Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH
-
@emad-r said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
Yh your both right, I just thought if there was an easy way to do implement this then maybe I will add it as an extra hardening step, and I know the more security layer you add the more complexity, and sometimes it becomes more unusable/unreliable.
Is it REALLY added security, though? In what way does it add protection?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
@emad-r said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
Yh your both right, I just thought if there was an easy way to do implement this then maybe I will add it as an extra hardening step, and I know the more security layer you add the more complexity, and sometimes it becomes more unusable/unreliable.
Is it REALLY added security, though? In what way does it add protection?
Between you and the cloud Provider. Adds additional layer of no eaves dropping if there is such an act, that said I know that your much better handled with cloud provider than self hosted
-
@emad-r said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
@scottalanmiller said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
@emad-r said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
Yh your both right, I just thought if there was an easy way to do implement this then maybe I will add it as an extra hardening step, and I know the more security layer you add the more complexity, and sometimes it becomes more unusable/unreliable.
Is it REALLY added security, though? In what way does it add protection?
Between you and the cloud Provider. Adds additional layer of no eaves dropping if there is such an act, that said I know that your much better handled with cloud provider than self hosted
How? How can encryption of the OS protect you in any way? Everything in the OS is public data that they can pull down anyway? And once your system is up and running, it's not encrypted. The cloud provider can turn it on anytime that they want.
I think this protection is complete myth. People hear "encryption" and assume it implies more security, but it does not. I see absolutely no protection. First, it's not something you would rationally want to protect. But secondly, even if it was, this does literally nothing to protect it.
-
Encrypting data has a small value in a situation like this, very small. Only when worried about physical theft, which is a "meteor-like risk" in a cloud datacenter. But at least it is real, if nominal (WELL into tin foil hat territory.) Unless you are a military or government, and even then, it's pretty remote.
But the OS is not a risk. It's that simple. As it is not a risk, nothing you do to it can increase security. There is nothing to secure.
-
Your server will rarely be turned off. In a rare case that it's off, yeah it asks for your unencryption password, but as Scott said it it'll normally be on and it won't matter.
-
To play devil's advocate, if you're using LUKS the data is encrypted in transit also. So it's not just at rest.
-
But, most likely the provider is already doing both at rest and in transit encryption. So there isn't much here to help. Also, using ephemeral systems takes care of this issue.
-
@stacksofplates said in Encryption FS on the Cloud and Remote SSH:
To play devil's advocate, if you're using LUKS the data is encrypted in transit also. So it's not just at rest.
I can't remember off of the top of my head, but you might need FIPS mode enabled for dm-crypt to encrypt in motion as well. I'm lazy and don't feel like looking it up.
