Read more.Quote:
Makes software encryption the default for newly encrypted drives.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Makes software encryption the default for newly encrypted drives.
Because Microsoft has such a stellar record when it comes to bug-free code...
That doesn't exonerate the SSD manufacturers.Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
Because one doesn't have a stellar record doesn't excuse the issues found in others.
Fantastic straw-man argument there azrael.
It's a great shame the people tasked with implementing security have such a poor understanding with the fundamentals (such as not using a generic password for everybody).
More importantly - should we trust any closed & proprietary security platform that has no credible, comprehensive and continuous independent security auditing, regardless of manufacturer?
I quite agree with you on this. It's just with all the bungled updates, bugs and what not courtesy of Microsoft they probably shouldn't pretend to know better. I orginally intended to state "Pot, meet Kettle". Perhaps I should have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabbykatze
Not quite sure what you mean with "straw-man argument". I'm not defending manufacturers of SSDs. I just believe Microsoft should take care of their own flaws before pointing the finger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dashers
Very well said, tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by chinf
There's a big difference between bugs in millions of lines of code and secure enclave having a bug that allows you to reset all the encryption keys on a drive giving you full access to the encrypted contents.Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
So...if one has a drive that they have deemed untrustworthy, does bitlocker need turning off and on again to benefit from the update?
Not really. I'm saying this as a developer ...fighting bugs on a daily basis. A bug is a bug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabbykatze
TBH, if I really wanted software encryption I'd probably use VeraCrypt. At least that *is* open source and independently audited.
Bitlocker is independently audited and is trusted as an industry standard for Windows products, just as FileVault 2 is for Mac.Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
Just because it's "Open Source" does not make it better or even more trustworthy, look at OpenSSL and Heartbleed.
As a developer, then you should know the difference between a bug causing an issue and an egregious design flaw resulting in security being classified as "null".
I've never tried mentioned software. As it is free and included as a feature on Windows it doesn't seem like the best option. I think that it's better to try some third part solutions for higher security. For example, Nordlocker is a great tool to help with this matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabbykatze