Cause there's no user data stored on EFI, and saying "almost-full-disk-except-for-the-EFI-partition-encryption" is a bit cumbersome and, obviously, pedantic.
Sure, but unencrypted means it can be tampered with. The bootloader can be modified to write your password to disk and once you boot, submit that to a server somewhere - or worse.
That's precisely why secure boot and TPMs exist - the TPM can store the keys to decrypt the drives and won't give them unless the signed shim executable can be verified; the shim executable then checks the kernel images, options, and DKMS drivers' signatures as well. If the boot partition has been tampered with, the drive won't decrypt except by manual override.
The big problem is Microsoft controls the main secure boot certificate authority, rather than a standards body. This means that either a bad actor stealing the key or Microsoft itself could use a signed malicious binary used to exploit systems.
Still, it's at least useful against petty theft.
TPM sniffing attacks seem possible, but it looks like the kernel uses parameter and session encryption by default to mitigate that: https://docs.kernel.org/security/tpm/tpm-security.html
There’s also PXE boot, secure boot, carrying around a live image on a flash drive, etc.
But any attacker advanced enough to tamper with your EFI partition in an evil-maid scenario has plenty of other options to log and steal your encryption passphrase, so it’s generally a moot point.
With that logic there's no need to even encrypt your partitions 🤷
Absolutely not — the skill level needed to tamper with a bashrc, pull credentials + keys, or generally hunt for sensitive info on an unencrypted disk is worlds apart from the skill level needed to modify an EFI binary.
security isn't real, just increasing deterrence for attackers.
if you can access something, they can access it, it's just a matter of effort needed to get there.
To add to the other comments: it's "full-disk" to distinguish it from "per-file" encryption. And "full-partition" didn't catch on, probably because functionally an unencrypted boot partition makes little practical difference.
And also because "disk" is already too hard for most people. "Partition" would be way way too complicated a concept for most users.
I think FDE is different to full partition. If your home partition is encrypted but not your root partition, that's not FDE. I would say FDE is when the partition that you mount to / is encrypted.
This is more nitpicking. Yes, there's a difference between partition and disk. But if we want to get technical, it's not disk encryption unless you're using a HDD. SSDs don't have disks.
At the end of the day, FDE would generally imply that all partitions with user data on them are encrypted. So it would generally include root and home partitions, and generally not include the boot partition, and would likely include partitions like /var and /opt, though not necessarily.
I didn't mean it as nitpicking. I was just responding to you?
Yeah, my disk's not even full.
The partition table isn't encrypted either. What a scam.
Well, something has to be. You can have your EFI partition on a separate drive and then the actual drive will be fully encrypted. It's just as good as we can get, the algorithm for decrypting the data obviously can't be encrypted.
I think there are implementations with encryption logic stored in the BIOS or on a separate chip, but don't quote me on that. And even then, the decryption logic itself will be unencrypted, because, as it happens, computers can't run encrypted code.
efi partition on a separate disk makes a lot of sense actually, imo the biggest point of fde is that your boot environment doesn't get fucked with from outside your trusted os, so if you put your efi on a read only CD or something and lock your bios to boot into that, that can't really be tampered with easily in software
As bad as secure boot is, that's exactly the use case for it. Frankly, you can both swap the CD and solder a new BIOS flash if you are really interested in boot poisoning, the latter is just a tiny bit harder to do without some sort of trace.
I meant software attacks, if your hardware is compromised it's pretty much already game over unless you use something esoteric like heads maybe
Why not have the BIOS decrypt the disk then continue the boot process as normal?
Mainly because then the manufacturer decides on how your stuff is encrypted, no likie.
What do you mean?? Our Motherboards come equipped with the latest and greatest Military Grade™ MD5 RealGood™ Encryption Technology.
What do you mean it's not longer considered secure????? Fake news, we'd never lie to you.
You are just moving things. When you change your EFI partition from being unencrypted and asking for your password to the BIOS asking for your password (or other credentials) you just shift the attack surface.
Somewhere there has to be an unencrypted part to start with.
Lock your unencrypted ESP down with secure boot and your own keys (shitty as it is that is in fact the one conceptional usecase of secure boot, not that stupid marketing bullshit MS is doing with getting vendors to pre-install Microsoft keys) to prevent tampering and you are good to go.
If you do this, be sure to make an image of your EFI partition and/or keys and keep it somewhere safe along with whatever is needed to restore the partition. Because if something tempers with it, your computer will stop booting because sighed hashes no longer match the ones calculated and you'll be locked out of your own system without some sort of way to restore the partition to a safe state.
@onlinepersona@programming.dev
Yes, preventing the boot process when something tempers with the files is the whole point of secure boot.
And beside the backups you should always have (remember: no backup, no pity for you...) the keys to sign your EFI files with are on the encrypted disk so the running system can get updated. So deactivating secure boot again, unlocking your encrypted disk from some live boot stick and fixing it is always an option (as is having a live system at hand signed by the same keys if you want to...).
Must be because full-ish sounds way too much like foolish, making people think it is a useless thing to do.
:I who cares..... do you want it to be called system partition encryption? i mean honestly that sounds better imo but its not something that's a big deal
Linux
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP