Garrett M. Groff wrote:
> Yes, good point. FDE doesn't by itself address all of an organization's 
> security needs. In regards to the online attack scenario that you describe 
> below (running ecard.exe, an attachment, while logged in as administrator), 
> several things come to mind: why is the user logged in as admin, in clear 
> violation of the principle of least priv? Does the machine have antivirus 
> software installed? Why would anyone in his or her right mind run an 
> attachment? Also, shouldn't a policy be in place to prevent executable 
> attachments so that less-than-savvy users won't run them by accident?


In the ideal environment these things would not happen but in .edu land,
you see all kinds of craziness.


> 
> Conclusion: online attack scenarios are not prevented by FDE. But that makes 
> sense, since the intent of FDE is to protect the data on the machine from 
> offline attacks that bypass the operating system's standard login and 
> authentication mechanism. For online attacks, other measures are useful, 
> like principle of least priv, security software, local/domain policies that 
> afford a higher level of security, etc. Hence, it makes sense to use FDE *in 
> addition* to the other "good security practices" that have been heavily 
> documented elsewhere.
> 
> - Garrett
> 
> 
>> To my understanding, FDE is good for data at rest when machine is off.
>> Once the system is booted, my understanding is that any legitimate user
>> then has access to the data (inasmuch as the OS allows it via auth) and
>> this means someone foolishly clicking on ecard.exe might get the Storm
>> worm if circumstances are right (running as Administrator, etc). What
>> good is FDE in this case? From what I can see, FDE does not meet this
>> particular need. For a system that's been physically stolen (and powered
>> off), FDE seems like a good solution. But protecting the data while the
>> system in use seems like a different challenge. We've seen messages here
>> about using encrypted virtual volumes for this, which would cover things
>> stored in that volume when the volume is not unlocked. If the user has
>> to have data open all day long and there is an attack surface through
>> that user, then that data is also at risk. I don't see any good
>> encryption solution for this. If the user can see the data, so can the
>> malware, to the best of my knowledge.
>>
>> I need to do some more research, but that will probably have to wait
>> until I return from BlackHat.
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FDE mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.xml-dev.com/mailman/listinfo/fde
> 


-- 
Curt Wilson
IT Network Security Officer
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
618-453-6237

GnuPG key: http://www.infotech.siu.edu/security/curtw.pub.asc

_______________________________________________
FDE mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.xml-dev.com/mailman/listinfo/fde

Reply via email to