The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.03 - May-June (2013 vol.33)
pp: 48-56
Jonathan Kaveh Valamehr , University of California, Santa Barbara
Melissa Chase , Microsoft Research
Seny Kamara , Microsoft Research
Andrew Putnam , Microsoft Research
Daniel Shumow , Microsoft Research
Vinod Vaikuntanathan , University of Toronto
Timothy Sherwood , University of California, Santa Barbara
The ability to safely keep a secret in memory is central to the vast majority of security schemes, but storing and erasing these secrets is a difficult problem in the face of an attacker who can obtain unrestricted physical access to the underlying hardware. Depending on the memory technology, the very act of storing a 1 instead of a 0 can have physical side effects measurable even after the power has been cut. These effects can't be hidden easily, and if the secret stored on chip is of sufficient value, an attacker might go to extraordinary means to learn even a few bits of that information. The architecture has an interesting role to play here. Just as one uses architectural techniques to detect and correct errors, so too can one create efficient methods to hide critical bits from physical inspection. The authors present a first step toward this goal by focusing on a backbone of any hardware system: on-chip memory. They examine the relationship between security, area, and efficiency in these architectures and quantitatively examine the resulting systems through cryptographic analysis and microarchitectural impact. In the end, they find an efficient scheme in which, even if an adversary is able to inspect the value of a stored bit with a probabilistic error of only 5 percent, the system will be able to prevent that adversary from learning any information about the original uncoded bits with 99.9999999999 percent probability.
Computer architecture, Computer security, Memory management, Security, Hardware, physical inspection attacks, computer hardware, security, memory structures, computer architecture, cryptography
Jonathan Kaveh Valamehr, Melissa Chase, Seny Kamara, Andrew Putnam, Daniel Shumow, Vinod Vaikuntanathan, Timothy Sherwood, "Inspection-Resistant Memory Architectures", IEEE Micro, vol.33, no. 3, pp. 48-56, May-June 2013, doi:10.1109/MM.2013.27
1. M.K. Qureshi, V. Srinivasan, and J.A. Rivers, "Scalable High Performance Main Memory System Using Phase-Change Memory Technology," Proc. 36th Ann. Int'l Symp. Computer Architecture (ISCA 09), ACM, 2009, pp. 24-33.
2. A. Tiwari and J. Torrellas, "Facelift: Hiding and Slowing Down Aging in Multicores," Proc. 41st Ann. IEEE/ACM Int'l Symp. Microarchitecture, ACM, 2008, 129-140.
3. U.R. Karpuzcu, B. Greskamp, and J. Torrellas, "The Bubblewrap Many-Core: Popping Cores for Sequential Acceleration," Proc. 42nd Ann. IEEE/ACM Int'l Symp. Microarchitecture, ACM, 2009, pp. 447-458.
4. G.E. Suh et al., "Secure Program Execution via Dynamic Information Flow Tracking," Proc. 11th Int'l Conf. Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS 04), ACM, 2004, pp. 85-96.
5. N. Vachharajani et al., "Rifle: An Architectural Framework for User-Centric Information-Flow Security," Proc. 37th IEEE/ACM Int'l Symp. Microarchitecture, IEEE CS, 2004, pp. 243-254.
6. M. Dalton, H. Kannan, and C. Kozyrakis, "Raksha: A Flexible Information Flow Architecture for Software Security," Proc. 34th Int'l Symp. Computer Architecture (ISCA 07), ACM, 2007, pp. 482-493.
7. G. Venkataramani et al., "FlexiTaint: A Programmable Accelerator for Dynamic Taint Propagation," Proc. 14th Int'l Symp. High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA 08), ACM, 2008, pp. 196-206.
8. O. Ruwase et al., "Parallelizing Dynamic Information Flow Tracking," Proc. 20th Ann. Symp. Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, (SPAA 08), ACM, pp. 35-45.
9. Z. Wang and R. Lee, "New Cache Designs for Thwarting Cache-Based Side Channel Attacks," Proc. 34th Int'l Symp. Computer Architecture (ISCA 07), ACM, 2007, pp. 494-505.
10. Z. Wang and R. Lee, "A Novel Cache Architecture with Enhanced Performance and Security," Proc. 41st IEEE/ACM Int'l Symp. Microarchitecture, IEEE CS, 2008, pp. 83-93.
11. M. Tiwari et al., "Crafting a Usable Microkernel, Processor, and I/O System with Strict and Provable Information Flow Security," Proc. 38th Int'l Symp. Computer Architecture (ISCA 11), IEEE CS, 2011, pp. 189-199.
12. J. Valamehr, "Inspection Resistant Memory: Architectural Support for Security from Physical Examination," Proc. 39th Ann. Int'l Symp. Computer Architecture (ISCA 12), IEEE CS, 2012, pp. 130-141.
13. "Understanding Actel Antifuse Device Security," white paper, Actel, Jan. 2004.
14. T. Wollinger and C. Paar, "New Algorithms, Architectures and Applications for Reconfigurable Computing," Security Aspects of FPGAs in Cryptographic Applications, Springer, 2005, pp. 265-278.
15. A. Kolodny et al., "Analysis and Modeling of Floating-Gate Eeprom Cells," IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, June 1986, pp. 835-844.
16. S. Haddad et al., "Degradations Due to Hole Trapping in Flash Memory Cells," IEEE Electron Device Letters, Mar. 1989, pp. 117-119.
17. M. Shatzkes and Y. Huang, "Characteristic Length and Time in Electromigration," J. Applied Physics, Dec. 1993, pp. 6609-6614.
3 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool