December 19, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item A Fundamental Security Mistake
December 20, 2009 at 2:39 am
I’m not so sure that users will use the TDE on Express edition. Most of the time Express edition is not managed by a DBA. In fact in most of the time the Express edition is being installed by another software and many times the DBA is not even aware of those editions that are installed in his organization. The users that use those applications are not database professionals and wouldn’t know what TDE is and how to use it (in fact many times they also are not aware that SQL Server Express edition is used by their software). In short I think that if TDE will be supported on Express edition, it will hardly be used.
Adi
--------------------------------------------------------------
To know how to ask questions and increase the chances of getting asnwers:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
For better answers on performance questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/SQLServerCentral/66909/
December 21, 2009 at 7:32 am
Adi Cohn-120898 (12/20/2009)
I’m not so sure that users will use the TDE on Express edition. Most of the time Express edition is not managed by a DBA. In fact in most of the time the Express edition is being installed by another software and many times the DBA is not even aware of those editions that are installed in his organization. The users that use those applications are not database professionals and wouldn’t know what TDE is and how to use it (in fact many times they also are not aware that SQL Server Express edition is used by their software). In short I think that if TDE will be supported on Express edition, it will hardly be used.Adi
I have to disagree with the point of your post.
I agree with Steve that it should be available. As with all security (and almost all other features), use of it is up to the DBA, whether that's a pro DBA or someone who "knows computer stuff" and doesn't even know how to spell "DBA".
The attitude you're expressing is comparable to saying, "Why even have keys for cars? Some people just leave the key in and the doors unlocked, so why bother even making cars that use keys?"
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 21, 2009 at 9:12 am
Encryption in general should be a default install at the OS level and apply to all files, not just to database files or express editions. Files like formatted reports, xls and csv dumps, sql scripts, and what not could all use such protections.
December 21, 2009 at 9:17 am
sjsubscribe (12/21/2009)
Encryption in general should be a default install at the OS level and apply to all files, not just to database files or express editions. Files like formatted reports, xls and csv dumps, sql scripts, and what not could all use such protections.
I prefer that as an option, not a default. Could be default in a business setting, but would be a pain in the butt at home. I prefer to be able to recover files off my hard drives directly, especially since I build my own computers.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 21, 2009 at 9:24 am
I'd like to see it as the default for some files. Like SQL Server files. Adding this option to Express, AND making it the default, would make things more secure. That along with an annoying message about the certificates and a "copy to" dialog at the end of an install.
Same for Quicken files, and other types of high security items. Makes some sense to have them encrypted automatically.
December 21, 2009 at 9:28 am
Steve Jones - Editor (12/21/2009)
I'd like to see it as the default for some files. Like SQL Server files. Adding this option to Express, AND making it the default, would make things more secure. That along with an annoying message about the certificates and a "copy to" dialog at the end of an install.Same for Quicken files, and other types of high security items. Makes some sense to have them encrypted automatically.
Yes, but that would be managed by the applications, not by the OS. The OS might (or might not) provide the encryption, but it would be something called in the application.
Quicken could certainly encrypt the database and files. So could Outlook, if that's desired (probably should be, at least on laptops). And so on. But why would I want my mp3 files and video files and such encrypted? If the OS defaults that way, they would be. And there go my compression options, too.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 21, 2009 at 9:40 am
I agree with the OS. There might be times I want those things encrypted, like the podcasts. Need to protect them :), but not by default.
December 21, 2009 at 9:41 am
GSquared (12/21/2009)
sjsubscribe (12/21/2009)
Encryption in general should be a default install at the OS level and apply to all files, not just to database files or express editions. Files like formatted reports, xls and csv dumps, sql scripts, and what not could all use such protections.I prefer that as an option, not a default. Could be default in a business setting, but would be a pain in the butt at home. I prefer to be able to recover files off my hard drives directly, especially since I build my own computers.
If you build your own computers, then the solution is for you to override the default encryption. All others get strong encryption by default. This is the trend anyway in thinking among all major operating systems.
December 21, 2009 at 10:15 am
sjsubscribe (12/21/2009)
GSquared (12/21/2009)
sjsubscribe (12/21/2009)
Encryption in general should be a default install at the OS level and apply to all files, not just to database files or express editions. Files like formatted reports, xls and csv dumps, sql scripts, and what not could all use such protections.I prefer that as an option, not a default. Could be default in a business setting, but would be a pain in the butt at home. I prefer to be able to recover files off my hard drives directly, especially since I build my own computers.
If you build your own computers, then the solution is for you to override the default encryption. All others get strong encryption by default. This is the trend anyway in thinking among all major operating systems.
And when I need to help a family member recover data from a crashed computer, it will be impossible.
Pictures from their last motorcycle vacation, gone. Downloaded music, gone. Etc.
Part of the whole purpose of security is balancing cost of protection vs cost of loss vs cost of exposure. Most people, most of the time, will have a higher cost of loss than cost of exposure, for the vast majority of their personal files.
Do you have steel bars, an alarm system, motion sensors, night-vision CCV cameras sending real-time video to a secure remote location, pressure pads, steel doors with 12-digit PIN mag locks, reinforced concrete walls with penetration-sensing mesh, and seismic records for detecting tunneling, for your garage? Those are all valid security systems that could be built into your home, but most people have locked doors and windows, and maybe an alarm system with a 4-digit PIN and a motion sensor in one or two rooms.
Why? Because the cost of protection would far outweigh the cost of exposure and loss.
At the same time, do you park your car downtown with the engine running and the doors unlocked? Or do you do like most people and turn it off, take the keys out, and lock the doors and leave the windows closed? Why? Because that level of cost of protection is far below the cost of exposure/loss.
You have to balance these things, or you're not actually doing security, you're just involved in some OCD neurosis about "must protect stuff".
You say it's okay for me to turn off the security on a computer I build for myself, but to force most people to have that same security. I say "force", because most won't know that it exists, much less how to make decisions about it. Why does that make sense?
Take a look at the most hated feature of Windows Vista, User Account Control (UAC). It forced most people to have a much higher level of security, at very low actual cost. That and lies from Apple, cost them a huge piece of the market (most businesses) and gave them a serious PR black eye.
Why? Because the perceived cost of protection was higher than the perceived cost of exposure. Microsoft didn't balance those correctly, and they got hurt for it. Rightly so.
So no, I don't buy the argument that, "it's okay for you to turn your security off if you happen to be a computer professional who knows how to do so, but let's put most people at higher exposure for loss without any real expectation of benefit".
If you disagree with that, lay out the expected benefit for encrypting personal computer files universally, and the expected loss resulting from that, and quantify the two measures, and prove that I'm wrong.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 21, 2009 at 10:16 am
I don't quite get what benefit there would be from TDE on Express. TDE only is useful for the data "at rest": if you have physicial access to the server and you're SA on the server (i.e. the default setting in Express), you have full access to everything in the database. Sure you're can't steal a backup for the database, but then again - you can simply go in and execute "select * from mytable".
I don't deny that it could be useful to ensure that your backup media is encrypted (unless you don't keep track of your keys in a separate place, in case you're essentially scr***d, but still - I think we're overselling its usefulness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
December 21, 2009 at 11:26 am
the company I work for is managing some hundred client sales applications in the pharm business. Most of these are express edition, some larger clients have workgroup edition. I'm a member of the db-development team.
Since customer data in pharm / health care business is very sensitive, we (and most of our customers) would prefer to have stronger security on their data. The customers - with a few exception - do not have admin permission on their servers, so TDE would make perfect sense for us. Enterprise edition is way out of scope. After all, we are often struggling to explain the need for a workgroup edition if data volume makes this unavoidable.
December 21, 2009 at 12:07 pm
I completely agree with Steve on this one... Arguments about who does what with SQL Express and that there is no DBA involved are hardly adequate when one is talking about a feature as important as the TDE. The feature should be there and then let the user choose whats done or not with it.
But I think this is overall just another indicator of how out of touch Microsoft is these days. Those of us who loaded Visual Studio 2008 only to find that it causes Winzip to cease to function have been all over Microsoft for months. Then Microsoft announced that the bug was "resolved". What was the resolution? They announced it will be fixed in the 2010 version. THAT IS A RESOLUTION?!?!?!
Or how about Office 2007 and the now infamous "ribbon". We delivered Office 2007 to a large segment of our client base. To date, more than a 1/2 of them have thrown it out the window and gone back to Office 2003. Microsoft responded to us "Well, they don't have to use the ribbon..." Yeah??? WELL WHY BUILD IT IN THERE THEN?!?!?
For 30 years I have been supportive of Microsoft, but over these last two years well, I have to admit I find the company often intolerable. They have lost their edge, and their way. They love over-complexity and gaping holes in products (like the TDE missing). This is a company so focused on selling us "new" products every couple years that they don't seem to care very much about the crud that goes out their doors.
As well, business wise, MS is stumbling badly too - read about it at any of these links...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/03/steve-ballmer-laughs-at-i_n_378518.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-galloway/steve-ballmer-is-carnac-t_b_148556.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/01/steve-ballmer-blue-screen_n_376013.html
I just thank God that in a couple years I can retire and be done with this kind of mediocrity. But as I look back I see one fatal flaw in the business model of this country. We should NEVER allow any one company to control things as MS has done. It stifles competition and level-headed thinking - and that is why the TDE is not there, and VS2008 is more like a virus than a product, and Office 2007 is like shoving rotted hamsters down a lion's mouth.
Microsoft - Where DONT you want to go today?
December 21, 2009 at 12:21 pm
I agree with Steve. I would prefer to have extra security on the laptops - not to the level of fully encrypting the entire hard drive. Security as options should be standard across all editions of SQL Server. If the DBA employs those options, that is their decision. As the DBA, I would rather the option be available so I can use it, than be the one questioned, since it is a database, and not have a legitimate answer for the lost data on the laptop.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
December 21, 2009 at 1:18 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (12/21/2009)
I agree with Steve. I would prefer to have extra security on the laptops - not to the level of fully encrypting the entire hard drive. Security as options should be standard across all editions of SQL Server. If the DBA employs those options, that is their decision. As the DBA, I would rather the option be available so I can use it, than be the one questioned, since it is a database, and not have a legitimate answer for the lost data on the laptop.
And yet - if you use Express (with the built-in SSMS for express, and the default user = SA), how is the encryption helping anyone? You just fire up SSMS, and voila, instant access to the data and all of its contents. The database automatically decrypts the data for anyone who's authorized, so the owner oof the laptop STILL cannot be denied access to the data.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 49 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply