Back in January Microsoft encrypted all my hard drives without saying anything. I was playing around with a dual boot yesterday and somehow aggravated Secureboot. So my C: panicked and required a 40 character key to unlock.
Your key is backed up to the Microsoft account associated with your install. Which is considerate to the hackers. (and saved me from a re-install) But if you’ve got an unactivated copy, local account, or don’t know your M$ account credentials, your boned.
Control Panel > System Security > Bitlocker Encryption.
BTW, I was aware that M$ was doing this and even made fun of the effected users. Karma.
deleted by creator
I tried having it on my new laptop for a bit. It took like a week for Windows to kill the secure boot key for my Linux partition. Even after I disabled secure boot I couldn’t get it to boot up so I had to reinstall. Just left it turned off afterwards.
deleted by creator
It’s not ”leaving bitlocker off”, though. It’s ”be aware about it and turn bitlocker off manually” since it’s enabled by default in the latest updates.
That’s false. My Windows partition didn’t magically enable bitlocker and I’m on 24h2. LTSC build and local account tho.
They can’t do that legally without notifying our asking in eu
They desperately wanted to eliminate personal computers and replace them with dumb terminals running over the net.
When the public rejected this idea
THIS is their response. They are still insisting on total control of our computers.
Good thing PCs aren’t locked into Windows.
yet
Good luck locking loose mainboards sold for the DIY market, which don’t come with anything installed by default, to a given OS, the only way that could maybe work is forcing the OS in ROM.
Another way would be to discontinue the socketed desktop form factors and replace them all with mini PCs that are as locked down as the current Macs.
Thinking for two seconds:
MS pays Google to start enforcing some device verification thing so you can only view a good chunk of the Internet if you pass verification? (Assumes Google goes even harder making the web Chrome-focused)
Ooh Cloudflare could be invited to the party here too. Constant CAPTCHAs if you’re not on an MS AUTHENTI-PC! device. (Think Private Access Token)
…fill in the gaps friends 😉 you know MS has already debated all your “suggestions” anyway
So you’re suggesting MS will somehow block non-Windows OSes from installing, even on hardware like loose mainboards for building your own PC with, or even on barebones mini PC kits or certain laptop SKUs, which don’t ship with an OS installed to begin with and expect the user to install it themselves? I mean, unless something extreme happens like changing the entire PC platform to be like the current Macs, that won’t be feasible.
Also, doing that would kill the Steam Deck which I doubt Valve would take sitting down.
SecureBoot pretty much does this. There is nothing preventing motherboard manufacturers from blocking adding non-MS keys if they wanted to.
No just some laws
Ah no
so you can only view a good chunk of the Internet if you pass verification
/
Constant CAPTCHAs
Get Google & Cloudflare to make the internet suck if you didn’t pay Microsoft[‘s vendors] “enough” for hardware
Just sounds great doesn’t it?!
Google already does precisely that with their “open source” mobile OS. People underestimate how easily these guys can ruin stuff
:( tell me more?
First off, Google has made agressive deals with phone manufacturers to ship spyware with their phones by default, and some of the stuff can only get taken out by rooting/jailbreaking the phone. By doing so, they acquired nearly 100% of the app store market share, and then used it to make “useful features” such as integrity checks that are tied to the Play Services app (which is an always on spyware background app).
The end result is, even if you manage to root your phone and install a custom ROM (which is not always available to every model), a bunch of apps will refuse to work properly because you fail the Google Play fingerprinting steps and are assumed to be a security vulnerability. If I’m not mistaken there’s also some shady stuff with certificates, too
This is already part of the trusted computing spec its called “remote attestation” I would actually expect it more targeted at multimedia who are hot to keep you from copying their stuff and banks.
Not to mention DRM. They want to own your computer and prevent any kind of modification so that movie producers give them money.
Movie producers?
Yeah, shit like HDCP is pushed by the film and TV industry.
