Abstract
In Part I of this book, we presented data-driven attack models capable of breaching the confidentiality of the system. In this form of attacks, attackers utilize the side-channels (such as acoustics, power, electromagnetic emissions, and so on) in the physical domain to estimate and steal cyber-domain data (such as G/M-codes). Since these emissions depend on the physical structure of the system, one way to minimize the information leakage is to modify the physical domain. However, this process can be costly due to added hardware modification. Instead, in this chapter we present a novel methodology that allows the cyber-domain tools [such as computer-aided manufacturing (CAM)] to be aware of the existing information leakage. We will demonstrate how by changing either machine process or product design parameters in the cyber-domain, we can minimize the information leakage. The methodology presented in this chapter aids the existing cyber-domain and physical domain security solution by utilizing the cross-domain relationship.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Hojjati, A., Adhikari, A., et al. (2016) Leave your phone at the door: Side channels that reveal factory floor secrets. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM.
Al Faruque, M. A., Chhetri, S. R., et al. (2016). Acoustic side-channel attacks on additive manufacturing systems. In International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems (ICCPS). Piscataway: IEEE.
Chhetri, S. R., et al. (2017). Confidentiality breach through acoustic side-channel in cyber-physical additive manufacturing systems. ACM Transaction on Cyber-Physical Systems, 2(1), 3
Yampolskiy, M., Andel, T. R., et al. (2014). Intellectual property protection in additive layer manufacturing: Requirements for secure outsourcing. In Proceedings of the 4th Program Protection and Reverse Engineering Workshop. New York: ACM.
Straub, J. (2017). Identifying positioning-based attacks against 3D printed objects and the 3D printing process. In SPIE Defense+ Security. International Society for Optics and Photonics.
Chhetri, S. R., Canedo, A., & Al Faruque, M. A. (2016). KCAD: Kinetic cyber-attack detection method for cyber-physical additive manufacturing systems. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Computer-Aided Design. New York: ACM.
Belikovetsky, S., Solewicz, Y., et al. (2017). Detecting cyber-physical attacks in additive manufacturing using digital audio signing. arXiv preprint:1705.06454.
Tsoutsos, N. G., Gamil, H., & Maniatakos, M. (2017). Secure 3D printing: Reconstructing and validating solid geometries using toolpath reverse engineering. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Cyber-Physical System Security. New York: ACM.
McMillen, D. (2016). Security trends in the manufacturing industry targeting control systems and crown jewels. Armonk: IBM. https://securityintelligence.com/media/security-trends-in-the-manufacturing-industry/.
Chen, F., Mac, G., & Gupta, N. (2017). Security features embedded in computer aided design (CAD) solid models for additive manufacturing. Materials & Design, 128, 182–194.
Gupta, N., Chen, F., et al. (2017). ObfusCADe: Obfuscating additive manufacturing CAD models against counterfeiting. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Design Automation Conference 2017. New York: ACM.
Ashford, W. (2014). 21 percent of manufacturers hit by intellectual property theft. Computer Weekly, [online] www.computerweekly.com.
Jamieson, R., & Hacker, H. (1995). Direct slicing of CAD models for rapid prototyping. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 1(2), 4–12.
Jin, G. Q., Li, W. D., et al. (2011). Adaptive tool-path generation of rapid prototyping for complex product models. Journal of manufacturing systems, 30(3), 154–164.
Yang, W., Zhou, Y., et al. (2017). Multi-channel fusion attacks. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 12(8), 1757–1771.
Mativo, T., Fritz, C., & Fidan, I. (2018). Cyber acoustic analysis of additively manufactured objects. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 96(1–4), 581–586.
Veyrat-Charvillon, N., & Standaert, F.-X. (2009). Mutual information analysis: How, when and why?. In CHES (Vol. 5747, pp. 429–443). Berlin: Springer.
Chhetri, S. R., Faezi, S., & Al Faruque, M. A. (2017). Fix the leak! an information leakage aware secured cyber-physical manufacturing system. In 2017 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition (DATE). Piscataway: IEEE.
Kramer, T. R., Proctor, F. M., et al. (2000). The NIST RS274NGC interpreter-version 3 (Vol. 5416). NISTIR.
Ultimaker. (2017). Cura software. https://ultimaker.com/en/products/cura-software.
Drumm, B. (2011). Printrbot: Your first 3D printer. Retrieved November, 26 (2013).
AT2021 (2016). Cardioid Condenser Microphone. Audio-Technica.
Adafruit triple-axis accelerometer (2017). www.adafruit.com.
Pico TA018 AC/DC Current Probe (2017). www.picotech.com.
Magnetometer digital triple axis—HMC5883l (2017). www.honeywell.com.
Thingiverse (2017). https://www.thingiverse.com/.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rokka Chhetri, S., Al Faruque, M.A. (2020). Data-Driven Defense Through Leakage Minimization. In: Data-Driven Modeling of Cyber-Physical Systems using Side-Channel Analysis. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37962-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37962-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37961-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37962-9
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)