* [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase
@ 2015-07-07 20:32 lyz
2015-07-07 21:00 ` wintonian
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: lyz @ 2015-07-07 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dm-crypt
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 458 bytes --]
Hi all,
I'm encrypting my whole system under LUKS, and I've seen that in the
wiki of Arch and Gentoo they suggest to use a keyfile and encrypt it
with gpg.
Why is more secure to encrypt a keyfile with a passphrase and then
encrypt the device with the keyfile rather than encrypting the device
directly with the passphrase?
Against a brute force attack the passphrase is the same, so they should
be equally secure, am I wrong?
Thank you
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase 2015-07-07 20:32 [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase lyz @ 2015-07-07 21:00 ` wintonian [not found] ` <559C3C05.9040701@wintonian.org.uk> 2015-07-08 3:00 ` David Christensen 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: wintonian @ 2015-07-07 21:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dm-crypt (replying to the list rather than the individual might be a better idea) A quick guess, In this scenario you have the following:- A, something physical - i.e. a keyfile. plus B, something known - i.e. a pass phrase. Which equals something more secure I guess there might be more to it than that, but I assume that's part of it. Regards Robert On 07/07/15 21:32, lyz wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm encrypting my whole system under LUKS, and I've seen that in the > wiki of Arch and Gentoo they suggest to use a keyfile and encrypt it > with gpg. > > Why is more secure to encrypt a keyfile with a passphrase and then > encrypt the device with the keyfile rather than encrypting the device > directly with the passphrase? > > Against a brute force attack the passphrase is the same, so they should > be equally secure, am I wrong? > > Thank you > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@saout.de > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <559C3C05.9040701@wintonian.org.uk>]
* Re: [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase [not found] ` <559C3C05.9040701@wintonian.org.uk> @ 2015-07-07 21:08 ` lyz 2015-07-07 21:20 ` Arno Wagner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: lyz @ 2015-07-07 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: wintonian, dm-crypt [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1400 bytes --] The keyfile will be stored in the /boot partition. My question is if it's in a cryptographic way more secure, like if gpg encryption of a keyfile is more difficult to break rather than a dm-crypt encryption of a device, therefore it's logical to use a keyfile to encrypt the device and gpg to encrypt the keyfile. Thanks On 07/07/2015 10:52 PM, wintonian wrote: > A quick guess, > > In this scenario you have the following:- > > A, something physical - i.e. a keyfile. > plus > B, something known - i.e. a pass phrase. > > Which equals something more secure > > I guess there might be more to it than that, but I assume that's part of > it. > > Regards > Robert > > On 07/07/15 21:32, lyz wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm encrypting my whole system under LUKS, and I've seen that in the >> wiki of Arch and Gentoo they suggest to use a keyfile and encrypt it >> with gpg. >> >> Why is more secure to encrypt a keyfile with a passphrase and then >> encrypt the device with the keyfile rather than encrypting the device >> directly with the passphrase? >> >> Against a brute force attack the passphrase is the same, so they should >> be equally secure, am I wrong? >> >> Thank you >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dm-crypt mailing list >> dm-crypt@saout.de >> http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt >> > [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase 2015-07-07 21:08 ` lyz @ 2015-07-07 21:20 ` Arno Wagner 2015-07-09 19:00 ` Sven Eschenberg 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Arno Wagner @ 2015-07-07 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dm-crypt I think a keyfile is only better if it resides in a different place than the LUKS header, i.e. is on an USB stick that gets removed or the like and can hence act as an extra factor. Crtypto-wise, if yoy use a high-entropy passphrase,see FAQ Item 5.1 at https://gitlab.com/cryptsetup/cryptsetup/wikis/FrequentlyAskedQuestions/ ...I do not see any reason why using GnuPG to protect the passhrase would be any more secure. Arno On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 23:08:17 CEST, lyz wrote: > The keyfile will be stored in the /boot partition. > > My question is if it's in a cryptographic way more secure, like if gpg > encryption of a keyfile is more difficult to break rather than a > dm-crypt encryption of a device, therefore it's logical to use a keyfile > to encrypt the device and gpg to encrypt the keyfile. > > Thanks > > On 