skip to main content
research-article

Enhanced PATRON: Fault Injection and Power-aware FSM Encoding Through Linear Programming

Published: 16 October 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Since finite state machines (FSMs) regulate the control flow in circuits, a computing system’s security might be breached by attacking the FSM. Physical attacks are especially worrisome because they can bypass software countermeasures. For example, an attacker can gain illegal access to the sensitive states of an FSM through fault injection, leading to privilege escalation and/or information leakage. Laser fault injection (LFI) provides one of the most effective attack vectors by enabling adversaries to precisely overturn single flip-flops states. Although conventional error correction/detection methodologies have been employed to improve FSM resiliency, their substantial overhead makes them unattractive to circuit designers. In our prior work, a novel decision diagram-based FSM encoding scheme called PATRON was proposed to resist LFI according to attack parameters, e.g., number of simultaneous faults. Although PATRON bested traditional encodings keeping overhead minimum, it provided numerous candidates for FSM designs requiring exhaustive and manual effort to select one optimum candidate. In this article, we automatically select an optimum candidate by enhancing PATRON using linear programming (LP). First, we exploit the proportionality between dynamic power dissipation and switching activity in digital CMOS circuits. Thus, our LP objective minimizes the number of FSM bit switches per transition, for comparatively lower switching activity and hence total power consumption. Second, additional LP constraints along with incorporating the original PATRON rules, systematically enforce bidirectionality to at least two state elements per FSM transition. This bestows protection against different types of fault injection, which we capture with a new unidirectional metric. Enhanced PATRON (EP) achieves superior security at lower power consumption in average compared to PATRON, error-coding, and traditional FSM encoding on five popular benchmarks.

