From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from arnowagner.info (mail.tansi.org [84.19.178.47]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C6A221D5B0 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 19:42:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=84.19.178.47 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762544579; cv=none; b=X4IebYi6mGqOSJOr0Q68wd+Xvo367TDMu+PjaIPtT7tC2xATpyqDk/jMjRF9IMZUPx1XUMCWjdLNIPnLDueYlmHX34lncOsbjpjHP9jXub5imLnABlsIwWOvtYHvLYicFJpfN5rddvRZxy10V4Us85vkLtvIIJhw9PS/roQLysI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762544579; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KDzpj4R5F4liGMLeHfjQ/bx2fsJzSVl4+Lj9sqZCIgg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Dp9nVdJm1dHXM/17EVNX14XpPpLT/ViQfxZeitahi4rKzLYQw+057Tle7WlZTi0toEzXbQgc1t8K42ECKHDEO5fv6D68nbAuQ5G2UK5A20U6/kZiasS9PLdNdNvm4OqklE/f0XCAjMz50qDGgdFXOyTqZ4Dc3SwtL/I/Z/kJwnk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arnowagner.info; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arnowagner.info; arc=none smtp.client-ip=84.19.178.47 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arnowagner.info Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arnowagner.info Received: from gate.tansi.org (81-6-44-245.init7.net [81.6.44.245]) by v1.tansi.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 97E5E1400E2 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 20:35:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by gate.tansi.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F22FF17A454; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 20:36:54 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 20:36:54 +0100 From: Arno Wagner To: cryptsetup@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: Question about FAQ 5.21: "Why is there no "Nuke-Option"?" Message-ID: Reply-To: Arno Wagner References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cryptsetup@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 15:38:06 CET, techmetx11 wrote: > After seeing GrapheneOS's implementation of the same design idea, I feel > like this idea wasn't given much thought in the FAQ. You feel incorrectly. This has been extensively discussed. > This paragraph ignores the fact that the TPMs that come with computers > have improved on-par to the standard of HSMs, and are now integrated > straight in the CPU in most cases, rather than being a seperate chip or > card that can be simply bus-probed or manipulated physically. They really have not. Not even remotely. > > Still, if you have a good use-case (i.e. non-abstract real-world > > situation) where a Nuke-Option would actually be beneficial, please let > > me know. > > Imagine if you were being tortured by people to unlock a hard drive that > you didn't want them to see the contents of, and so you give them the > password to hopefully make it so that it wipes the TPM/HSM/etc. of the > computer and destroy any chance of unlocking the contents, thus making > their job futile and saving information from ending up on your > adversaries' hands (even if it meant it cost you your life) This senario has been discussed here many times. It is not a valid reason to have a nuke option. Also note the cryptsetup has no TPM integration as part of the project. Regards, Arno Wagner -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., Email: arno@wagner.name GnuPG: ID: CB5D9718 FP: 12D6 C03B 1B30 33BB 13CF B774 E35C 5FA1 CB5D 9718 ---- A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. -- Plato If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier