The word “Gave” is really doing some heavy lifting in that title. Microsoft produced the keys in response to a warrant as required by law.
If you don’t want a company, any company, to produce your data when given a warrant then you can’t give the company that data. At all. Ever.
Not fast food joints, not Uber, not YouTube, not even the grocery store.
Not true with E2EE, they can’t give over shit when they don’t have the keys
Yes. But this completely invalidates the encryption. If anyone can decrypt your data without you giving the keys to them, it is not really encrypted.
The encryption key is data, don’t give it to ANYONE. “Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.”
Which means it’s useless if always uploaded to MS
Its not anyone though. Not anyone can get a warrant and demand the keys
if Microsoft has the power to give the keys to the feds what happens when Microsoft gets hacked?
Anyone as in “a single person”. They don’t mean everyone has access.
Sure. It’s not anyone. It’s anyone that can get a warrant. Or anyone that have enough power/underhanded influence to ask them nicely. Or any admin that have access to cloud storage at MS (remember they where caught with some exec having full access to that a while ago). Or any big leak that could exfiltrate these data. And probably a handful of other people, like, someone getting access to your MS account for whatever reason (which kinda happen, seeing how people lose their mail account to phishing/scams all the time) suddenly having access to your keys from there.
If your keys are in a DB somewhere, there’s a lot of way they could get out. Would these ways coincide with someone actually having your drive at hand? Probably not. Still, the key not existing in plaintext in some third party storage close all these holes.
what happens when fydor monikov the sleeper agent from the kgb working at the fbi gets a copy of these master keys
I’m stupid. How do thet even produce the keys?
Your computer generate a random key using (hopefully) a trusted PRNG with good enough sources. This key is then used to encrypt your data. This key is stored in your computer’s TPM module, and provided to the OS only if the chip approves all the checks in places. In addition, you get that key displayed to you, so you can write it down (or alternatively save the key file somewhere of your convenience). This is relatively good as far as security goes (unless the TPM is broken, which can happen).
And then, unless you jumped through hoops to disable it, your PC sends the key to Microsoft so they can just keep it linked to your account. That’s the part that sucks, because then, they have the key, can unlock your drive on your behalf, and have to produce it if asked by a judge or something.
Note that there are relatively safe way to protect these keys even if they are backed up in “the cloud”, by encrypting them beforehand using your actual password. It’s not absolutely perfect, but can make it very hard/costly/impossible to retrieve, depending on the resources of the attacker/government agency. But MS didn’t chose this way. I don’t know if it’s because of sheer incompetence, inattention, or because this feature is claimed to be here to “help” people that lose their key, and as such are likely to lose their password too, but it is what it is.
“help” people that lose their key
Funny enough, people have lost access to their bitlocker encrypted drive because of some weird issues that triggered the windows intallation to revert to asking for the full bitlocker encryption key (I think if you disable secure boot or mess with CPU upgrades or the TPM, or some weird update broke, that can happen), which they didn’t have and forgot the microsoft account. But microsoft can’t help because they forgot about their acount credentials.
They should’ve asked the FBI for help lolz
I’m pretty sure all tpms can be read with an electric interference reader when they’re probed, as an intended loophole
deleted by creator
Microsoft built the encryption in Windows so know how to get around it. In theory that remains a closely guarded secret but there are the warrants and the NSA and…
Nope, this isn’t even a “backdoor”. The key itself was automatically uploaded to your microsoft account, so they can just take the key from the microsoft servers and walk right in. This isn’t some secret, a quick online search will reveal this as public information. They literally tell you the key will get uploaded.
So how did Microsoft have the keys in the first place? The article says they are automatically uploaded to the cloud. What does that mean? They’re uploaded to the user’s on drive or something else? Because whatever that user account is shouldn’t be accessible by Microsoft, even if they run the service. I’m not saying aim surprised they do have it, but would be nice to be a little clearer about what features of Bitlocker to avoid. Is it the Microsoft account associated with the windows key? Probably.
All the more reason to use Linux. I will be swapping to Cachy or SteamOS Desktop, depending on when and how things play out.
Expect nothing else from any corporation for your own safety.
BitLocker? More like ShitLocker.
IIRC am pretty sure they have been doing this for years(since Windows 8).
So, this means Microsoft has copies of every single bitlocker key, meaning that a bad actor could obtain them… Thereby making bitlocker less than worthless, it’s an active threat.
MS really speedrunning worst possible software timelineHey copilot, give me the bitlocker key to the nuclear football!
They don’t have a copy of every single Bitlocker key. They do have a copy of your Bitlocker key if you are dumb enough to allow it to sync with your Microsoft account, you know, “for convenience.”
Don’t use a Microsoft account with Windows, even if you are forced to use Windows.
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.
I mean it’s dumb to sync but at same time it’s not like MS isn’t great at either making it almost impossible to not sync it re-enable syncing for a bit after updates.
You can constantly tell it not to sync but all it takes is MS saying we want it now and they’ll get it
Don’t use
a Microsoft account withWindowsFtfy
Literally fix the anticheat problem and I’ll uninstall.
Don’t use
aMicrosoftaccount with WindowsFFTFY.
Bethesda anything, Azure, Outlook, GitHub, Visual Studio, Office, Bing, XBox, LinkedIn, SharePoint (so disgusting this is a given), fuck it not even Skype (lmao what year is it?)
Still kinda hurts they own Bethesda now, but considering that company has only produced garbage since FO4 which only was kinda mid, I don’t even mind skipping them.
To use Windows without a Microsoft account requires tech literacy these days, I thought. I would not be suprised if users didn’t choose to sync with a MS account but it’s doing it anyway, if that’s what MS want.
If you sign in with a Microsoft account at all I don’t believe there’s the capability to opt out.
I only use local accounts. I have never had a Microsoft account. I never will.
You can’t do that anymore, at least not with a normal Windows installation. All of the tricks of forcing it offline, clicking cancel 10 times and jumping up and down don’t work anymore, they’ve disabled them all, the only way to install Windows 11 now (using the normal Microsoft installer) is by linking it to a Microsoft account.
Just update a W10 local install. It won’t even try to ask you to add a microsoft account.
Using Rufus still works. I did it as recently as a couple of days ago.
Sorry, but the argument above was for a regular user, who doesn’t know what Rufus is, who doesn’t know the concept of OS, who simply
knowsthinks the files are saved “on the computer” (while they somehow ended up on OneDrive).… and who doesn’t know that you can even install an OS to begin with!
This is not true. There are several tools to create a bootable USB that uses a local account.
They just made it hard for Joe Schmoe to avoid it.
using the normal installer
Joe Schmoe buys new laptop with Windows preinstalled.
Joe Schmoe boots it for the first time.
Greeted by first-log-on.
Goes through steps and is immediately captured.
You can still create a local account by setting the PC up as a “School or Business” PC and then choosing the local account option.
I’m not even sure if you can install without an MS account if you don’t use Rufus anymore. Rufus requires literacy for sure, and even if you can still do it without it is designed to make it impossible to know you can from within the installer itself.
Main issue with Rufus is secure boot unfortunately, otherwise Rufus is easy enough that I gave a couple “click here, then here, then here and here are some screenshots” to a friend they were able to navigate it just fine. At this point I swear Rufus is easier than using the official installer provided Secure Boot is off.
It’s a bit harsh and unfair to say “you are dumb enough to allow it”. Microsoft makes it damn near impossible to avoid this unless you are extremely particular and savvy about it, and never have an off day where you make a mistake while using your PC.
Encryption doesn’t actually complete until you log in with a Microsoft account for Home Edition.
Anyways: Use Veracrypt.
Or just Linux + LUKS
Save a copy of your bitlocker keys to a Veracrypt drive with a password no shorter then 15 mixed characters. Then upload that encrypted container to any free service. They wont be able to open it and now you have a remote backup copy.
Why not save a step, fuck bitlocker, and use veracrypt to encrypt your drive in the first place?
That is a option but it’s performance is bad and you need at least fifteen mix character password every time you boot. If you game you need to use bitlocker sadly or load times dive hard. Having a second drive in full Veracrypt is fine for things like basic documents but not to game on.
Why not save a step and don’t install Windows in the first place.
If you can have two computers one should always be Linux. But gaming and certain software just does not work on Linux yet sadly. Hoping steam can turn that around.
I employed the super secure expedient of never exporting my keys. I have no idea what they are, I never did, and I never will.
There’s really no irreplaceable data on my Windows machine. If I have to reformat it some day A) that’s no big deal, and B) it’s Windows, what else is new.
They do have a copy of your Bitlocker key if you are dumb enough to allow it to sync with your Microsoft account, you know, “for convenience.”
Which I don’t believe is the only way it can leak. It’s well known Microsoft can access anything and everything on an internet connected Windows PC whether there’s a Microsoft account or not. If the nazi’s push for the device of someone on a local account only, you know they’ll magically find a way.
No they do not have copies of every Bitlocker key.
Bitlocker by default creates a 48-bit recovery code that can be used to unlock an encrypted drive. If you run Windows with a personal Microsoft account it offers to backup that code into your Microsoft account in case your system needs recovered. The FBI submitted a supoena to request the code for a person’s encrypted drive. Microsoft provided it, as required by law.
