• Shadow
      link
      fedilink
      English
      117
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Watch the video. It just means external to the CPU, not an external device.

      They demo the attack on a Lenovo laptop in the first minute of the video.

      Edit: nm I just realized that was a 10 year old laptop and they’re in all the modern procs. I’m a lot less impressed now.

      Sounds like intel has external and amd internal with their ftpm?

      • Lazarus
        link
        fedilink
        561 year ago

        Many systems still use discrete tpms. Just because the CPU has a virtual tpm function doesn’t mean it’s used

      • Lee DunaOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 year ago

        fTPM has a bug, don’t know if it’s fixed

        https://www.techspot.com/news/93684-amd-promises-fix-ftpm-issue-causes-stuttering-freezes.html

        Veracrypt also doesn’t recommend using encryption that relies on TPMs

        Some encryption programs use TPM to prevent attacks. Will VeraCrypt use it too? No. Those programs use TPM to protect against attacks that require the attacker to have administrator privileges, or physical access to the computer, and the attacker needs you to use the computer after such an access. However, if any of these conditions is met, it is actually impossible to secure the computer (see below) and, therefore, you must stop using it (instead of relying on TPM).

        If the attacker has administrator privileges, he can, for example, reset the TPM, capture the content of RAM (containing master keys) or content of files stored on mounted VeraCrypt volumes (decrypted on the fly), which can then be sent to the attacker over the Internet or saved to an unencrypted local drive (from which the attacker might be able to read it later, when he gains physical access to the computer).

        https://veracrypt.eu/en/FAQ.html

        Let’s assume the attackers were law enforcers

    • Toes♀
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 year ago

      It’s fairly common in business devices before 8th gen Intel.

    • Shurimal
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      The MSI mini-PC-s for office/business use have separate TPM modules on their mobos. I wouldn’t be surprised if other mfg-s do this too.

  • peopleproblems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    681 year ago

    Very end of the article explains you need access to the TPM communication hardware, which no longer occurs external to Intel and And cpus

    • massive_bereavement
      link
      fedilink
      251 year ago

      To *newer Intel and AMD cpus and only certain models.

      There’s a lot of current hardware that uses embedded TPMs. It also depends on the communication path between the CPU and the module, but chances are it will be clear text and in some, via LPC.

    • @amenotef@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So offline (external) bitlocker drives that are unlocked with the key only.

      Or internal bitlocker drives that are unlocked with AMD fTPM are excluded from this exploit?

  • @tias@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    67
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I thought the point of the TPM was that the keys would be kept internally to the TPM at all times and that any data lanes would only be used for transferring payload. Why are they sending keys between the TPM and the CPU?

    • @Squire1039@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      431 year ago

      There are some functions like that, like Passkey signing. For Bitlocker, the encryption/decryption key is transferred to the CPU (and RAM) in order for it to operate. The problem described here has been around for a while, but putting it on a key like that makes the attack method available to “everyone”. There has been a solution for a while too: 1) put in pre-boot Bitlocker PIN, and 2) use integrated TPM like the article mentions.

    • @jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 year ago

      Because the CPU has to decrypt the bulk of the data coming from the disc. And it needs a key to do that. Unless we route all traffic through the TPM to decrypt the disc. The CPU needs a key to do that

      • @tias@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Surely some smart key exchange algorithm could be used for that, e.g. the CPU provides a public key to the TPM and the TPM encrypts the symmetric disk key with that public key. Similar to how TLS works.

        • @xradeon@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          The private key would have to stored in clear text somewhere. Potentially if you had non volatile space on cpu that to store the private key, that might work. But if you’re going to do that, might as well just use an ftpm.

            • @xradeon@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              You can’t do that since vulnerability is the connection between the TPM and the CPU, you need to encrypt that path.

              • @laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                The TPM comes out from the factory with a private key stored in it. The CPU has the public key.

                You turn on the laptop for the first time, and the communication between the CPU and the TPM is encrypted from the start.

                That’s what I’m referring to. Can’t this be done? I’m guessing it’s not that easy because I’m sure computer designers have already considered this idea.

              • @Lojcs@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Pretty sure they meant if you need to keep a persistent public/private pair you can keep them in the tpm and initiate the exchange from there

                • @laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  That’s correct. I’m guessing if it hasn’t been implemented yet, then there is some technical roadblock I’m currently missing.

          • @Lojcs@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Just generate one anew. You don’t need to use the same one each time

            • @xradeon@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              What do you mean by that? Generate a new private/public key pair every time you setup a new TPM? Or when you boot the system or something?

              • @Lojcs@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                On each connection. Or boot. Whenever you need

                Edit: to be clear, this would still be vulnerable to mitm attacks without a user entered password on top but at least you can’t just read the secrets from the bus. E2: And having a password wouldn’t be fully secure without such a scheme neither

  • @chairman@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    301 year ago

    Question: if I have an bitlocker encrypted SSD in a modern computer with embedded TPM, can I move this SSD to an old computer with external TPM to sniff the cod this way? Be gentle. I am dumb. Thanks.

  • @Petter1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 year ago

    Finally, we can install Linux on your corporate pc or grab some RAM from it 😂😂😂