Info Synology NAS Encryption: Forensic Analysis of Synology NAS Devices by Elcomsoft

[Oleg Afonin]

I would say the "j" series are perfect for many home users who just need a "data grave". By the way, encryption speeds are horrible at least on DS216j, with about 85 MB/s reads (acceptable) and only 35 MB/s writes (way too slow, extremely poor implementation even for this low-end and dated hardware).

 

[jeyare]

@fredbert
Yeap, from behaviour science you need prepare low cost and high-ends to be ready for golden middle way orders

 

[jeyare]

Or purchasing of the low-end NASes based on an assumption makes more traumatic experiences.
... assumption is the mother of all F*** ups!
reason why we are here

 

[Rema]

I need a bit of a research on this (and I have that planned). From what I've seen, the encryption key stored on a USB device is wrapped with a user-provided passphrase. That's fine; in an ideal world, this would mean that one would need all three of (hard drive), (USB stick) and (user-provided wrapping passphrase) in order to unlock the encrypted folder.

However, from what I've seen, DSM allows automatically mounting encrypted folders on boot even if you store the encryption key on a USB stick and enter your own wrapping passphrase. This, in turn, would mean that the wrapping passphrase (not just the hash but the actual passphrase) is stored somewhere on the HDD; otherwise, DSM would be unable to mount such folders automatically on boot.

Whether or not the wrapping passphrase is stored on the HDD if you are NOT using the "automatically mount" feature is subject to future research. Technically, it shouldn't be there, but I wouldn't place my bets on it.

Hi Oleg. I've just read this thread and I'm wondering whether you've completed the research that you mentioned above?

 

[amenotis]

Dear all,

Sorry for digging this old thread, but apparently there was still an encryption master password at least in DSM 7.0
Could you point out to me the corresponding CVE ID number to monitor this thread and ask Synology to display it publicly.
Is there still a master password in DSM 7.1?

Kind regards,
Amenotis

 

[amenotis]

All known CVE about Synology are there:

Synology : Products and vulnerabilities

Synology: List of all products, security vulnerabilities of products, cvss score reports, detailed graphical reports, vulnerabilities by years and metasploit modules related to products of this vendor.

www.cvedetails.com

If a vulnerability is not described as a CVE it does exist for Synology.

Could someone point out to me the CVE ID about this threat?

 

[ChAlb]

Hi very interesting topic, thanks for resurrecting it .

I was wondering how encryption (stored on usb key) is supposed to work on a Synology SHA cluster ?
Does both nodes needs to have the usb key mounted ? Only the active server ? How to switch from active to passive ?

I haven’t found many documentation on this.

 

[Laddmeister]

7.2 comes with volume encryption (in addition to folder-based encryption). Finally.

 

[Telos]

7.2 comes with volume encryption (in addition to folder-based encryption). Finally.

Wait and see... Is the OS partition encrypted? What about swap? What about performance? Will it only work with Synology HAT drives?

Synology always comes up short... I'll wait and see.

 

[Laddmeister]

Probably not, but do any NAS providers offer volume encryption with OS encryption?
Volume encryption usually slow down performance some, but usually not by much. Volume encryption is a lot better when it comes to performance than than folder based encryption. Its also more secure since it also protects metadata on the volume. Those users who want that extra layer of security can use volume encryption for the entire volume and in addition use folder based encryption for extra sensitive files.
I think thats the same protection you'll get on a QNAP.

 

[Telos]

Probably not, but do any NAS providers offer volume encryption with OS encryption?

This is availble on most prominent Linux distros, and partial encryption is only of partial value nowadays.

also more secure since it also protects metadata on the volume

You may be suprised at the level of metadata residing outside the data volume.

I think thats the same protection you'll get on a QNAP.

If QNAP is our standard, we are in grave circumstances

 

[Laddmeister]

This is availble on most prominent Linux distros, and partial encryption is only of partial value nowadays.

You may be suprised at the level of metadata residing outside the data volume.

If QNAP is our standard, we are in grave circumstances

I agree that full encryption of also the OS would be better, but for those looking for a non-custom NAS solution like QNAP or Synology, I'm guessing thats not something that exists.

QNAP is shit, but they have provided volume protection for years. It's a shame that Synology is so slow to offer this.

I agree that they could do more, but by offering volume protection on 7.2 I think theyre heading in the right direction.