Welcome Guest. | Log In | Register | Membership Benefits
Dark Reading's hacked-off Weblog

Topics:   Hacked Off
  • |   Email this page E-mail
  • |  Print Print
  • |   Bookmark and Share

TCG Drive Encryption Goes Mainstream

The Trusted Computing Group's newly released specifications for the management of hard drive encryption are now being adopted by a number of vendors -- Seagate arguably the most prominent, but also including Fujitsu, Toshiba, Hitachi, Wave Systems, CryptoMill, WinMagic, Secude, and McAfee.

Feb 20, 2009 | 05:20 PM | 

By Rob Enderle
Dark Reading
The Trusted Computing Group's newly released specifications for the management of hard drive encryption are now being adopted by a number of vendors -- Seagate arguably the most prominent, but also including Fujitsu, Toshiba, Hitachi, Wave Systems, CryptoMill, WinMagic, Secude, and McAfee.These specifications (PDF) focus on how the drives are managed by host-side applications, and should provide the dual benefit of increased performance with encrypted drives, driving a wider implementation of this security technology. What this enables is vastly lowered barriers to entry for related products because the standards allow hardware-encrypted drives from a wide variety of conforming vendors to be plug-compatible.

This, in turn, has the dual benefit of lowering costs through competitive standardization and increasing adoption of the related technology. The National Security Agency, which participated in this effort, has issued a letter of acceptance for one of the participating vendors, demonstrating that it's also behind this effort.

Standard Advantages Advantages to this TCG Hard Drive encryption approach include improved setup time, enhanced scalability, interoperability, increased security over keys, portability, and platform breadth. Let's take a look at each.

Setup Time: With this class of encryption product, data is encrypted from the time the drive is manufactured. Turning on the security is nearly instantaneous because the drive is already encrypted. With other forms of encryption, the drive must first become encrypted when the feature is turned on, requiring the encryption of the then-resident drive contents (which can be very time-consuming).

Scalability: For more traditional CPU-based solutions, when multiple drives are introduced, they will bottleneck once the capacity of the CPU and chipset is reached. With drive- based encryption, the restricting function is handled by the drive and scales up in performance with each drive added.

Interoperability: Chipsets vary greatly between processor vendors, and have since the late '90s. Processor/chipset-based approaches tend to tie the drives to the chipset and processor solution, and have difficulty moving between solutions (if at all) without performance impact. The TCG approach is plug-compatible across vendors, virtually eliminating this problem.

Key Security: With CPU/chipset solutions, the keys for each hard drive need to be managed by the host-side application. They are generally stored in memory so they can be made accessible to the CPU. This leaves the keys vulnerable to kernel-level attacks and others, like the Princeton cold-boot attack. With the TCG method, the keys are sent to the hard drive during the preboot -- typically using a security-hardened application. This makes them more difficult to compromise.

Portability: Drives based on the TCG specification can be moved between PCs because, unlike other methods, there is no system-level dependency. This is because the encryption engine is inside the drive and not dependent on the unique aspects of any one PC configuration.

RAID Performance: Chipset/CPU configurations are particularly painful on servers or multiple-drive desktops because they shift the encryption load to the processor and chipset, which generally is already running at a high-level load in such a configuration. That typically leads to a significant bottleneck.

Wrapping Up The TCG's new specifications, as well as drives from the vendors now supporting them, have been needed for some time and address a number of high-performance, interoperability, and security concerns. This change represents a significant improvement in an industry (storage) that doesn't have many of them in any given year.

-- Rob Enderle is president and founder of Enderle Group. Special to Dark Reading.



Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

Dark Reading encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, Dark Reading moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. Dark Reading further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
Subscribe to RSS









  1. Cookies, Social Media And FireSheep
  2. SMB Guide To Credit Card Regulations, Part 2: The Low-Hanging Fruit
  3. HP And The Scary Corporate Fifth Column Concept
  4. Taking USB Attacks To The Next Level
  5. NoSQL: Not Much, Anyway
  1. Taking Cybersecurity Lessons To The Bank
  2. Researchers See Real-Time Phishing Jump
  3. 'BlackSheep' Sniffs Out Firesheep WiFi-Hacking
  4. Slideshow: Ten Free Security Monitoring Tools
  5. A Different Spin On Sleuthing Stuxnet
  6. M&A Activity Muddles Database Security
  1. Secure Managed Web Hosting Saves 960.gs from Malicious Hackers
  2. Access Governance as a Business Service: An Integrated Strategy for Automation with ITSM
  3. Business Driven Access Management and Governance: Simplifying the Delivery and Governance of Access Throughout
 
 


 
  Ars Technica
Boing Boing
Channel 9 Forums
CRN Blogs
Dr.Dobb's Portal: Blogs
Engadget
Gizmodo
GrokLaw
  Lifehacker
Schneier on Security
Slashdot
TechCrunch
Techdirt
Techmeme
Valleywag
 
  February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008