References

[2]
Michel Agoyan, Jean-Max Dutertre, Amir-Pasha Mirbaha, David Naccache, Anne-Lise Ribotta, and Assia Tria. 2010. How to flip a bit?. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 16th International On-Line Testing Symposium. IEEE, 235–239.
[3]
Kahraman D. Akdemir, Ghaith Hammouri, and Berk Sunar. 2009. Non-linear error detection for finite state machines. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Information Security Applications. Springer, 226–238.
[4]
Douglas A. Anderson and Gernot Metze. 1973. Design of totally self-checking check circuits for m-out-of-n codes. IEEE Transactions on Computers 100, 3 (1973), 263–269.
[5]
Luca Benini and Giovanni De Micheli. 1995. State assignment for low power dissipation. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits 30, 3 (1995), 258–268.
[6]
Eli Biham and Adi Shamir. 1997. Differential fault analysis of secret key cryptosystems. In Proceedings of the Annual International Cryptology Conference. Springer, 513–525.
[7]
Clément Champeix, Nicolas Borrel, Jean-Max Dutertre, Bruno Robisson, Mathieu Lisart, and Alexandre Sarafianos. 2015. SEU sensitivity and modeling using pico-second pulsed laser stimulation of a D Flip-Flop in 40 nm CMOS technology. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI and Nanotechnology Systems. IEEE, 177–182.
[8]
Muhtadi Choudhury, Domenic Forte, and Shahin Tajik. 2021. PATRON: A pragmatic approach for encoding laser fault injection resistant FSMs. In Proceedings of the 2021 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition. IEEE, 569–574.
[9]
Muhtadi Choudhury, Shahin Tajik, and Domenic Forte. 2021. SPARSE: Spatially aware LFI resilient state machine encoding. In Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Hardware and Architectural Support for Security and Privacy. 1–8.
[10]
Mathieu Dumont, Mathieu Lisart, and Philippe Maurine. 2020. Modeling and simulating electromagnetic fault injection. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 40, 4 (2020), 680–693.
[11]
Carson Dunbar and Gang Qu. 2014. Designing trusted embedded systems from finite state machines. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems 13, 5s (2014), 1–20.
[12]
Markus Grassl. 2022. Bounds on the Minimum Distance of Linear Codes and Quantum Codes. Online available at Retrieved from http://www.codetables.de
[13]
Gary D. Hachtel, Mariano Hermida, Abelardo Pardo, Massimo Poncino, and Fabio Somenzi. 1994. Re-encoding sequential circuits to reduce power dissipation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design. IEEE Computer Society, 70–71.
[14]
Aruna Jayasena, Khushboo Rani, and Prabhat Mishra. 2022. Efficient finite state machine encoding for defending against laser fault injection attacks. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 40th International Conference on Computer Design. IEEE, 247–254.
[15]
Mark Karpovsky and Alexander Taubin. 2004. New class of nonlinear systematic error detecting codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 50, 8 (2004), 1818–1819.
[16]
Régis Leveugle, Paolo Maistri, Pierre Vanhauwaert, F. Lu, G. Di Natale, M.-L. Flottes, B. Rouzeyre, A. Papadimitriou, D. Hély, V. Beroulle, G. Hubert, S. De Castro, J.-M. Dutertre, A. Sarafianos, N. Boher, M. Lisart, J. Damiens, P. Candelier, and C. Tavernier. 2014. Laser-induced fault effects in security-dedicated circuits. In Proceedings of the 2014 22nd International Conference on Very Large Scale Integration. IEEE, 1–6.
[17]
Xuesen Lin. 2009. Multi-behaviors finite state machine. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Youth Conference on Information, Computing and Telecommunication. IEEE, 201–203.
[18]
David G. Luenberger, Yinyu Ye, et al. 1984. Linear and Nonlinear Programming. Vol. 2. Springer.
[19]
Natasa Miskov-Zivanov and Diana Marculescu. 2010. Modeling and analysis of ser in combinational circuits. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Silicon Errors in Logic-System Effects.
[20]
Natasa Miskov-Zivanov, Kai-Chiang Wu, and Diana Marculescu. 2008. Process variability-aware transient fault modeling and analysis. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design. IEEE, 685–690.
[21]
Sikender Mohsienuddin Mohammad and Lakshmisri Surya. 2018. Security automation in information technology. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) 6 (2018).
[22]
Adib Nahiyan, Farimah Farahmandi, Prabhat Mishra, Domenic Forte, and Mark Tehranipoor. 2018. Security-aware FSM design flow for identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities to fault attacks. IEEE Transactions on Computer-aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 38, 6 (2018), 1003–1016.
[23]
Adib Nahiyan, Kan Xiao, Kun Yang, Yier Jin, Domenic Forte, and Mark Tehranipoor. 2016. AVFSM: A framework for identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities in FSMs. In Proceedings of the 2016 53rd ACM/EDAC/IEEE Design Automation Conference. IEEE, 1–6.
[24]
Winfried Noth and Reiner Kolla. 1999. Spanning tree based state encoding for low power dissipation. In Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition. IEEE, 168–174.
[25]
Eric Olson and S. M. Kang. 1994. State assignment for low-power FSM synthesis using genetic local search. In Proceedings of the IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conference. IEEE, 140–143.
[26]
