135
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
135 points (96.6% liked)
Technology
34975 readers
79 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Hi, repair shop owner here.
Automatic Bitlocker encryption has been a thing since TPM 2.0 devices hit the market in 2018.
If a device is UEFI, Secure Boot is enabled, TPM 2.0 is present, and the user signs in with a Microsoft Account , then the disk is encrypted and the recovery key is saved to that Microsoft Account.
If those conditions aren’t met, automatic encryption doesn’t happen.
As long as they know their Microsoft Account Identifier, users can easily get to that key through the first search engine result for “bitlocker recovery key”: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/finding-your-bitlocker-recovery-key-in-windows-6b71ad27-0b89-ea08-f143-056f5ab347d6
We don’t really have a hard time with it - if a user provides their login PIN, a short terminal command will let us grab a copy of their key before BIOS updates or battery disconnects.
I have had very few cases where folks suffered data loss because of Bitlocker. Most of them were HP Laptops that used Intel Optane accelerated SSDs - encrypting what is effectively a software RAID0 is a recipe for disaster.
The other few had an unhealthy paranoia where they were reluctant to share anything about themselves with Microsoft, yet still decided to use a Microsoft operating system. While setting up the computer, they created a new Outlook.com email (instead of using their primary email), made up a random birthday, and did not fill in any recovery options like a phone number or secondary email. With the password (and sometimes even email) forgotten, they created a situation where they could not prove the online account was theirs and therefore could not get to the recovery key that had been backed up.
I do think that Microsoft should have this as an opt-in feature during the out of box experience, which is how Apple has it set up for Filevault and how most Linux distributions are set up. Ultimately, most users will still mash “next’ through the process and later blame the computer.
I have had quite a few clients have their laptops stolen after car breakins. Their biggest stressor was the possibility of thieves having access to the data on those machines, and the fact that we knew their systems were encrypted with Bitlocker brought them a lot of relief.
well, the thing is not everyone want to have their PC connected to MS account for privacy reason
Then don’t?
If you still want to use Windows and use their encryption solution, manually enable Bitlocker and store the recovery key yourself.
There are also third party encryption options.
Or if you don't trust Microsoft to begin with, just use Veracrypt, it won't upload your recovery key anywhere, but will help to make a recovery usb stick.
Additionally, the problem above was not some kind of "unhealthy paranoia", but disliking Microsoft and then still creating an account for some reason, one that they deemed to be a throwaway account. Question is why did they do that (oh, because Microsoft made it hard* to skip registering an account? That can't be! Microsoft is trustworthy and anyone thinking else is just unhealthily paranoid, right?), but also how should have the user known that this was a dangerous thing to do? Don't tell me they should have read the dozens of pages of dry legal text.
*Yes, it's hard if it's not an option in the installer. How the fuck you look it up when you don't have your computer?
If you’re at that point of not trusting a company, the best practice would be to avoid using their devices or connecting them to your network.
There are plenty of other ways to track and identify users, a company could conceivably bake whatever the hell they want into the operating system and doesn’t need to rely on you creating an account with them to achieve that objective.
I used the term “unhealthy paranoia” due to the logical fallacy that is at play.
Yes, that would be the best practice. However there are a lot of best practices that cannot be followed for one reason or another.