Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

IIRC earlier versions of bitlocker would rely upon SSD firmware implementations for drive encryption. They stopped doing that when it was revealed many of these hardware encryption systems in common drives didn't actually work.


    void encryptSector(struct context *c, long sector_no, unsigned char *data, size_t data_len) {
      // TODO
    }


This is also something to keep in mind when resale of SSDs is discussed and people recommend using the secure erase function of the SSD!


Yup, when I was working desktop support a few years ago my manager told me to just format the drive and send it back to dell at the end of the lease, they’d secure erase it anyway and the data was safe, I never trusted that and used dd to overwrite every bit of the ssd twice with junk data, I’m sure it decreased the longevity of the drive but wasn’t my problem and it felt cool to be the only desktop support guy who knew any Linux.


SSD wear leveling mechanism would create new writes into different physical sectors so it was highly probable you were not in fct overwriting at least a proportion of the data


I can imagine the wear levelling function on some SSDs looks pretty similar to the encryptSector function


It's only securely erased after I've put about six 5/8" holes with my drill in it


Wasn't it tremendously naive of Microsoft to trust that SSDs did encryption correctly? So naive that it borders incompetence and/or malice?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: