Masking against Side-Channel Attacks: A Formal Security Proof

  • Emmanuel Prouff
  • Matthieu Rivain
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7881)

Abstract

Masking is a well-known countermeasure to protect block cipher implementations against side-channel attacks. The principle is to randomly split every sensitive intermediate variable occurring in the computation into d + 1 shares, where d is called the masking order and plays the role of a security parameter. Although widely used in practice, masking is often considered as an empirical solution and its effectiveness is rarely proved. In this paper, we provide a formal security proof for masked implementations of block ciphers. Specifically, we prove that the information gained by observing the leakage from one execution can be made negligible (in the masking order). To obtain this bound, we assume that every elementary calculation in the implementation leaks a noisy function of its input, where the amount of noise can be chosen by the designer (yet linearly bounded). We further assume the existence of a leak-free component that can refresh the masks of shared variables. Our work can be viewed as an extension of the seminal work of Chari et al.published at CRYPTO in 1999 on the soundness of combining masking with noise to thwart side-channel attacks.

References

  1. 1.
    Blakely, G.: Safeguarding cryptographic keys. In: National Comp. Conf., vol. 48, pp. 313–317. AFIPS Press, New York(1979)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blömer, J., Guajardo, J., Krummel, V.: Provably Secure Masking of AES. In: Handschuh, H., Hasan, M.A. (eds.) SAC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3357, pp. 69–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carlet, C., Goubin, L., Prouff, E., Quisquater, M., Rivain, M.: Higher-order masking schemes for s-boxes. In: Canteaut, A. (ed.) FSE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7549, pp. 366–384. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chari, S., Jutla, C., Rao, J., Rohatgi, P.: Towards Sound Approaches to Counteract Power-Analysis Attacks. In: Wiener, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1999. LNCS, vol. 1666, pp. 398–412. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chari, S., Rao, J., Rohatgi, P.: Template Attacks. In: Kaliski Jr., B.S., Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2002. LNCS, vol. 2523, pp. 13–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clavier, C., Coron, J.-S., Dabbous, N.: Differential Power Analysis in the Presence of Hardware Countermeasures. In: Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2000. LNCS, vol. 1965, pp. 252–263. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coron, J.-S., Kizhvatov, I.: Analysis and Improvement of the Random Delay Countermeasure of CHES 2009. In: Mangard, S., Standaert, F.-X. (eds.) CHES 2010. LNCS, vol. 6225, pp. 95–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coron, J.-S., Kocher, P., Naccache, D.: Statistics and secret leakage. In: Frankel, Y. (ed.) FC 2000. LNCS, vol. 1962, pp. 157–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Di Crescenzo, G., Lipton, R.J., Walfish, S.: Perfectly Secure Password Protocols in the Bounded Retrieval Model. In: Halevi, S., Rabin, T. (eds.) TCC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3876, pp. 225–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dodis, Y., Pietrzak, K.: Leakage-Resilient Pseudorandom Functions and Side-Channel Attacks on Feistel Networks. In: Rabin, T. (ed.) CRYPTO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6223, pp. 21–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dziembowski, S., Faust, S.: Leakage-Resilient Circuits without Computational Assumptions. In: Cramer, R. (ed.) TCC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7194, pp. 230–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dziembowski, S., Pietrzak, K.: Leakage-resilient cryptography. In: FOCS, pp. 293–302. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Faust, S., Kiltz, E., Pietrzak, K., Rothblum, G.N.: Leakage-Resilient Signatures. In: Micciancio, D. (ed.) TCC 2010. LNCS, vol. 5978, pp. 343–360. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Faust, S., Rabin, T., Reyzin, L., Tromer, E., Vaikuntanathan, V.: Protecting Circuits from Leakage: the Computationally-Bounded and Noisy Cases. In: Gilbert, H. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6110, pp. 135–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gandolfi, K., Mourtel, C., Olivier, F.: Electromagnetic Analysis: Concrete Results. In: Koç, Ç.K., Naccache, D., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2001. LNCS, vol. 2162, pp. 251–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Genelle, L., Prouff, E., Quisquater, M.: Thwarting higher-order side channel analysis with additive and multiplicative maskings. In: Preneel, B., Takagi, T. (eds.) CHES 2011. LNCS, vol. 6917, pp. 240–255. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goldwasser, S., Rothblum, G.N.: Securing computation against continuous leakage. In: Rabin, T. (ed.) CRYPTO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6223, pp. 59–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldwasser, S., Rothblum, G.N.: How to Compute in the Presence of Leakage. In: 53rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science – FOCS 2012, pp. 31–40. IEEE Computer Society (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goubin, L., Patarin, J.: DES and Differential Power Analysis – The Duplication Method. In: Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 1999. LNCS, vol. 1717, pp. 158–172. