Fault Tolerant Infective Countermeasure for AES

  • Sikhar Patranabis
  • Abhishek Chakraborty
  • Debdeep Mukhopadhyay
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9354)

Abstract

Infective countermeasures have been a promising class of fault attack countermeasures. However, they have been subjected to several attacks owing to lack of formal proofs of security and improper implementations. In this paper, we first provide a formal information theoretic proof of security for one of the most recently proposed state of the art infective countermeasures against DFA, under the assumption that the adversary does not change the flow sequence or skip any instruction. Subsequently, we identify weaknesses in the infection mechanism of the countermeasure that could be exploited by attacks which change the flow sequence. Furthermore, we propose an augmented infective countermeasure scheme obtained by introducing suitable randomizations that reduce the success probabilities of such attacks. All the claims have been validated by supporting simulations and real life experiments on a SASEBO-W platform. We also compare the fault tolerance provided by our proposed countermeasure scheme against that provided by the existing scheme.

Keywords

Infective Countermeasure AES Randomization Instruction Skip Fault Attack Fault Tolerant 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Malkin, T., Standaert, F.-X., Yung, M.: A comparative cost/security analysis of fault attack countermeasures. In: Breveglieri, L., Koren, I., Naccache, D., Seifert, J.-P. (eds.) FDTC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4236, pp. 159–172. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maistri, P., Leveugle, R.: Double-data-rate computation as a countermeasure against fault analysis. IEEE Transactions on Computers 57(11), 1528–1539 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Patranabis, S., Chakraborty, A., Nguyen, P.H., Mukhopadhyay, D.: A Biased Fault Attack on the Time Redundancy Countermeasure for AES. In: Mangard, S., Poschmann, A.Y. (eds.) COSADE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9064, pp. 189–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lomné, V., Roche, T., Thillard, A.: On the Need of Randomness in Fault Attack Countermeasures - Application to AES. In: Bertoni, G., Gierlichs, B. (eds.) Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography – FDTC 2012, pp. 85–94. IEEE Computer Society (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gierlichs, B., Schmidt, J.-M., Tunstall, M.: Infective Computation and Dummy Rounds: Fault Protection for Block Ciphers without Check-before-Output. In: Hevia, A., Neven, G. (eds.) LatinCrypt 2012. LNCS, vol. 7533, pp. 305–321. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Battistello, A., Giraud, C.: Fault Analysis of Infective AES Computations. In: Fischer, W., Schmidt, J.-M. (eds.) Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography – FDTC 2013, pp. 101–107. IEEE Computer Society Press (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tupsamudre, H., Bisht, S., Mukhopadhyay, D.: Destroying fault invariant with randomization. In: Batina, L., Robshaw, M. (eds.) CHES 2014. LNCS, vol. 8731, pp. 93–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schmidt, J., Herbst, C.: A practical fault attack on square and multiply. In: 5th Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography, FDTC 2008, pp. 53–58. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barenghi, A., Bertoni, G.M., Breveglieri, L., Pelosi, G.: A fault induction technique based on voltage underfeeding with application to attacks against aes and rsa. Journal of Systems and Software 86(7), 1864–1878 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Balasch, J., Gierlichs, B., Verbauwhede, I.: An in-depth and black-box characterization of the effects of clock glitches on 8-bit mcus. In: 2011 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography (FDTC), pp. 105–114. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dehbaoui, A., Dutertre, J.-M., Robisson, B., Tria, A.: Electromagnetic transient faults injection on a hardware and a software implementations of aes. In: 2012 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography (FDTC), pp. 7–15. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trichina, E., Korkikyan, R.: Multi fault laser attacks on protected crt-rsa. In: 2010 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography (FDTC), pp. 75–86. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Choukri, H., Tunstall, M.: Round reduction using faults. FDTC 5, 13–24 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dutertre, J.-M., Mirbaha, A.-P., Naccache, D., Ribotta, A.-L., Tria, A., Vaschalde, T.: Fault round modification analysis of the advanced encryption standard. In: 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware-Oriented Security and Trust (HOST), pp. 140–145. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moro, N., Dehbaoui, A., Heydemann, K., Robisson, B., Encrenaz, E.: Electromagnetic fault injection: towards a fault model on a 32-bit microcontroller. In: 2013 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography (FDTC), pp. 77–88. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heydemann, K., Moro, N., Encrenaz, E., Robisson, B.: Formal verification of a software countermeasure against instruction skip attacks. In: PROOFS 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schmidt, J., Medwed, M.: A fault attack on ecdsa. In: 2009 Workshop on Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance in Cryptography (FDTC), pp. 93–99. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barenghi, A., Breveglieri, L., Koren, I., Naccache, D.: Fault injection attacks on cryptographic devices: Theory, practice, and countermeasures. Proceedings of the IEEE 100(11), 3056–3076 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sikhar Patranabis
    • 1
  • Abhishek Chakraborty
    • 1
  • Debdeep Mukhopadhyay
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Engg.IIT KharagpurKharagpurIndia

Personalised recommendations