Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

securedrives.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 58 posts

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#11

Post by click170 »

I've enjoyed the idea of self-destructing data for awhile now, but it always leads to the possibility of DoS attacks against my own data.

This smartphone app and token, how do they communicate with the drive? Does it use cryptographic signatures to make sure that it's actually my phone talking to the device and not someone else, or just a passcode?

Does the drive send out an alert if it receives more than X SMS messages, where X is configurable? What's to stop someone from sending random texts to it until it self destructs? Simply the that they don't know the phone number?

How long does the battery last?

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#12

Post by Perseids »

I can't really see the usage scenario. If you want to transmit data securely between A and B, use public key cryptography and the internet [1]. If you want to protect data at rest, use full disk encryption. If you want protect the data on a running PC against theft, then you also have to consider all the data in the RAM (caches etc.). And if you, somehow, can prevent the attackers from getting that, then you can again use full disk encryption.

[1] If you are really paranoid and don't want to connect the devices to the internet, or if you don't have an internet connection at the target location, send a messenger with a random symmetric key first. If he/she arrives safely, send the hard drive with full disc encryption using the symmetric key next. Via any means. You can even FedEx it.

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#13

Post by wjkm »

danbruc wrote: post #6

1. Use a GSM yammer to prevent self-destruction by SMS. 2. Steal the laptop and get out of the range of the token quickly to prevent self-destruction via the token. I could not find how drive and token communicate but you can probably jam it, too, for example Bluetooth. 3. Keep the battery charged to prevent self-destruction by low battery level and set up a femto cell - without connection to the real GSM net, of cou…

They also sell devices called Data Security Protocol Switches (DSPS) which completely prevent your method from working.

"A Signal Proximity (SP) option means that any registered AutothysisDSP computer hard drive that leaves the vicinity of the DSPS signal will automatically self-destruct. This protects against theft and someone walking out the room with a computer. Likewise if a jamming of the DSPS signal is tried in an attempt to thwart the security protocol the registered DSPS hard drives will self-destroy."

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#14

Post by api »

Huge problem with these schemes:

If my data is valuable, I have two fears: (1) theft, (2) loss. If my drive is built to self-destruct, it decreases fear #1 but increase fear #2. What do I do then? Back up my data elsewhere? But that defeats the purpose of the high security drive. Do I get more than one high security drive? That still puts a lot of trust in the design -- if there were a systemic flaw that caused them all to fail or self-destruct at once I'd be out my data.

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#15

Post by joshvm »

api wrote: post #14

Huge problem with these schemes: If my data is valuable, I have two fears: (1) theft, (2) loss. If my drive is built to self-destruct, it decreases fear #1 but increase fear #2. What do I do then? Back up my data elsewhere? But that defeats the purpose of the high security drive. Do I get more than one high security drive? That still puts a lot of trust in the design -- if there were a systemic flaw that caused them…

Presumably the use case would be you want to transfer secret information from a secure location via an insecure channel to another secure location (e.g. in a diplomatic bag perhaps?).

This is for people who care more about knowing that the data was transferred securely than whether it goes through at all. There would likely be a master (backed up) copy on an internal air-gapped machine.

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#16

Post by joshvm »

Perseids wrote: post #12

I can't really see the usage scenario. If you want to transmit data securely between A and B, use public key cryptography and the internet [1]. If you want to protect data at rest, use full disk encryption. If you want protect the data on a running PC against theft, then you also have to consider all the data in the RAM (caches etc.). And if you, somehow, can prevent the attackers from getting that, then you can agai…

Your Fedex scenario wouldn't work if both the disk or key were compromised mid-transit. You might not know that someone sneaked a glance at the key or if they managed to clone the drive, but if they're sniffing all your mail then you've just given them the keys and the data.

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#17

Post by AlyssaRowan »

I have not (yet?) evaluated this device. I do however have a couple of initial comments.

Only the (TI) security processor itself had a FIPS 140-2 Level 3 crypto engine. However this device as a whole has no certifications I am aware of, FIPS, CESG or anywhere else (let's leave aside for a moment the flaws of the certification processes). Given its claims, the threat model and what it tries to do, that is actually surprising. It should be aiming for 140-2 Level 4, with claims like that. There are not a lot of 140-2 Level 4 devices around at all…

They say "flipped". Do they mean "zeroized"?

There are a few pitfalls with disk encryption. They mention AES-256-CBC. That is not a wide-block mode. So how are the IVs defined? Do they use an encrypted salt-sector IV? A plain one? Is any diffuser used? Is there any integrity protection?

I do not see that this provides a meaningful level of security which is even comparable to, say, (the late) TrueCrypt.

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#18

Post by Buge »

joshvm wrote: post #16
Perseids wrote: post #12

I can't really see the usage scenario. If you want to transmit data securely between A and B, use public key cryptography and the internet [1]. If you want to protect data at rest, use full disk encryption. If you want protect the data on a running PC against theft, then you also have to consider all the data in the RAM (caches etc.). And if you, somehow, can prevent the attackers from getting that, then you can agai…

Your Fedex scenario wouldn't work if both the disk or key were compromised mid-transit. You might not know that someone sneaked a glance at the key or if they managed to clone the drive, but if they're sniffing all your mail then you've just given them the keys and the data.

Isn't this SSD also vulnerable if the key is compromised?

Re: Autothysis SSD drives impede unauthorised access

#19

Post by Perseids »

joshvm wrote: post #16
Perseids wrote: post #12

I can't really see the usage scenario. If you want to transmit data securely between A and B, use public key cryptography and the internet [1]. If you want to protect data at rest, use full disk encryption. If you want protect the data on a running PC against theft, then you also have to consider all the data in the RAM (caches etc.). And if you, somehow, can prevent the attackers from getting that, then you can agai…

Your Fedex scenario wouldn't work if both the disk or key were compromised mid-transit. You might not know that someone sneaked a glance at the key or if they managed to clone the drive, but if they're sniffing all your mail then you've just given them the keys and the data.

That's why I was writing about a "messenger" specifically. I was thinking about someone you can trust, if need be, yourself. If this messenger assures you the key wasn't spied upon, you can use the key. If you can't even get a courier with a sealed envelope to the location, then you probably won't get any encrypted or otherwise protected data in there, anyway.

This level of security is ridiculous for almost everyone, of course. But we are talking about a self destructing SSD, which you want to send via courier to initiate the destruct, as an alternative. So I think this is a fair comparison.

Post reply on HN