Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by CiPHPerCoder 738 days ago
> So I'm not so sure what's the point of encryption at rest in AWS except just to tick off a compliance and regulatory checklist.

> The private key is with them anyway, just don't encrypt and save few milliwatts of power.

"Them" is Amazon, a company with over 1 million employees, last I checked.

It's perfectly reasonable to trust the KMS team to keep your keys secure, even if you don't trust the RDS team to never try to look at your data.

I know it's tempting to think of all of AWS as a sort of "Dave" who wears multiple hats, but we're talking about a large company. Protecting against other parts of the same company is still a worthwhile and meaningful security control.
2 comments
outworlder 738 days ago
> It's perfectly reasonable to trust the KMS team to keep your keys secure, even if you don't trust the RDS team to never try to look at your data.

If the database is live, then the data is able to be decrypted and who knows where it ends up. Encryption at rest solves only the threat scenario where the RDS team has access to the database storage layer. It doesn't do anything to mitigate any threats after it has been read from storage.

link
wg0 738 days ago
As a customer, I don't know neither I do care how they have teamed up internally. Not my problem.

From my perspective, the secret keys I don't have. Just AWS has and they can decrypt whatever and whenever they want maybe because they have a warrant or some three letter agency has them do it.

link