6 ms·

That's a new one on me. Bitlocker keys can be backed up to onedrive if you want, but you can also store them in a TPM or a smartcard (physical or virtual).

JoshTriplett 11y ago
See http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2015/07/29/wind-nos/ http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2015/07/29/wind-nos/ ; "Windows 10 automatically encrypts the drive its installed on and generates a BitLocker recovery key. That’s backed up to your OneDrive account." Together with the ToS: "We will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to protect our customers or enforce the terms governing the use of the services."
- the8472 11y ago
  > We will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including [...] files in private folders I don't see any language that restricts that to their cloud offerings. It's in the privacy statement that covers windows too. So unless i'm missing something they're granting themselves the right to disclose your harddrive to government agencies or their own legal department on a good-faith basis.
  - sudioStudio64 11y ago
    Every company that has access to your encryption keys can be prompted to give them up with a warrant. You can keep them from having the key. That's one way around it. Using hardware of some kind (and there are multiple.) You are also free to use another solution that might meet your strict requirements to personally review the encryption, filesystem, device driver, and memory management code of your operating system to verify it's operating to your specifications. There have literally never been so many options for the privacy minded person with the time to pour through a metric ton of C code.
    - the8472 11y ago
      I'm not talking about encryption keys. I'm talking about the data itself. Sitting on my harddrive, as it is. As I understand it microsoft is saying that they could siphon data from my computer if they deemed it necessary. Maybe that's an adversarial reading of their privacy statement[1]. But it clearly speaks of accessing files in private folders. [1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.aspx https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.asp...
      - sudioStudio64 11y ago
        I believe that you are mistaken. Could they turn over your BitLocker recovery key to the authorities that would then use it to decrypt your HDD that they have already taken from you? Yes. Are they going to reach out over the internet and take your data? No. They are not going to do that. I follow this stuff really closely. I promise I haven't seen or heard of a capability where they can remotely take data from your machine and turn it over to the government.
        JoshTriplett 11y ago
        There are two approaches: give someone a pile of power over you and trust them not to abuse it, or never give them that power in the first place. Given the repeated demonstrations of what can and does go wrong with the former...
        sudioStudio64 11y ago
        Those aren't even remotely the only two choices here. There have never been more options for an end user of technology. You don't have to use agree to it. It's a trade off. If you have different requirements they are more than willing to come up with a different arrangement with you. (Yes, for a fee.) They aren't the government. They are an overblown bubble gum factory. It's up to you if you chew or not. And there have never been so many flavors!
        11y ago
- sudioStudio64 11y ago
  OK. What I'm trying to say is that backing up to OneDrive is optional. You get the choice. You can protect the key with a TPM or a smart card...It's not an all or nothing thing. You have options there, if you are interested. The other thing is that it sounds like a lot of privacy minded people can't trust BitLocker despite any number of assurances from MS or code reviews by third parties. AND THAT'S OK. Use something else. EDIT: I forgot to mention that if you are an admin or just operate your own AD installation you can store the key in Active Directory. The behavior is version specific, I think. EDIT EDIT: I believe that the TOS you are talking about is specifically referring to online services. I don't have time to stop and read it right now, but I think that you are misconstruing the intent.
  - JoshTriplett 11y ago
    > OK. What I'm trying to say is that backing up to OneDrive is optional. You get the choice. You can protect the key with a TPM or a smart card...It's not an all or nothing thing. You have options there, if you are interested. Except that the default is both insecure and privacy-violating.
    - sudioStudio64 11y ago
      It's insecure by a standard that you are setting. If they can demonstrate an audit log of every admin who has escalated their permission to logon to the container of your data and access it, including the files they accessed, would that be good? (Because they do that.) Again privacy-violating by your, arguably, very narrow standard. I'm sorry friend, but you are stating these things as if there's no question as to what you say. More accurately, you might say that there are higher privacy and audit-ability standards that you would require for your given situation or application. I wouldn't be able to argue with that at all.
      - pjc50 11y ago
        If they can demonstrate an audit log of every admin who has escalated their permission to logon to the container of your data and access it, including the files they accessed, would that be good? (Because they do that.) They are legally prevented from showing you such an audit log if a National Security Letter is involved.
- drdaeman 11y ago
  Read this warning on release day, went to read this myself and haven't found such statement neither in ToS, nor in Privacy Policy. This paragraph (about private communications and files in private folders) seems to be gone from their Privacy Policy. Google cache confirms it was present (in PP, not ToS), but I suppose MS spotted had this insane statement and removed in a hurry - or hid somewhere else, deeper in small fine print and with another wording. (Or maybe I had totally missed something, scrolling through the document and my browser's search function malfunctioned.)
  - mmebane 11y ago
    Did you expand the sections in the Privacy Statement [1]? Open the page in Firefox or Chrome, hit F12 to get to the browser console, then run this to expand all the sections: $('.learnMoreLabel').click() If you search the page for "disclose", you'll see that that exact wording is no longer present, but very similar wording is in the "Reasons We Share Personal Data" and "Skype - Partner companies" sections. [1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.aspx https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.asp...
    - drdaeman 11y ago
      Thanks! Yes, now I see this.

