I don't use LUKS because I found it to be too much trouble, but if they broke the crypto on LUKS doesn't that mean a lot of shit out there is vulnerable and not just LUKS encrypted hard drives?
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
6 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
1806 readers
1 users here now
Everything about Linux
RULES
-
Be nice to each other.
-
No memes or pictures of Linux in the wild.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
LUKS is not broken. An old KDF option in LUKS for encrypting the master encryption key in a keyslot is just old and less safe than newer, better KDF options.
The article is almost 70 days old, and Clemens Fruhwirth, one of the creators of LUKS, has responded:
A random keyboard typable character gives you around 6 bits of entropy. 20 of those give you 120 bits of entropy. Even without a KDF, brute-forcing this key space is infeasible with today's hardware. Even with PBKDF2, a 13-character password should be enough to keep your data secure for your lifetime.[1]
It is much more likely that there was some security failure in the linked case other than PBKDF2. That said, I support the upgrade to Argon2.
[1] In my thesis on LUKS, Chapter 5.3 Passwords from entropy weak sources anticipates the creation of specialized hardware for breaking PBKDF2. The "13 characters should be enough" advice is found on Page 86, Table 5.4, top left cell. It gives a 78-bit recommendation (=13 characters) in the worst-case scenario, which is Moore's law continues to double the attacker speed every 2 years.
It doesn't seem like it's such a big deal.
can you please link to the source with Fruhwirth's response?
Yep, a 10 Diceware word passphrase is just as secure as a 128-bit encryption key, even if only HKDF were used instead of a password-based KDF. Key stretching matters when you have weak passphrases, and even Argon2 only adds a few bits of effective entropy with reasonable difficulty factors.