Not really. Your problem in us is the lobbying lawyers. It’s a political systematic problem. The demonic corp entities that crave endless growth will never not do anything that could potentially suck any data from or control a customer. The ones that get “money” for things like this are your law makers. The Republican authoritarian faschists are the winners, along with billionaires that can afford to buy laws. No movie producer. No one in any business except exploitation on the mass scale can profit from these moves. In some countries it is illegal. In the us it is business
No idea how you say all that but can’t put together which industry specifically benefits from HDCP.
So not movie producers. You just mentioned them as another category being fucked? Because that’s what they are
The film industry benefits from HDCP and all DRM, they aren’t being fucked. I’ve looked back over the conversation, I think you have it flipped in your head.
Just wait until you learn about Intel’s Management Engine…
They desperately wanted to eliminate personal computers and replace them with dumb terminals running over the net.
I don’t know about that.
Dumb terminal concept was more what Chromebook was doing.
Microsoft is doing something even stupider.
I think they want you to only use Windows and pay for cloud storage.
By enforcing BitLocker and Secure Boot, they are trying to eliminate dual-booting (you don’t need to dual-boot Windows/Linux anyway, as you can just use WSL2 /s).
By enforcing disk encryption, in general, they try to force the use of cloud storage, by making data recovery nearly impossible. Most people are probably too lazy to buy external storage, and manually copy their files over.
This guarantees 2 money streams. One from Windows’s tracking/advertising and the other from OneDrive subscriptions.
It does not guarantee any revenue stream. It is just incompetence
you don’t need to dual-boot Windows / Linux anyway
Exactly, as I can just wipe the disc and install OpenBSD.
Data recovery isn’t impossible. You can easily back up the recovery key. This is just typical Microsoft shit design.
My parents wouldn’t even notice that their computer decided to encrypt their files. And they will blame the service guy for not being able to recover their photos, in case of hardware failure.
Dumb terminal concept was more what Chromebook was doing.
I mean, for a lot of people they’re fine especially if they’re priced appropriately. Especially with a lot more software as a service out there. My problem is that all of them have a built in drop dead date on when they’re going to stop getting updates and there’s not really a great option for the devices post ChromeOS.
ChromeOS certainly can be a good system. I still have my old CR-48 from when I got selected to test the OS and even when it was in its infancy, it was solid. I used it for a lot of my college career because it was better than my Asus eeePC which had Ubuntu on it.
I had an Intel Chromebox that I ran galliumOS on. The problem is locked bootloaders which should be illegal
I have never bought a device I could not own completely and flash the rom with what I want. Except once I had iPhone 3 but it was easily jail broken, but I still feel dirty. How can someone think they own and control something I bought? There is something fundamentally wrong with that and I agree it should be illegal
Agreed. It’s unacceptable that things have gotten this.had. we need to fight back
If my Chromebook could run Linux or even pure Android, I’d probably use it way more often. But it being a locked down distro with android bolted on is useless to me.
- I can’t really do anything major on it that I can on a cheap laptop
- I can’t really use it for the same games or programs on Android, as the form factor really gets in the way, even in tablet mode.
It feels like the worst of both worlds. It’s fine for people who use a laptop/OS as a bootloader to a web browser, its not fine for weirdos like me.
You could always put Linux on it. I believe there is a way to do that for most ChromeBooks nowadays.
I tried, doesn’t work. There’s no documentation for my laptop or its board codename. I briefly got it to consider an Arch Linux ARM ISO but it just looped an error code on boot until you turned it off.
Funny thing is that a cheap netbook has stats that would be fine for anything we did in the 90’s maybe even some games too
The Chromebook I have, is overall fine. It runs ChromeOS pretty well, and most web pages don’t make me beg for more RAM or CPU. ChromeOS does a fine job, to the point I wonder if I ran Arch or something on it, it’s a crapshoot.
I think most laptops these days, even the cheap ones, are probably fine when you run a light OS on em. I’ve used computers that were 10 years old and ran most things decently well.
I’ve got an entry level desktop from 2009 I’m gonna throw arch on and run some stuff
MS execs blathered about “the age of software running locally being over” long before Chromebooks.
Not that it helps now, but you can also dump your bitlocker recovery key through powershell and save it independently.
