• SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Yeah TPM chip encryption is mostly not secure (at least not by simply existing, as an encryption with with a strong password that only exists in your head is) I’ve seen a german youtuber crack the bitlocker TPM encryption of a windows think pad, I have no doubt big companies can do this for the 3-4 most used TPM chips in android phones

    And if you got the device and can damage it, even if you couldn’t crack the chip, putting the silicia under an electron microscope is always an option (lots of actual manhours of actual experts needed, but you could charge the client heavily to compensate)

    • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      No. The TPM was not cracked. The communication was sniffed, which is unencrypted. This requires a Device to be modified and then successfully unlocked to get exploited also this does not affect devices where the tpm is integrated in the SoC.

      • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You are right in a sense of: If the TPM holding the keys were itself encrypted with a strong password, this would be still be considered secure. You are wrong in the sense of: lenovo sells a device, tells its users its encrypted, their data is safe. None can steal their data

        in reality the data can easily be accessed, which could be considered as “cracking the device/bypassing the encryption” because what lenovo prevent was someone ripping your ssd l, but not just decrypt it because the encryption was not implemented securely.

        I don’t want to debate the security of a luks Linux volume or veracrypt windows laptop, (even though even those are in theory vulnerable to highly targeted and skilled things like cleverly exploiting e.g the logofail bug)

        My point isn’t that there are no ways to have a secure system, my point is that the percentage of truly secure systems is low

        • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The device needs to be physically accessed and modified and then unlocked in order to exploit it.

          Yes it is a vulnerability but with those steps you could also just solder a keylogger to the keyboard.

          Similar outcome.

          • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            The device needs to be physically accessed and modified and then unlocked in order to exploit it.

            Exactly the service the company offers

            Yes it is a vulnerability but with those steps you could also just solder a keylogger to the keyboard.

            This is not a hot take at all!

            Sure thing, it is equally hard to confiscate/steal a device (if the user notices you just shrug) and open it no user input required And Stealing the device without the user noticing Solder a keylogger, get it back to the user without them noticing and having them put in their password, then steal the device again so you can use said passwort

            I totally agree