wants or is even aware of it. Encryption is always a tradeoff; it trades the possibility of unauthorised access with the possibility of even the owner losing access permanently. IMHO this tradeoff needs careful consideration and not blind application.

jiggawatts 10mo ago
This is why I always shake my head when the Reddit armchair security experts say "The data wasn't even encrypted!? Amateur hour!" in response to some PII leak. Sure, sure buddy, I'll encrypt all of my PII data so nobody can access it... including the web application server. Okay, fine, I'll decrypt it on the fly with a key in some API server... now the web server had unencrypted access to it, which sounds bad, but that's literally the only way that it can process and serve the data to users in a meaningful way! Now if someone hacks the web app server -- the common scenario -- then the attacker has unencrypted access! I can encrypt the database, but at what layer? Storage? Cloud storage is already encrypted! Backups? Yeah, sure, but then what happens in a disaster? Who's got the keys? Are they contactable at 3am? Etc, etc... It's not only not as simple as ticking an "encrypted: yes" checkbox, it's maximally difficult, with a very direct tradeoff between accessibility and protection. The sole purpose of encrypting data is to prevent access!
- londons_explore 10mo ago
  I like the approach of mega.nz... Server stores encrypted blobs. Server doesn't have the keys. Entire application is on the client, and just downloads and decrypts what it needs. Obviously your entire application stack needs to be developed with that approach in mind, and some things like 'make a hyperlink to share this' get much more complex.
- Terr_ 10mo ago
  Nah bro, you just gotta use homomorphic encryption! /s That said, encryption at rest is still good in terms of theft or mis-disposal.
- dh2022 10mo ago
  Re: encrypting data that would be served via web server: why would anyone bother to encrypt data meant to be shared externally worldwide? It makes no sense to begin with…
  - deleted 10mo ago
    [deleted]
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
UltraSane 10mo ago
This has already happened to Windows users when BitLocker disk encryption is enabled by default and they do something that causes the encryption key to be lost. You can have the key saved in your Microsoft account.
- userbinator 10mo ago
  You can have the key saved in your Microsoft account. I find it very hard to believe that those who want their disk encrypted also want Microsoft to have the key.
  - UltraSane 10mo ago
    Microsoft isn't going to release it without a warrant. But you have to trust their security not to leak it.
    - paradox460 10mo ago
      Unless the JeDI contract is up for renewal
      - UltraSane 10mo ago
        What does that have to do with bitlocker?

londons_explore 10mo ago

> They thought the camera’s file system was unencrypted, when it was encrypted. Willing to bet plenty of hn readers are unaware of encryption going on at lower layers of the tech stack than they're aware of. For example most hard drives encrypt all data, even when not commanded to, as a way to do 'data whitening' (ie making sure there are even numbers of 0's and 1's in the data stream and not some pattern which might throw off tracking.) The encryption key is simply stored elsewhere in the drive - or nvram or in the firmware. But it means if you extract the physical magnetic surface and read it with the right microscope, you might well find the data encrypted with no available key.

ryan-ca 10mo ago
To my knowledge, encoding avoids runs to avoid desynchronization in a way that isn’t encrypted.
- londons_explore 10mo ago
  This used to be done, but since ~2000, disks were expected to support on-device encryption, and by making encryption always-on no encoding is needed.
- rocqua 10mo ago
  This is line coding, often used on wired connections. But reading a hard drive trace isn't quite a wired connection, so the trade-offs are different. Most notably with line coding when using positive and negative voltages it is quite important for the average voltage to be zero to avoid building up a charge difference. Whitening can often be used if the downside to an imbalance or long runs is much lower. Notably in RF this is often about avoid harmonics with a little bit of symbol timing advantage thrown in. Whitening doesn't really require encryption though. Weak cypher streams xored into the data work fine. Even a repeated 256 bit string is quite alright. Whitening using any non trivial encryption key seems weird to me. AES with a key equal to the current offset in ECB mode already feels over-engineerd.
  - londons_explore 10mo ago