JoshTriplett 11y ago

See http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2015/07/29/wind-nos/ http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2015/07/29/wind-nos/ ; "Windows 10 automatically encrypts the drive its installed on and generates a BitLocker recovery key. That’s backed up to your OneDrive account." Together with the ToS: "We will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to protect our customers or enforce the terms governing the use of the services."

the8472 11y ago
> We will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including [...] files in private folders I don't see any language that restricts that to their cloud offerings. It's in the privacy statement that covers windows too. So unless i'm missing something they're granting themselves the right to disclose your harddrive to government agencies or their own legal department on a good-faith basis.
- sudioStudio64 11y ago
  Every company that has access to your encryption keys can be prompted to give them up with a warrant. You can keep them from having the key. That's one way around it. Using hardware of some kind (and there are multiple.) You are also free to use another solution that might meet your strict requirements to personally review the encryption, filesystem, device driver, and memory management code of your operating system to verify it's operating to your specifications. There have literally never been so many options for the privacy minded person with the time to pour through a metric ton of C code.
  - the8472 11y ago
    I'm not talking about encryption keys. I'm talking about the data itself. Sitting on my harddrive, as it is. As I understand it microsoft is saying that they could siphon data from my computer if they deemed it necessary. Maybe that's an adversarial reading of their privacy statement[1]. But it clearly speaks of accessing files in private folders. [1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.aspx https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.asp...
    - sudioStudio64 11y ago
      I believe that you are mistaken. Could they turn over your BitLocker recovery key to the authorities that would then use it to decrypt your HDD that they have already taken from you? Yes. Are they going to reach out over the internet and take your data? No. They are not going to do that. I follow this stuff really closely. I promise I haven't seen or heard of a capability where they can remotely take data from your machine and turn it over to the government.
      - JoshTriplett 11y ago
        There are two approaches: give someone a pile of power over you and trust them not to abuse it, or never give them that power in the first place. Given the repeated demonstrations of what can and does go wrong with the former...
        sudioStudio64 11y ago
        Those aren't even remotely the only two choices here. There have never been more options for an end user of technology. You don't have to use agree to it. It's a trade off. If you have different requirements they are more than willing to come up with a different arrangement with you. (Yes, for a fee.) They aren't the government. They are an overblown bubble gum factory. It's up to you if you chew or not. And there have never been so many flavors!
        11y ago
sudioStudio64 11y ago
OK. What I'm trying to say is that backing up to OneDrive is optional. You get the choice. You can protect the key with a TPM or a smart card...It's not an all or nothing thing. You have options there, if you are interested. The other thing is that it sounds like a lot of privacy minded people can't trust BitLocker despite any number of assurances from MS or code reviews by third parties. AND THAT'S OK. Use something else. EDIT: I forgot to mention that if you are an admin or just operate your own AD installation you can store the key in Active Directory. The behavior is version specific, I think. EDIT EDIT: I believe that the TOS you are talking about is specifically referring to online services. I don't have time to stop and read it right now, but I think that you are misconstruing the intent.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago
  > OK. What I'm trying to say is that backing up to OneDrive is optional. You get the choice. You can protect the key with a TPM or a smart card...It's not an all or nothing thing. You have options there, if you are interested. Except that the default is both insecure and privacy-violating.
  - sudioStudio64 11y ago
    It's insecure by a standard that you are setting. If they can demonstrate an audit log of every admin who has escalated their permission to logon to the container of your data and access it, including the files they accessed, would that be good? (Because they do that.) Again privacy-violating by your, arguably, very narrow standard. I'm sorry friend, but you are stating these things as if there's no question as to what you say. More accurately, you might say that there are higher privacy and audit-ability standards that you would require for your given situation or application. I wouldn't be able to argue with that at all.
    - pjc50 11y ago
      If they can demonstrate an audit log of every admin who has escalated their permission to logon to the container of your data and access it, including the files they accessed, would that be good? (Because they do that.) They are legally prevented from showing you such an audit log if a National Security Letter is involved.
drdaeman 11y ago
Read this warning on release day, went to read this myself and haven't found such statement neither in ToS, nor in Privacy Policy. This paragraph (about private communications and files in private folders) seems to be gone from their Privacy Policy. Google cache confirms it was present (in PP, not ToS), but I suppose MS spotted had this insane statement and removed in a hurry - or hid somewhere else, deeper in small fine print and with another wording. (Or maybe I had totally missed something, scrolling through the document and my browser's search function malfunctioned.)
- mmebane 11y ago
  Did you expand the sections in the Privacy Statement [1]? Open the page in Firefox or Chrome, hit F12 to get to the browser console, then run this to expand all the sections: $('.learnMoreLabel').click() If you search the page for "disclose", you'll see that that exact wording is no longer present, but very similar wording is in the "Reasons We Share Personal Data" and "Skype - Partner companies" sections. [1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.aspx https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/default.asp...
  - drdaeman 11y ago
    Thanks! Yes, now I see this.