Today i took my first steps into the world of Linux by creating a bookable Mint Cinamon USB stick to fuck around on without wiping or portioning my laptop drive.
I realised windows has the biggest vulnerability for the average user.
While booting off of the usb I could access all the data on my laptop without having to input a password.
After some research it appears drives need to be encrypted to prevent this, so how is this not the default case in Windows?
I’m sure there are people aware but for the laymen this is such a massive vulnerability.
I’m sure there are people aware but for the laymen this is such a massive vulnerability.
This is only a vulnerability if you suspect a threat actor might physically access your computer. For most people, this is not a concern. There’s also the issue that it has processing overhead, so it might make certain operations feel sluggish.
Encryption is not a panacea, because if someone ever forgets their password (something common for the layperson), the data on that drive is inaccessible. No chance for recovery. Certain types of software may not like it either. It’s one of many considerations someone should make when determining their own threat model, but this is not a security flaw. It’s an option for consideration, and most people are probably better off from a useability standpoint with encryption disabled by default.
Encryption is not a panacea, because if someone ever forgets their password (something common for the layperson), the data on that drive is inaccessible.
It’s because of stuff like this that Microsoft wants people to create an Microsoft account. Recovery key automatically saved to your Microsoft account. For business the recovery key can also be automatically saved in a central location.
I think it just really goes to show you can’t hide anything on a computer physically.
I also feel this is something that should be taught in school (maybe it is i finished school over 13 years ago)
I always knew there were ways to recover files off of hard drives. I just assumed they needed to be physically remounted not just plug in a usb and off you go
Physically remounting a drive is the same thing as just plugging in a USB and going to town. Instead of taking the drives to a different system, you’re bringing the different system to the drives!
where I live they never really taught conputer literacy. some places teach ms office and that’s it
Most Linux users run fully unencrypted drives as well. Its a vulnerability and a risk but its not a massive threat to the average person.
Idk if the average person is a laptop user but laptop users would definitely place a higher value on disk encryption.
This is not that big of a deal most of the time, since you are the only person interacting with your computer, but it’s worth remembering when you decide to recycle or donate – you have to securely wipe in that case. Also bear in mind, if you do encrypt your drive, there are now more possibilities for total data loss.
Oh, fun fact: you can change a users windows password inside Linux. Comes in handy for recovery, ie, user forgot their password.
Yes, any laptop without an encrypted storage drive will have its data accessible by someone booting from a live USB.
It really is a massive vulnerability, but it’s not well known because so few people even understand the concept of a ‘live USB’ to make it a widespread threat or concern.
So yeah, if you’re ever in possession of a Windows machine that doesn’t have an encrypted disk, you can view the users’ files without knowing their password via a live USB.
It’s also not limited to laptops.
While booting off of the usb I could access all the data on my laptop without having to input a password.
This is entirely expected behavior. You didn’t encrypt your drive, so of course that data is available if you sidestep windows login protections. Check out Bitlocker for drive encryption.
How old is your laptop? Pretty much every Windows machine I’ve ever owned after a certain year requires you to type in your Bitlocker key, including my first-gen Surface Go from 2018.
Also, you often have to manually set up encryption on most Linux installs as well - I did it for my Thinkpad. I need to do it for my desktop as well - I should probably do a reinstall, but I’m thinking of backing everything up and trying to do it in-place just for fun. On top of that, we can finally transition to btrfs.
Microsoft used to have a division for testing windows on various hardware configurations. They stopped doing that when they could just put different versions of windows on people’s computers and use telemetry to check the differences. This could be an artifact of that.
I think my laptop is from 2018 so is getting old. It’s an asus predator gaming laptop
Pretty much every Windows machine I’ve ever owned after a certain year requires you to type in your Bitlocker key, including my first-gen Surface Go from 2018.
This is interesting. I had a work computer require this ~4 years ago, but not one of the three since have (personal and different employers.)
I’m happy that you’re on a journey of discovery. This is not an insult. The word is partition. Someone corrected me on the spelling of something last night. We all make mistakes.
(especially with reference to a country with separate areas of government) the action or state of dividing or being divided into parts.
This is a case where Windows-bashing is hypocritical. Almost no Linux distro has disk encryption turned on by default (PopOS being the major exception).
It’s dumb and inexcusable IMO. Whatever the out-of-touch techies around here seem to think, normies do not have lumbering desktop computers any more. They have have mobile devices - at best laptops, mostly not even that.
If an unencrypted computer is now unacceptable on Android, then it should be on Linux too. No excuses.
Almost no Linux distro has disk encryption turned on by default (PopOS being the major exception).
it’s usually an option in the guided disk partition
If an unencrypted computer is now unacceptable on Android, then it should be on Linux too. No excuses.
Linux is about choice, not whatever someone else thinks it’s acceptable
Echoing Jubilant Jaguar’s sentiment about defaults mattering, I think that sometimes an excess amount of choice can be overwhelming such that a user is less empowered to make choices about things they do care about (Leading to a less steep learning curve). Sensible defaults need not remove anyone’s choice
I don’t disagree with the premise. I may disagree encrypted hard drive by default a sensible choice
Sure. But defaults are important.
Defaults are generally who do not want to understand in depth what they are doing (no offence). Example from other sphere: in R-Cran (used to write statistical models), some functions have defaults to either choose a particular algorithm or an optimisation value. I have heard almost about nobody among students, PhDs and even higher up the ladder, who took the time to understand what is happening below the shell. Instead these people took just the defaults, it worked (result was significant), done. However, if they may have chosen another algorithm, things may have turned differently, which would open up a box with many questions concerning modelling adequacy and understanding of data. It is the same with defaults in Linux.
