What a slap to the faces of everyone who had been locked out of their data because they never knew about this crap and thus never saved their keys
Except their keys were saved but microsoft deemed that they cant “prove ownership” of the microsoft account, because they lack the credentials…
Just as I expected how security in Microsoft products works.
People called me paranoid when I said this would happen someday…
Why is anyone surprised by this? And what kind of imbecile commits crimes and uses windows? 🤣
Didn’t Osama bin Laden use Windows? 😂
Not just that but also uploads a copy of the key to their Microsoft Account…
Many modern Windows computers rely on full-disk encryption, called BitLocker, which is enabled by default. This type of technology should prevent anyone except the device owner from accessing the data if the computer is locked and powered off. But, by default, BitLocker recovery keys are uploaded to Microsoft’s cloud, allowing the tech giant — and by extension law enforcement — to access them and use them to decrypt drives encrypted with BitLocker, as with the case reported by Forbes.
uploads a copy of the key to their Microsoft Account
Microsoft added that feature because people kept losing their encryption keys and thus losing all their files if they need to have their computer replaced. They get complaints either way - privacy advocates complain when the key is backed up, and sysadmins/users complain when the key isn’t backed up.
Well, since you don’t actually enter a password to decrypt a bitlocker device, you can intercept the key data with physical connectors to the TPM
Bitlocker just makes it slightly more tedious to retrieve data. As long as you have all other components intact aswell.
What does Microsoft think the fucking point of encryption is? Do they think I am encrypting my data to protect it from my dog?
Why do you think the encryption capabilities on your PC are there for your sake? They might have sold them to you on that, but they are really there to protect copyright data because TPM allows encryption/decryption that is completely hidden from the rest of your system. Like an encrypted handshake that then transfers an encrypted key to decrypt the video stream. But it doesn’t save the decrypted data, it immediately re-encrypts it using your display’s private key (or whatever device is next in the chain, maybe your GPU). They can make it so that the unencrypted stream never touches your RAM or travels on any wire, which means you can’t pirate shows as you watch them unless you point a camera at your screen.
Obviously if they just said that was one of the main points, no one would want it and media companies couldn’t benefit from it because they’d have to compromise to sell content.
The other point was so that they could build a system where they hold the encryption keys and get to choose whose data is actually private. Obviously that’s an even harder sell.
So they did what marketers always do and lied by omission about what it was for and just outright lied if they ever said they’d never give the keys to law enforcement (did they ever even say that?).
Let go of the idea that someone selling something to you implies any kind of loyalty, especially when either party is a large corporation.
If you’re not the only one with the keys, is it really encrypted?
As someone who used windows for way too long: they just simply don’t give a shit. Like at all
deleted by creator
Amazing how every time you think they’ve finally stopped digging… they whip out the steam shovel and go “Hey y’all, watch this!”
Microslop’s OS is evidently untrustworthy and should not be used. I recommend replacing it with a Linux distribution.
all of the disadvantages of FDE with none of the advantages.
not that this wasnt expected, wtf do yall think it was uploaded to onedrive in the first place lol
Is anyone shocked by this? With everything that DHS, FBI, ICE, military, elected representatives, etc. are all doing without any concern or care for laws, civil rights, human rights, the Constitution, this should not be a shock to anyone. Corporations are bending over backwards to appease the talking orange and make more money. They do not care as long as profits are up and the shareholders are happy. A companies primary legal responsibility is to the shareholders, not the customers.
+100. People forget, or chose not to pay attention to the fact that Google sensor vault data was key evidence in convicting the January 6 insurrectionists (who were exonerated to become ICE). Surveillance capitalism doesn’t care which side you are on.
Small correction. They were not exonerated. They were pardoned. A pardon implicitly means guilt. Exonerated means their conviction was overturned.
Agreed. Wrong word choice. And its an important, major correction. Not a small one. :-)
Isn’t this against the fourth admement or something?
Well, storing the key in the specific provider‘s cloud isn‘t a good idea anyway - the same counts for iCloud as well. There are things that should be separated from each other because of reasons, this one is just another proof for the need to do so.
Federal investigators in Guam believed the devices held evidence that would help prove individuals handling the island’s Covid unemployment assistance program were part of a plot to steal funds.
Damn, they weren’t even doing this to go after pedos.
I’m curious where in the economic ladder this person fell. Rich enough to get a significant amount of money from the system, but still too poor to make the government look the other way.
Not your keys ? Not your data !
Daily reminder that verified boot is objectively superior to “secure boot”, once again a common Linux W and another example of Google actually promoting some good security practices
Same thing?
You can add custom keys to secure boot.
That doesn’t make it the same thing
Both are different names for a process that ensures the boot process is loading the correct non-malicious code.
Secure boot verifies the system is booting correct code, verified boot can ensure total system integrity and can protect against tampering. Furthermore the Linux implementation of secure boot is very often in the least secure method.