(Get-BitLockerVolume -MountPoint “C”).KeyProtector
The control panel dialogue allows you to do this as well. Control Panel > system security > Bitlocker encryption. But it also has the superior option which is to turn it off.
I didn’t loose any data BTW. I had my M$ account info, and a backup besides.
But it also has the superior option which is to turn it off.
Why would you not want to encrypt your files? My Linux systems are encrypted too.
Why would you not want to encrypt your files?
Bitlocker is only as secure as Microsoft is. If someone hacks your account, they’ve got your keys. And Micosoft stores that key in plain text.
It sounds like you’re complaining about both approaches.
If Microsoft doesn’t have the key: You can’t recover your files if you lose it.
If Microsoft does have the key: An attacker could get in and take it (unlikely if you have two factor auth though) and you need to trust Microsoft.
And Micosoft stores that key in plain text.
How do you know this, though? It could be encrypted using your account password as a key or seed.
Microsoft is very much encouraging passwordless accounts. Mine only has a passkey with MFA.
Years ago I thought I was being smart encrypting my home dir on my Linux server. I found out the hard way this prevents remote login over ssh using public key encryption, as the .ssh dir is in the home dir, which is encrypted unless you are already logged in at the time! So every time I wanted to ssh in, I had to plug in a monitor and log in on the console first.
You can install Dropbear into your initramfs and configure it to allow entering the encryption key via SSH. Example guide I found: https://www.cyberciti.biz/security/how-to-unlock-luks-using-dropbear-ssh-keys-remotely-in-linux/
You do have to have an unencrypted
/boot, but the rest of the system can be encrypted. This uses a separateauthorized_keysfile embedded within the initramfs.
Not using Bitlocker is not the same as not encrypting your stuff.
I know, I just meant why would someone willingly disable Bitlocker?
I know, I just meant why would someone willingly disable Bitlocker?
I mean… the premise of the thread seems like a good enough reason, doesn’t it?
And even if it doesn’t, if one is already using a different encryption solution that doesn’t rely on TPM and secureboot silliness, what possible reason could there be not to disable Bitlocker?the premise of the thread
Some of the things mentioned in the OP don’t actually happen in real life, though. Bitlocker is only automatically activated if you use a Microsoft account to log in, and why wouldn’t you know the account credentials if it’s what you use to log in?
doesn’t rely on TPM and secureboot silliness
TPM is optional (but recommended) for Bitlocker. Practically every computer released in the past 10 years has TPM support.
Secure boot is needed to ensure that the boot is secure and thus it’s okay to load the encryption key. Without it, a rootkit could be injected that steals the encryption key.
You generally want to use TPM and secure boot on Linux too, not just on Windows. You need secure boot to prevent an “evil maid attack”
Some of the things mentioned in the OP don’t actually happen in real life, though. Bitlocker is only automatically activated if you use a Microsoft account to log in, and why wouldn’t you know the account credentials if it’s what you use to log in?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding something here, but does this whole thing not mean that the moment you use your Microsoft account for logging in, you immediately tie the permanent accessibility of your local files to you retaining access to a cloud account?
TPM is optional (but recommended) for Bitlocker. Practically every computer released in the past 10 years has TPM support. Secure boot is needed to ensure that the boot is secure and thus it’s okay to load the encryption key. Without it, a rootkit could be injected that steals the encryption key. You generally want to use TPM and secure boot on Linux too, not just on Windows. You need secure boot to prevent an “evil maid attack”
You have different opinions on TPM and the prevalence of evil maids than me, fair. But please don’t disregard the central premise of my last comment: One is already using a different encryption solution. Say, Veracrypt is churning away in the background. Why would one leave Bitlocker activated?
Disk encryption should absolutely be used, especially on laptops/portable systems.
Otherwise someone steals your laptop and swaps the disk into another system and they’ve got all your stuff. Including that folder that nobody knows about.
Holy shit, they automatically activate it on computers without an account to back the key up to?
That’s just malicious
IIRC, they only do this if you’re logged in with a Microsoft account.