I always turn on LUKS during install. The only exceptions are when I’m doing tests of different distros on my machine that I lovingly call “FuckAround”.
It really is the best way to find out.
If an unencrypted computer is now unacceptable on Android, then it should be on Linux too. No excuses.
When is the last time you carried your desktop outside? Forgot it somewhere?
It’s dumb and inexcusable IMO
No, it’s a choice, because:
-
History… encryption didn’t exist in the beginning. Upgrades won’t enable it.
-
Recovery… try telling the people that didn’t backup the encryption key - outside of the encrypted vault - that their data’s gone.
-
Performance… not such an issue these days, but it does slow your system down (and then everyone complains)
So, please continue to encrypt your data as you choose and be less judgemental on others, esp. anyone new
No excuses.
You can’t enable encryption after the fact? What a backwards system…
For which OS?
It can be enabled at any time on Windows & Linux. It’s just optional.
It’s your bullet point number 1
I will definitely say I wish encryption setup was a lot easier in Linux. Windows is like “wanna Bitlocker?” Done.
With most Linux installers, if you’re not installing in a very default way, and clicking that box to encrypt the drive, it’s time to go seriously digging. For a while.
I managed to encrypt a secondary drive with the same password on my EndeavourOS laptop, but I still need to enter the same password 2 times before getting into the OS.
I consider that a feat, and I’m not touching it for fear of losing everything lol.
Yes, I feel your pain.
Encryption drives sound like a good idea until the subject of unlocking them comes up… and automatically unlocking the drive for the OS isn’t really helping.
But, for user data, it can be unlocked automatically during login. The Arch wiki covers this.
But backup your data 😉
Blah blah blah. Unencrypted data is the wrong default in 2025 for any OS. Linux should not be a poor man’s OS.
It depends on your use-case.
Encryption of data at rest (this discussion) is mostly helpful for physical theft, so a device that never leaves the house, there’s little reason for encryption.
Similarly, on a lower powered mobile device, maybe you only want / need user data to be encrypted, and there’s no need to encrypt the OS, which keeps the performance up.
Maybe you want the whole thing encrypted on your high performance laptop.
So, it’s difficult to define a sane default for everyone, thus making it an option for the end user to decide on.
Linux has more choice than Windows - and the encryption algorithm(s) can be verified - so it’s definitely the better choice.
-
I thought BitLocker was enabled by default on Windows 11, which is a terrible idea imo. Full disk encryption by default makes sense in professional settings, but not for the average users who have no clue that they’ll lose all their data if they lose the key. If I had a penny for every Windows user who didn’t understand the BitLocker message and saved the key on their encrypted drive, I’d have a lot of pennies. At the very least it should be prompted to give the user a choice.
Windows does not let you save the key to the drive being encrypted. (Unless you access it via SMB share, which I’ve done a number of times during setup before moving it off.)
You mean it prevents people from writing the key on a piece of paper when they get the BitLocker message, then copy it on a text file once their session is running and throw the paper away or lose it later ?
This is true - it is enabled by default in win11. I disagree with you it being a terrible idea - imagine all the sentistive data people put on their hard drives - would they want to to fall in the wrong hands if they lose their computer? Or if their hard drives fails so they can do a secure wipe?
I’m not a fan of Microsoft, but they did solve the key issue in the enterprise setting by storing the key in they entrance identity. Same should be done for home consumers, since having a Microsoft account is being shoved in everyone’s throat anyway…
Yeah, should be noted that bitlocker is only default enabled if you set windows up with a Microsoft account, since it then saves the recovery info on that account “in the cloud”.
If you set it up with a local account, you still need to enable it manually, so that you can save the recovery info somewhere else.
Previous versions of Windows only permitted drive encryption in their premium tiers, and it seems like the current one possibly requires a TPM chip for it, so a lot of hardware won’t even support it. So basically greed or greed.
For what it’s worth it’s not always a default with Linux installations either. There’s a usually minor performance hit, though I can’t say it ever bothered me. Personally I have less fear of bad actors obtaining physical access than I do myself breaking something catastrophically and losing my access, so I don’t use it now.
Are you saying the performance hit is from running off an encrypted drive?
There will be some additional time and resources required to read and write encrypted data, even if minor.
Given that AES instructions have been implemented directly in the CPU since 2008, any performance penalty should be negligible.
Yup. You’ll need to tkinker with Linux too if you want disk encryption. At the very least, set a BIOS password.
It’s the same situation with Linux just a simple login only has very basic protection you need to encrypt your disk if you want to make sure no one can read it.
Yeh. But also this allowed me to save my files from my dying windows drive while moving to linux, so sometimes giant security holes can be handy.
Good practice is putting anything important on an encrypted USB drive (as that stuff usually isn’t very big), and just treating the machine as “kinda insecure”
If you set up a BIOS password, someone at least needs to unscrew your computer to get stuff. But this is generally not setup because people, well, forget their passwords…
so how is this not the default case in Windows?
It actually is now
IIRC, this is one of the reasons that Windows 11 requires TPM 2.0, so that the drive can be encrypted using the TPM as the key.
And people are pissed because they don’t realize, and when they don’t have the key any more, all their data is gone!
The encryption key is stored remotely and can be retrieved through the Microsoft account
That assumes they know which Microsoft account it was attached to, the password, and have another device to access that account and retrieve the recovery key. If they did the setup five years ago, they’ve probably forgotten all that info.