Sébastien Ordas, Ludovic Guillaume-Sage, and Philippe Maurine. 2015. EM injection: Fault model and locality. In Proceedings of the 2015 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography. IEEE, 3–13.
[27]
Sébastien Ordas, Ludovic Guillaume-Sage, and Philippe Maurine. 2017. Electromagnetic fault injection: The curse of flip-flops. Journal of Cryptographic Engineering 7, 3 (2017), 183–197.
[28]
Athanasios Papadimitriou, David Hély, Vincent Beroulle, Paolo Maistri, and Régis Leveugle. 2014. A multiple fault injection methodology based on cone partitioning towards RTL modeling of laser attacks. In Proceedings of the 2014 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition. IEEE, 1–4.
[29]
Huan-Kai Peng, Charles H.-P. Wen, and Jayanta Bhadra. 2009. On soft error rate analysis of scaled CMOS designs: A statistical perspective. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Computer-Aided Design. 157–163.
[30]
Vijaypal Singh Rathor, Bharat Garg, and G. K. Sharma. 2018. New lightweight architectures for secure FSM design to thwart fault injection and Trojan attacks. Journal of Electronic Testing 34, 6 (2018), 697–708.
[31]
Jan Richter-Brockmann, Pascal Sasdrich, and Tim Güneysu. 2022. Revisiting fault adversary models–hardware faults in theory and practice. IEEE Transactions on Computers 72, 2 (2022), 572–585.
[32]
Jan Richter-Brockmann, Aein Rezaei Shahmirzadi, Pascal Sasdrich, Amir Moradi, and Tim Güneysu. 2021. Fiver–robust verification of countermeasures against fault injections. IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems, 447–473.
[33]
Cyril Roscian, Jean-Max Dutertre, and Assia Tria. 2013. Frontside laser fault injection on cryptosystems-Application to the AES’last round. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware-Oriented Security and Trust. IEEE, 119–124.
[34]
Bodo Selmke, Johann Heyszl, and Georg Sigl. 2016. Attack on a DFA protected AES by simultaneous laser fault injections. In Proceedings of the 2016 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography. IEEE, 36–46.
[35]
Davood Shahrjerdi, Jeyavijayan Rajendran, Siddharth Garg, Farinaz Koushanfar, and Ramesh Karri. 2014. Shielding and securing integrated circuits with sensors. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design. IEEE, 170–174.
[36]
Premkishore Shivakumar, Michael Kistler, Stephen W. Keckler, Doug Burger, and Lorenzo Alvisi. 2002. Modeling the effect of technology trends on the soft error rate of combinational logic. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. IEEE, 389–398.
[37]
Sergei P. Skorobogatov and Ross J. Anderson. 2002. Optical fault induction attacks. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems. Springer, 2–12.
[38]
Berk Sunar, Gunnar Gaubatz, and Erkay Savas. 2007. Sequential circuit design for embedded cryptographic applications resilient to adversarial faults. IEEE Transactions on Computers 57, 1 (2007), 126–138.
[39]
Victor Tomashevich, Yaara Neumeier, Raghavan Kumar, Osnat Keren, and Ilia Polian. 2014. Protecting cryptographic hardware against malicious attacks by nonlinear robust codes. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI and Nanotechnology Systems. IEEE, 40–45.
[40]
Chi-Ying Tsui, Massoud Pedram, and Alvin M. Despain. 1998. Low-power state assignment targeting two-and multilevel logic implementations. IEEE Transactions on Computer-aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 17, 12 (1998), 1281–1291.
[41]
Vamshi Veeramachaneni, Akhilesh Tyagi, and Suresh Rajgopal. 1995. Re-encoding for low power state assignment of FSMs. In Proceedings of the 1995 International Symposium on Low Power Design. 173–178.
[42]
Scott Washabaugh, Paul D. Franzon, and H. Troy Nagle. 1994. SABSA: Switching-activity-based state assignment. International Journal of High Speed Electronics and Systems 5, 02 (1994), 203–212.
[43]
Lin Yuan, Gang Qu, Tiziano Villa, and Alberto Sangiovanni-Vincentelli. 2005. FSM re-engineering and its application in low power state encoding. In Proceedings of the 2005 Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference. 254–259.
[44]
Loic Zussa, Jean-Max Dutertre, Jessy Clédiere, Bruno Robisson, Assia Tria, et al. 2012. Investigation of timing constraints violation as a fault injection means. In Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Design of Circuits and Integrated Systems. Citeseer, 1–6.

Index Terms

  1. Enhanced PATRON: Fault Injection and Power-aware FSM Encoding Through Linear Programming

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems
    ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems  Volume 28, Issue 6
    November 2023
    404 pages
    ISSN:1084-4309
    EISSN:1557-7309
    DOI:10.1145/3627977
    Issue’s Table of Contents

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Journal Family

    Publication History

    Published: 16 October 2023
    Online AM: 03 August 2023
    Accepted: 24 July 2023
    Revised: 21 June 2023
    Received: 05 November 2022
    Published in TODAES Volume 28, Issue 6

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 212
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)109
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
    Reflects downloads up to 20 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Login options

    Full Access

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    Full Text

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media