fault sensitivity analysis
play

Fault Sensitivity Analysis Yang Li, Kazuo Sakiyama, Shigeto - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Fault Sensitivity Analysis Yang Li, Kazuo Sakiyama, Shigeto Gomisawa, Kazuo Ohta The University of Electro-Communications liyang@ice.uec.ac.jp Toshinori Fukunaga, Junko Takahashi NTT Information Sharing Platform Laboratories 19 Aug 2010 CHES


  1. Fault Sensitivity Analysis Yang Li, Kazuo Sakiyama, Shigeto Gomisawa, Kazuo Ohta The University of Electro-Communications liyang@ice.uec.ac.jp Toshinori Fukunaga, Junko Takahashi NTT Information Sharing Platform Laboratories 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 1

  2. Outline  Differential Fault Analysis and its countermeasure  Power-based Side-Channel Attacks  DPA, CPA  A New Fault-based Attack  Fault Sensitivity Analysis (FSA)  Some Case Studies on SASEBO-R  FSA attack on PPRM1-AES  FSA attack on WDDL-AES  FSA attack on Satoh’s AES (recent result)  Conclusion 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 2

  3. Differential Fault Analysis (DFA)  Basic idea  Make a differential path by fault injection  Get correct outputs and faulty outputs  Verify the differential path for each key candidate  General DFA attack requirements  Specific transient fault  Pairs of correct output and faulty output for the same input  General DFA countermeasures  Inherent resistance, prevent specific transient fault  e.g. WDDL [1]  Redundant calculation for error detection  e.g. Satoh’s AES [2] 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 3

  4. Outline  Differential Fault Analysis and its countermeasure  Power-based Side-Channel Attacks  DPA, CPA  A New Fault-based Attack  Fault Sensitivity Analysis (FSA)  Some Case Studies on SASEBO-R  FSA attack on PPRM1-AES  FSA attack on WDDL-AES  FSA attack on Satoh’s AES (recent result)  Conclusion 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 4

  5. Power-based Side-Channel Attacks  Basic idea  Power consumption depends on sensitive-data that is calculable with public variables and key guess  General attack procedures  Have a key guess  Calculate sensitive-data  Check the calculated data with recorded power consumption  Correct key guess matches the power consumption best!  Well-kown attacks  Correlation Power Analysis (CPA)  Differential Power Analysis (DPA) 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 5

  6. Outline  Differential Fault Analysis and its countermeasure  Power-based Side-Channel Attacks  DPA, CPA  A New Fault-based Attack  Fault Sensitivity Analysis (FSA)  Some Case Studies on SASEBO-R  FSA attack on PPRM1-AES  FSA attack on WDDL-AES  FSA attack on Satoh’s AES (recent result)  Conclusion 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 6

  7. General Introduction to FSA  Fault Sensitivity Analysis (FSA)  Fault-based  A new side channel leakage  Sensitive-data dependency for fault sensitivity  Similar Attack procedures to power-based attacks  Bypass some DFA countermeasures  What is Fault Sensitivity?  Sensitivity to the fault injection  E.g. Minimal clock frequency with correct output  Has data dependency  Can be used for key retrieval 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 7

  8. Review Fault Injection (The idea of FSA) Good Environment Input Output C Device (Key) C Threshold Change ( Side-channel Leakage) Fault Intensity Fault C’ Bad Environment Input Faulty Output C’ Device (Key) Works for different types of fault injection: overclock, low-power, laser 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 8

  9. Fault Sensitivity under an over-clock n n D in D out F/F Logic CLK Sensitive Data clk D in Critical Delay Timing illegal_clk1 illegal_clk2 Threshold as Fault Sensitivity 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 9

  10. Signal delays for AND gate  AND Gate (T X : delay time for signal X)  Assume T A < T B  When signal A=0, T C = T A + T AND (small)  When signal A=1, T C = T B + T AND (large)  T AND : Delay timing of AND gate B T A T B A Data Dependency !! T AND 0 input, small delay. C = A • B 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 10

  11. Signal delays for XOR gate  XOR Gate (T X : delay time for signal X)  Assume T A < T B  When signal A=0, T C = T B + T XOR  When signal A=1, T C = T B + T XOR  T XOR : Delay timing of XOR gate B T A T B A T XOR No Data Dependency !! C = A B 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 11

