I’m setting up FDE and wonders which one is better. “LVM over LUKS” or “LUKS over LVM”? Or something else? Does one is definitely better then the other? What are your preference?

Thanks.

  • umami_wasabi@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I though FDE is to thwart physical access to exfiltrate and or recover data. Making the root partition unencrypted surely will boost performance but I feel like this opens up an additional avenue for an attacker to exploit and defeat the purpose of doing FDE? It isn’t just making “installed apps private” but literally replace some binaries with a backdoored version of it with then enables access to decrypted data.

    • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If an attacker has physical access to your device, you should not use the device afterwards, ever. There are some mitigations like Secure Boot and Heads OS, but they only slow down the attacker. Given enough time, you cannot stop him. Heads OS is pretty much for giving your laptop to airport security temporary and Secure Boot has been hacked in a minute. Although that was using TMP outside of the CPU, I would not trust Secure Boot with TMP 2.0 for anything other than a quick customs check either.

      Using FDE as a protection against physical attacks is just a false sense of security. Veracrypt for example go as far as to say that secure boot is false sense of security.

      For maximum paranoia there is a use for FDE, though. If you install a crappy app that saves data outside of RAM, /home, /var and /tmp, the data won’t get leaked. Though that would be a massive security issue because most linux computers are servers which cannot use FDE.

      • koper@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The most common physical attacks will be you misplacing your device or some friend/burglar/cop taking it. FDE works great in those scenarios.

      • umami_wasabi@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        For secure bypasses I could only find BlackLotus is the only one capable to do this. I would like to have more details to support the claim “Secure Boot has been hacked in a minute.” Also, I would like the explanation on secure boot is a false sense of security and points to suport such claim as BlackLotus is the only publicly known malware to bypass secure boot.

        However, I do firmly believe that there ia no reason that servers can’t use FDE as they are no differ than other typical computer.

        • NaN@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think people tend to get hung up on where you store the key material for a server. Hardware token and TPM being two options that are less secure, but network bound disk encryption is supported as well as a combination. So you could have it require the network key as well as the matching PCRs from the TPM for the proper software load before it will unseal.

            • NaN@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              If I steal the server I have the token, unless someone is physically going to unlock the server every time you reboot which is not realistic.