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Herbst, C., Oswald, E., Mangard, S.: An AES Smart Card Implementation Resistant to Power Analysis Attacks. In: Zhou, J., Yung, M., Bao, F. (eds.) ACNS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3989, pp. 239–252. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ishai, Y., Sahai, A., Wagner, D.: Private Circuits: Securing Hardware against Probing Attacks. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 463–481. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Juma, A., Vahlis, Y.: Protecting Cryptographic Keys against Continual Leakage. In: Rabin, T. (ed.) CRYPTO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6223, pp. 41–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kiltz, E., Pietrzak, K.: Leakage Resilient ElGamal Encryption. In: Abe, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6477, pp. 595–612. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kocher, P.: Timing Attacks on Implementations of Diffie-Hellman, RSA, DSS, and Other Systems. In: Koblitz, N. (ed.) CRYPTO 1996. LNCS, vol. 1109, pp. 104–113. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kocher, P., Jaffe, J., Jun, B.: Differential Power Analysis. In: Wiener, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1999. LNCS, vol. 1666, pp. 388–397. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Macé, F., Standaert, F.-X., Quisquater, J.-J.: Information Theoretic Evaluation of Side-Channel Resistant Logic Styles. In: Paillier, P., Verbauwhede, I. (eds.) CHES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4727, pp. 427–442. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mangard, S., Oswald, E., Popp, T.: Power Analysis Attacks – Revealing the Secrets of Smartcards. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Messerges, T.: Securing the AES Finalists against Power Analysis Attacks. In: Schneier, B. (ed.) FSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1978, pp. 150–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Micali, S., Reyzin, L.: Physically Observable Cryptography (Extended Abstract). In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 278–296. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Oswald, E., Mangard, S., Pramstaller, N., Rijmen, V.: A Side-Channel Analysis Resistant Description of the AES S-box. In: Gilbert, H., Handschuh, H. (eds.) FSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3557, pp. 413–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Peeters, E., Standaert, F.-X., Quisquater, J.-J.: Power and Electromagnetic Analysis: Improved Model, Consequences and Comparisons. Integration 40(1), 52–60 (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pietrzak, K.: A Leakage-Resilient Mode of Operation. In: Joux, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5479, pp. 462–482. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Prouff, E., Roche, T.: Higher-order glitches free implementation of the aes using secure multi-party computation protocols. In: Preneel, B., Takagi, T. (eds.) CHES 2011. LNCS, vol. 6917, pp. 63–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rivain, M., Prouff, E.: Provably Secure Higher-Order Masking of AES. In: Mangard, S., Standaert, F.-X. (eds.) CHES 2010. LNCS, vol. 6225, pp. 413–427. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rothblum, G.N.: How to compute under\(\mathcal{AC}^0\)leakage without secure hardware. In: Safavi-Naini, R. (ed.) CRYPTO 2012. LNCS, vol. 7417, pp. 552–569. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schindler, W., Lemke, K., Paar, C.: A Stochastic Model for Differential Side Channel Cryptanalysis. In: Rao, J.R., Sunar, B. (eds.) CHES 2005. LNCS, vol. 3659, pp. 30–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shamir, A.: How to Share a Secret. Commun. ACM 22(11), 612–613 (1979)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Standaert, F.-X., Archambeau, C.: Using Subspace-Based Template Attacks to Compare and Combine Power and Electromagnetic Information Leakages. In: Oswald, E., Rohatgi, P. (eds.) CHES 2008. LNCS, vol. 5154, pp. 411–425. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Standaert, F.-X., Örs, S.B., Preneel, B.: Power Analysis of an FPGA: Implementation of Rijndael: Is Pipelining a DPA Countermeasure? In: Joye, M., Quisquater, J.-J. (eds.) CHES 2004. LNCS, vol. 3156, pp. 30–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Standaert, F.-X., Pereira, O., Yu, Y., Quisquater, J.-J., Yung, M., Oswald, E.: Leakage resilient cryptography in practice. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2009/341 (2009), http://eprint.iacr.org/
  41. 41.
    Tiri, K., Verbauwhede, I.: A Logic Level Design Methodology for a Secure DPA Resistant ASIC or FPGA Implementation. In: Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exposition – DATE 2004, pp. 246–251. IEEE Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yu, Y., Standaert, F.-X., Pereira, O., Yung, M.: Practical leakage-resilient pseudorandom generators. In: Al-Shaer, E., Keromytis, A.D., Shmatikov, V. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security – CCS 2010, pp. 141–151 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Cryptologic Research 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emmanuel Prouff
    • 1
  • Matthieu Rivain
    • 2
  1. 1.ANSSIFrance
  2. 2.CryptoExpertsFrance

Personalised recommendations