  12. How about an FSA Attack? FSA For Power-based attacks: Sensitive Data Attackers Key Fault Power Consumption Sensitivity 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 12

  13. FSA Attack Procedures  Collect pairs of public variables and fault sensitivity  Retrieval the key by the data analysis  Have a key guess  Calculate sensitive-data  Check the calculated data with recorded fault sensitivity  Directly apply the techniques in power analysis 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 13

  14. Case studies of FSA attacks FSA attack against PPRM1-AES FSA attack against WDDL-AES FSA attack against Satoh’s AES (recent work) 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 14

  15. CASE 1: FSA attacks against PPRM1-AES  PPRM1-AES: a low power AES implementation with “PPRM1 - Sbox” [4]  PPRM1 S-box PPRM1 S-box AND gate: 0 input, small delay. AND array … … AND array: XOR array More 0 inputs, smaller delay! 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 15

  16. As a result, for PPRM1 S-box More 0 inputs , Smaller delay!! Smaller hamming weight Less sensitive to overclock Fault sensitivity Typical Side Channel Leakage Exploitable by CPA-like analysis Input hamming weight 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 16

  17. Attack results against last round of PPRM1-AES Correlation Key guess All of the 16 key bytes can be identified clearly. 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 17

  18. How much fault sensitivity data is needed? Less than 50 plaintexts (FS data) to obtain a 128-bit key. 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 18

  19. How many times of fault injection?  Which point is the fault sensitivity? Success rate of fault injection 1 0 Fre. of Clock  In our experiment C’ C Fre. of Clock Worst case: 120 times 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 19

  20. CASE 2: FSA attacks against WDDL-AES  Naturally immune to DFA attacks based on the setup-time violation. [2]  Dual-Rail Precharge Logic  Complementary wires: (ture,false)  “transient” fault will erase the secret information at the output.  WDDL is not perfectly immune to FSA attacks based on setup-time violation. 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 20

  21. WDDL’s Vulnerability against FSA (1/2)  First of all, no clear correlation between input data and fault sensitivity.  All types of gates are mixed up  However, we observed a data dependence at the output.  Imbalance of complementary wires leads to imbalance of critical path delays. 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 21

  22. WDDL’s Vulnerability against FSA (2/2)  Assume  Precharge value = 0  Delay_ture > Delay_false  then (1,0)  (0,0) happens easier than (0,1)  (0,0).  1 is more sensitive than 0 true false Vulnerability! WDDL Logic Exploitable by DPA-like analysis Difficult to make perfect matching wires. 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 22

  23. Attack result against WDDL-AES with 1200 plaintexts Correlation 3 of 16 key bytes can be identified. Key guess 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 23

  24. CASE 3: FSA attacks against Satoh’s AES  Satoh’s AES (CHES2008)  High performance AES with Error-detection Scheme  Successful FSA attack  Self-Template FSA  To be continued in the rump section. 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 24

  25. Outline  Differential Fault Analysis and its countermeasure  Power-based Side-Channel Attacks  DPA, CPA  A New Fault-based Attack  Fault Sensitivity Analysis (FSA)  Some Case Studies on SASEBO-R  FSA attack on PPRM1-AES  FSA attack on WDDL-AES  FSA attack on Satoh’s AES (recent result)  Conclusion 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 25

  26. Conclusion  A new side channel leakage: fault sensitivity  FSA has a potential to bypass some fault attack countermeasures.  Future work:  FSA countermeasures (mask technique?)  Stronger FSA attacks  Try other types of FSA under other fault injection methods 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 26

  27. References  [1]G. Piret and J.-J. Quisquater. A Differential Fault Attack Technique against SPN Structures, with Application to the AES and KHAZAD. CHES 2003  [2] S. Guilley T. Graba N. Selmane, S. Bhasin and J.-L. Danger. WDDL is Protected Against Setup Time Violation Attacks. FDTC 2009  [3] Akashi Satoh, Takeshi Sugawara, Naofumi Homma, Takafumi Aoki: High-Performance Concurrent Error Detection Scheme for AES Hardware. CHES 2008  [4] S. Morioka and A. Satoh. An Optimized S-Box Circuit Architecture for Low Power AES Design. CHES2002 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 27

  28. Thank you for your attentions! Questions? 19 Aug 2010 CHES 2010 @ Santa Barbara 28

Recommend


More recommend