07/07/2015 10:52 PM, wintonian wrote: > > A quick guess, > > > > In this scenario you have the following:- > > > > A, something physical - i.e. a keyfile. > > plus > > B, something known - i.e. a pass phrase. > > > > Which equals something more secure > > > > I guess there might be more to it than that, but I assume that's part of > > it. > > > > Regards > > Robert > > > > On 07/07/15 21:32, lyz wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I'm encrypting my whole system under LUKS, and I've seen that in the > >> wiki of Arch and Gentoo they suggest to use a keyfile and encrypt it > >> with gpg. > >> > >> Why is more secure to encrypt a keyfile with a passphrase and then > >> encrypt the device with the keyfile rather than encrypting the device > >> directly with the passphrase? > >> > >> Against a brute force attack the passphrase is the same, so they should > >> be equally secure, am I wrong? > >> > >> Thank you > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> dm-crypt mailing list > >> dm-crypt@saout.de > >> http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@saout.de > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt -- 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase 2015-07-07 21:20 ` Arno Wagner @ 2015-07-09 19:00 ` Sven Eschenberg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Sven Eschenberg @ 2015-07-09 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dm-crypt It's a simple strategy to mitigate physical theft, if your 'key-material' is on a moveable device. (while it is trivial to acquire a physical object unnoticed it's much harder to acquire something from the brain of a person unnoticed, I'd assume) -Sven On Tue, July 7, 2015 23:20, Arno Wagner wrote: > I think a keyfile is only better if it resides in a different > place than the LUKS header, i.e. is on an USB stick that gets > removed or the like and can hence act as an extra factor. > > Crtypto-wise, if yoy use a high-entropy passphrase,see > FAQ Item 5.1 at > https://gitlab.com/cryptsetup/cryptsetup/wikis/FrequentlyAskedQuestions/ > ...I do not see any reason why using GnuPG to protect the > passhrase would be any more secure. > > Arno > > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 23:08:17 CEST, lyz wrote: >> The keyfile will be stored in the /boot partition. >> >> My question is if it's in a cryptographic way more secure, like if gpg >> encryption of a keyfile is more difficult to break rather than a >> dm-crypt encryption of a device, therefore it's logical to use a keyfile >> to encrypt the device and gpg to encrypt the keyfile. >> >> Thanks >> >> On 07/07/2015 10:52 PM, wintonian wrote: >> > A quick guess, >> > >> > In this scenario you have the following:- >> > >> > A, something physical - i.e. a keyfile. >> > plus >> > B, something known - i.e. a pass phrase. >> > >> > Which equals something more secure >> > >> > I guess there might be more to it than that, but I assume that's part >> of >> > it. >> > >> > Regards >> > Robert >> > >> > On 07/07/15 21:32, lyz wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I'm encrypting my whole system under LUKS, and I've seen that in the >> >> wiki of Arch and Gentoo they suggest to use a keyfile and encrypt it >> >> with gpg. >> >> >> >> Why is more secure to encrypt a keyfile with a passphrase and then >> >> encrypt the device with the keyfile rather than encrypting the device >> >> directly with the passphrase? >> >> >> >> Against a brute force attack the passphrase is the same, so they >> should >> >> be equally secure, am I wrong? >> >> >> >> Thank you >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> dm-crypt mailing list >> >> dm-crypt@saout.de >> >> http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt >> >> >> > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> dm-crypt mailing list >> dm-crypt@saout.de >> http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt > > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@saout.de > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase 2015-07-07 20:32 [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase lyz 2015-07-07 21:00 ` wintonian [not found] ` <559C3C05.9040701@wintonian.org.uk> @ 2015-07-08 3:00 ` David Christensen 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: David Christensen @ 2015-07-08 3:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dm-crypt On 07/07/2015 01:32 PM, lyz wrote: > I'm encrypting my whole system under LUKS, and I've seen that in the > wiki of Arch and Gentoo they suggest to use a keyfile and encrypt it > with gpg. What are the URL's? David ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-07-09 19:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-07-07 20:32 [dm-crypt] Security concern: gpg keyfile vs passphrase lyz
2015-07-07 21:00 ` wintonian
[not found] ` <559C3C05.9040701@wintonian.org.uk>
2015-07-07 21:08 ` lyz
2015-07-07 21:20 ` Arno Wagner
2015-07-09 19:00 ` Sven Eschenberg
2015-07-08 3:00 ` David Christensen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox