Thanks for the pointer, we haven't checked out OPAL yet. It seems to be the most popular standard when it comes to "Self Encrypting Drives" (SED).
Looking into it shortly, I've found a paper from 2019 from Meijer et al. ([1]) finding several flaws with OPAL-compliant drives. They further find that BitLocker entirely depends on SSD-based encryption if the hardware advertises it. This finding's nature is very similar to ours in that BitLocker's Disk Encryption is insecure/unreliable in particular hardware configurations.
Thanks for the hint. From the paper it seems it's highly implementation-dependent which drives can be compromised and there's no immediate way to tell. Still it seems OPAL 2.0 is good enough to deter data leaks in case of theft (excluding targeted attacks).
Looking into it shortly, I've found a paper from 2019 from Meijer et al. ([1]) finding several flaws with OPAL-compliant drives. They further find that BitLocker entirely depends on SSD-based encryption if the hardware advertises it. This finding's nature is very similar to ours in that BitLocker's Disk Encryption is insecure/unreliable in particular hardware configurations.
[1] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8835339