One part of the original PUF promise was their improved resilience
against physical attack methods, such as cloning, invasive techniques, and arguably
also side channels. In recent years, however, a number of effective physical
attacks on PUFs have been developed [17,18,20,8,2]. This paper continues
this line of research, and introduces the first power and timing side channels (SCs)
on PUFs, more specifically on Arbiter PUF variants. Concretely, we attack socalled
XOR Arbiter PUFs and Lightweight PUFs, which prior to our work were
considered the most secure members of the Arbiter PUF family [28,30].We show
that both architectures can be tackled with polynomial complexity by a combined
SC and machine learning approach.
Our strategy is demonstrated in silicon on FPGAs, where we attack the above
two architectures for up to 16 XORs and 512 bits. For comparison, in earlier
works XOR-based Arbiter PUF designs with only up to 5 or 6 XORs and 64 or
128 bits had been tackled successfully. Designs with 8 XORs and 512 bits had
been explicitly recommended as secure for practical use [28,30].
Together with recent modeling attacks [28,30], our work shows that unless
suitable design countermeasures are put in place, no remaining member of the
Arbiter PUF family resists all currently known attacks. Our work thus motivates
research on countermeasures in Arbiter PUFs, or on the
«
One part of the original PUF promise was their improved resilience
against physical attack methods, such as cloning, invasive techniques, and arguably
also side channels. In recent years, however, a number of effective physical
attacks on PUFs have been developed [17,18,20,8,2]. This paper continues
this line of research, and introduces the first power and timing side channels (SCs)
on PUFs, more specifically on Arbiter PUF variants. Concretely, we attack socalled
XOR Arbiter PUFs and Ligh...
»