Bitlocker is disabled by default if you only use local accounts
I’ve occasionally seen it activate itself on computers with only a local account, though I’ve so far only seen it when upgrading in place to 11 with secure boot enabled in the BIOS, and not every time. Fortunately the one time it locked me out was on a freshly cloned drive, so it only cost me redoing the work.
Also, the number of people who I’ve seen lose all their data because they don’t even know they created an MS account during OOBE, and later had a boot or BIOS hiccup, is too bamn high!
I have (had ;'( ) a local account, and bitlocker was activated. I only found out when my motherboard bit the dust, and that triggered the no-TPM bitlocker thingamajig. Goodbye data.
Of course it hits right as I needed the data on that laptop. Fucking murphy and his fancy legal words.
If anyone is in a situation like mine, you might find luck with a little DIY hacking: https://www.techspot.com/news/106166-old-bitlocker-vulnerability-exploited-bypass-encryption-updated-windows.html
I mean you can write your Bitlocker key down and store it safely or put it somewhere else safe… Lol
The main problem here is Bitlocker is being turned on by default on fresh 24H2 installs, most people that don’t know how to bypass the online account requirement are making burner Microsoft accounts (Boomers), therefore do not know the credentials in 3-4 years when their computer needs a repair.
Why cant windows copy luks and let you choose your own password
deleted by creator
because people will set hunter2 and be done with it.
So?
How did you get my password?
All I see is *******. What do you see?
I’m power sure you can get your recovery key and write that down elsewhere.
Ik that
Bit late to this thread but I know a few commands that might help if you’re stuck:
manage-bde -off C:(or any other drive) This decrypts the volume and turns off bitlockermanage-bde -lock/unlockmanage-bde -protectors -get C:(or any other drive) This displays your 48-digit key. I suggest you store it somewhere, just to be safe.Get-BitlockerVolumereveals which of your partitions are encrypted with Bitlocker.Disclaimer: I am not a terminal nerd, I just had similar problems years ago and went down the rabbit hole, used these commands and turned off bitlocker permanently. I don’t use windows anymore, but when I did, it didn’t cause any problems with bitlocker after this. If you’re concerned about your un-encrypted hard drives, consider using Veracrypt (carefully!) or similar open source encryption software.
Alright, lol, I’ll be the guy
Hey OP, ever heard of Linux?
This was the exact same situation I experienced with my old Surface 6. Started to look into Linux firmware on Surface devices and deactivated secure boot because it wouldn’t boot Ventoy at all and do nothing, so I figured to try again with no secure boot. It still didn’t work so I turned it on again, but was then greeted with this Bitlocker screen which I didn’t even know it had activated up until this point. I set up a local account so I had no key to reset or something and was literally not able to do anything besides reinstalling the entire system.
Luckily I had nothing important on it lol
Weirdly the activation was saved on the MS servers so I didn’t need to do that again at least (was a preinstalled system so I wouldn’t have known the activation key anyways, I thought “When it doesn’t work I’ll switch to Linux fully because I’m not paying for that garbage system”).
After I updated Ventoy I was able to boot again even with secure boot on, there seems to have been an issue with that specific version.
I had Windows on my device since I bought it (around 2018) only upgraded to W11. It never mentioned anything about Bitlocker before this incident so if I had important stuff on it it would have been so over. Well, never save important files on Windows without backup is what I got out of it
This caused me literally bigger problems than my switch to Arch Linux after having only used Windows the entire time xD
You know, this is actually one Windows decision I agree with. Encryption should be default, especially on portable devices like laptops. For an OS aimed at people who want to use their computers, rather than understand them, you have to choose an encryption that works by default for most of your non-tech-savvy users.
If they want their data truly in their own hands, or full control, use Linux.
If they want to use Windows, but not rely on a Microsoft account for recovery, get the bitlocker recovery key and write it down (which you can do).
But I think this looks like a sane default.
(Full disclosure, I don’t use Windows for anything I care about!)
Respectfully, hard disagree and terrible take. I work in IT, and your stance only makes sense if people have some tech knowledge. Which is never going to happen for the average person.