Bitlocker does not require that key be created, and you don’t have to save it to Microsoft’s cloud.
This is just a case of people not knowing how things work and getting surprised when the data they save in someone else’s computer is accessed using the legal processes.
If you sign into a Microsoft account during setup, Microsoft automatically turns on bitlocker and sends the key off to Microsoft for safe keeping. You are right, there are other ways to handle bitlocker, but that’s way beyond most people, and I don’t think Microsoft even tells you this during setup. It’s honestly a lifesaver for when bitlocker breaks(and it does), but it comes at a cost. In the business world, this is seen as a huge benefit, as we aren’t trying to protect from the US government, mostly petty theft and maybe some corporate espionage.
As is often the case, the real solution is Linux, but that, too, is far beyond most people until manufacturers start shipping Linux machines to big box stores and even then they’d probably not enable any encryption.
I question whether we are rapidly approaching the point where Linux is simply easier to use in a safe, secure, and practical way for the average user, because it doesn’t try to actively fuck you over like Microsoft does
It’s easier when you don’t need to jump through hoops to make a local account. It’s easier when you don’t need to turn off a dozen settings you might not know about regarding data collection or advertisements. It’s easier when you don’t have an antagonistic system that treats you like the product, not a user, not pushing you towards confusing things you don’t want
Except that Microsoft basically puts a gun to every users head to login with a Microsoft account which can/does backup the recovery keys.
Rufus: “Am I a joke to you?”
This is why we Jason Bourne style snatch the gun out of their holster before they can draw it and beat them unconcious with it, I mean oobe\bypassnro
Iirc bypassnro no longer works on recent builds of windows
It no longer works as a shortcut, but the actual bypass still works. In practice the command line you have to enter just got a bit longer is all.
At least last time I needed it, to that still worked fine. It’s been a few months.
Microsoft is already a bad actor and they have them. Or a bad actor could threaten microsoft physically and microsoft will hand them over. Wait, that already happened.
And people make fun of me for turning off secure boot and tpm. They just cause grief for no benefit.
Both are completely unrelated to the discussion. TPM sometimes have issues regarding their security, but you can certainly use Secure Boot with your own signing keys to ensure the kernel you run is one you installed, which improves security. And you can use TPM to either keep your FDE keys, or only part of them combined with a PIN if you don’t fully trust them to be secure, so you keep strong encryption but with a bit of convenience.
Without a (properly configured) Secure Boot startup, anyone could just put a malware between the actual boot and your first kernel. If the first thing that happens when you boot is something asking for a password to be able to decrypt your storage, then an attacker can just put something here, grab your password, and let you proceed while storing in a a place it can be retrieved.
Is this scenario a concern for most people? That’s unlikely. But every computer sold these last five years (at least!) can be setup to reduce this risk, so why not take advantage of it.
Well this isn’t directly related to those, so maybe some derision is warranted.
As long as you’re doing your own whole disk encryption, you have a valid path to still be secure. However, if you’re running an unencrypted disk, you’re much more likely to lose your data to a non-state actor.
More likely stupid users storing their bitlocker key in the microsoft account instead of printing it out or storing it somewhere not owned by MS lol
Could be worse. Could have skeleton keys
You’re assuming there isn’t a master pubkey baked into the software.
A single bitter, crowing “hah!” at whoever thought there wasn’t at least this much overlap between our corporate and government masters. Welcome to hell kid, shoutout to whatever’s being trained on the last ~30 years of everything that touched the internet in the NSA’s Utah data center. Rose coloured PRISM though, I dream of the day when someone makes those search tools public and I can reminisce through my preteen MSN Messenger convos
bonjour!
Linux. LUKS it yourself or it isn’t really encrypted.
Microslop is openly anti consumer. Why would you hand them your encryption keys?
Even if you don’t care that MS and the federal government can decrypt your data, when Bitlocker is enabled your MS account becomes cryptographically linked to your identity and machine, making it a powerful tool for surveillance, identification, and DRM.
BitLocker provides for a recovery key. This is to allow someone to regain access to an encrypted device in the event that they lose their PIN, any one of these scenarios happen, OR when suspects do not want to cooperate with LEOs.
Find your BitLocker recovery key
If the target device is part of an enterprise and managed with EntraId/Intune this is the option. Escrowed keys.
Remember when Truecrypt got suspiciously terminated? That was the goal
I wonder if it’s actually safe or if it’s just a CIA honeypot.
They’ve fixed Truecrypt vulnerabilities uncovered by previous audits, and have themselves been audited at least twice
Edit: some highlights on the latest audits and their response.
