Functional Analysis Attacks on Logic Locking
November 29, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Deepak Sirone, Pramod Subramanyan
arXiv ID
1811.12088
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Citations
143
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Logic locking refers to a set of techniques that can protect integrated circuits (ICs) from counterfeiting, piracy and malicious functionality changes by an untrusted foundry. It achieves these goals by introducing new inputs, called key inputs, and additional logic to an IC such that the circuit produces the correct output only when the key inputs are set to specific values. The correct values of the key inputs are kept secret from the untrusted foundry and programmed after manufacturing and before distribution, rendering piracy, counterfeiting and malicious design changes infeasible. The security of logic locking relies on the assumption that the untrusted foundry cannot infer the correct values of the key inputs by analysis of the circuit. This paper proposes Functional Analysis attacks on Logic Locking algorithms (abbreviated as FALL attacks). FALL attacks have two stages. Their first stage is dependent on the locking algorithm and involves analyzing structural and functional properties of locked circuits to identify a list of potential locking keys. The second stage is algorithm agnostic and introduces a powerful addition to SAT-based attacks called key confirmation. Key confirmation can identify the correct key from a list of alternatives and works even on circuits that are resilient to the SAT attack. In comparison to past work, the FALL attack is more practical as it can often succeed (90% of successful attempts in our experiments) by only analyzing the locked netlist, without requiring oracle access to an unlocked circuit. Our experimental evaluation shows that FALL attacks are able to defeat 65 out of 80 (81%) circuits locked using Stripped-Functionality Logic Locking (SFLL-HD).
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted