The Carry Leakage on the Randomized Exponent Countermeasure

  • Pierre-Alain Fouque
  • Denis Réal
  • Frédéric Valette
  • Mhamed Drissi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5154)

Abstract

In this paper, we describe a new attack against a classical differential power analysis resistant countermeasure in public key implementations. This countermeasure has been suggested by Coron since 1999 and is known as the exponent randomization.

Here, we show that even though the binary exponentiation, or the scalar product on elliptic curves implementation, does not leak information on the secret key, the computation of the randomized secret exponent, or scalar, can leak useful information for an attacker. Such part of the algorithm can be not well-protected since its goal is to avoid attack during the exponentiation. Consequently, our attack can be mounted against any kind of exponentiation, even very resistant as soon as the exponent randomization countermeasure is used. We target an ℓ-bit adder which adds ℓ-bit words of the secret exponent and of a random value. We show that if the carry leaks during the addition, then we can almost learn the high order bits of each word of the secret exponent. Finally, such information can be then used to recover the entire secret key of RSA or ECC based cryptosystems.

References

  1. 1.
    Blömer, J., May, A.: New Partial Key Exposure Attacks on RSA. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 27–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boneh, D., Durfee, G., Frankel, Y.: An Attack on RSA Given a Small Fraction of the Private Key Bits. In: Ohta, K., Pei, D. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 1998. LNCS, vol. 1514, pp. 25–34. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brier, E., Chevallier-Mames, B., Ciet, M., Clavier, C.: Why One Should Also Secure RSA Public Key Elements. In: Goubin, L., Matsui, M. (eds.) CHES 2006. LNCS, vol. 4249, pp. 324–338. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brier, E., Clavier, C., Olivier, F.: Correlation Power Analysis with a Leakage Model. In: Joye, M., Quisquater, J.-J. (eds.) CHES 2004. LNCS, vol. 3156, pp. 16–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coppersmith, D.: Finding a Small Root of a Bivariate Integer Equation; Factoring with High bits Known. In: Maurer, U.M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1996. LNCS, vol. 1070, pp. 155–165. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coppersmith, D.: Small Solutions to Polynomial Equations, and Low Exponent RSA Vulnerabilities. J. Cryptology 10(4), 233–260 (1997)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coron, J.-S.: Resistance against Differential Power Analysis for Elliptic Curve Cryptosystems. In: Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 1999. LNCS, vol. 1717, pp. 292–302. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coron, J.-S., Lefranc, D., Poupard, G.: A New Baby-Step Giant-Step Algorithm and Some Applications to Cryptanalysis. In: Rao, J.R., Sunar, B. (eds.) CHES 2005. LNCS, vol. 3659, pp. 47–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ernst, M., Jochemsz, E., May, A., de Weger, B.: Partial Key Exposure Attacks on RSA up to Full Size Exponents. In: Cramer, R.J.F. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3494, pp. 371–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fouque, P.-A., Kunz-Jacques, S., Martinet, G., Muller, F., Valette, F.: Power Attack on Small RSA Public Exponent. In: Goubin, L., Matsui, M. (eds.) CHES 2006. LNCS, vol. 4249, pp. 339–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fouque, P.-A., Valette, F.: The Doubling Attack - why Upwards Is Better than Downwards. In: Walter, C.D., Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2003. LNCS, vol. 2779, pp. 269–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Itoh, K., Izu, T., Takenaka, M.: Address-Bit Differential Power Analysis of Cryptographic Schemes OK-ECDH and OK-ECDSA. In: Kaliski Jr., B.S., Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2002. LNCS, vol. 2523, pp. 129–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kocher, P.C., Jaffe, J., Jun, B.: Differential Power Analysis. In: Wiener, M.J. (ed.) CRYPTO 1999. LNCS, vol. 1666, pp. 388–397. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Messerges, T.S., Dabbish, E.A., Sloan, R.H.: Power Analysis Attacks of Modular Exponentiation in Smartcards. In: Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 1999. LNCS, vol. 1717, pp. 144–157. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pollard, J.M.: Kangaroos, Monopoly and Discrete Logarithms. J. Cryptology 13(4), 437–447 (2000)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rade, L., Westergren, B.: Mathematics Handbook for Science and Engineering, Sudentlitteratur, Lund (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seifert, J.-P.: On authenticated computing and RSA-based authentication. In: Atluri, V., Meadows, C., Juels, A. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 122–127. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stinson, D.R.: Some baby-step giant-step algorithms for the low hamming weight discrete logarithm problem. Math. Comput. 71(237), 379–391 (2002)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Oorschot, P.C., Wiener, M.J.: Improving Implementable Meet-in-the-Middle Attacks by Orders of Magnitude. In: Koblitz, N. (ed.) CRYPTO 1996. LNCS, vol. 1109, pp. 229–236. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre-Alain Fouque
    • 1
  • Denis Réal
    • 2
    • 3
  • Frédéric Valette
    • 2
  • Mhamed Drissi
    • 3
  1. 1.École normale supérieure/CNRS/INRIAParisFrance
  2. 2.CELARBruzFrance
  3. 3.INSA-IETRRennesFrance

Personalised recommendations