I can’t tell you how many older people I’ve had to tell that I can’t save their grandkids first pics because of bitlocker
That still happens without bitlocker. Computers are dropped. Facebook passwords are forgotten.
I acknowledge automatic encryption is going to make some more cases of lost data, but, with respect, I think the benefit of making fewer cases of stolen data is worth it. I agree with the other commenter that users should be made aware of it more clearly.
Also, as much as I hate the push to Microsoft accounts, I have to admit it helps mitigate this problem: if all ordinary users have an account looking after their master keys, then they can turn to that when they forget their login password etc. but the opportunistic thief on the train can’t (as easily). Not every grandma has a Millennial relative at hand to boot Linux to rescue files off her HDD. And for those who don’t like to trust their master keys to Microsoft/Apple/Google? There’s Linux. And external backups. And saving your password somewhere safe.
How many has it protected though? Maybe 2? It’s not logical to ask the user if you want to take over their data
The push to Microsoft accounts? More people, I expect, than I’d care to admit.
Not nearly as much. If someone breaks their motherboard in half but the hard drive is okay, I can get their data unless they have bitlocker. Microsoft is encrypting drives and storing the keys in the TPM only, and it is insane. My grandma doesn’t have state secrets on her laptop, she doesn’t need encryption.
So, your grandma doesn’t need encryption. She might not need a seatbelt either. But it’s not only state secrets that are worth protecting. Does she have internet banking, with cookies stored in her browser? But many people do, and it’s either encryption for everyone, or for (almost) no one.
Hah is there a rash of nursing home break ins that I’m unaware of? I’m in the field, the way that is happening is phishing with fake ads and emails
Very few people are breaking into a laptop for cookies, it’s tremendous amounts of work, and is usually targeted. Motherboards die all the time, and take the TPM with them
Hah is there a rash of nursing home break ins that I’m unaware of?
I mean, not Windows user lives in a nursing home. I wish! But some lose laptops on the train, and some even throw their computers away!
Sure, most of the risk is remote through emails etc. Maybe you’re right. Maybe the balance is better the other way round: let all Windows Home users’ computers stay unencryptedv at rest, and keep encryption for Pro users. I grew up with a high focus on security; maybe I’m paranoid.
But phones are all encrypted these days. Obviously they’re more mobile and at more risk, but that suggests to me that laptops are subject to similar, if smaller, risks.
I get it, but as someone who has had to tell little old ladies their data is fucked, I am beyond pissed at Microsoft’s implementation. They should not be encrypting data without forcing lay people to have backup codes printed or on a flash drive or something.
They’re doing this because they want to force people to her Microsoft accounts, probably just to collect more data.
And for the record, I am very pro encryption The half assed way of encrypting even if there isn’t a Microsoft account connected and therefore no way to save keys somewhere is completely unacceptable
But wtf, all thiefs want is the device, why do they want photos of her grandson?
Would be fine. The problem is, Microsoft is encrypting drives and not telling anybody about it. Average users have no clue what any of this is and are completely unaware they need to create a passphrase for safe keeping.
Fair point.
Just checked my wife’s laptop. Local account, secure boot off, windows 10. It had a message telling me to setup a microsoft account to ‘finish encrypting the device’. I clicked turn off, and it’s currently decrypting the hard drive. Blech.
I need to check my girl’s laptop.
Which version of Win 10 are you using? My girl’s Win 10 Pro laptop is still unencrypted.
Windows 10 Home
It’s not which version, it’s where you are. They follow some laws here some there and now that the US is fascist they roll out features like this on these easy targets first
Oh, ok. I am in EU.
Shit they do this on windows 10 too? I should check my girl laptop too.
*You’re
You’re boned
MY boned?
OUR boned
“do not redeem!” - microsoft, probably
This is gonna happen to a lot more people with their password change.
Why do you have to use there? Nothing a cater. You can’t use Google or open source. I don’t get it. They suck.
Like I need more spyware on my phone.
What about people with landlines? Older people.
So they’re going to lose a huge market share when they force everybody to throw away their computer to run Windows 11.
Windows 10 or 11?
