MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001593096 · doi:10.1109/isvlsi.2010.14

Differential Power Analysis of CAST-128

2010· article· en· W2001593096 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kean Hong Boey, Yen-Cheng Lu, Máire O׳Neill, Roger Woods

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsPower analysisDifferential (mechanical device)Computer sciencePower (physics)PhysicsEngineeringAlgorithmAerospace engineeringCryptography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power analysis is used to reveal the secret key of security devices by monitoring the power consumption of certain cryptographic algorithm operations through a statistical analysis approach known as Differential Power Analysis (DPA). Whilst this has been applied extensively to attacks on FPGA devices, there has been little research into attacks on ASIC devices. Although standard DPAs are essentially independent of the block cipher that they target, some are less susceptible than others due to algorithm's structure, and therefore more difficult to attack such as the CAST-128. In this paper, we outline the first reported power analysis attack of CAST-128 as it falls into the category just outlined and it is the only algorithm that has not been practically broken either on FPGA or ASIC, it is also a common block cipher used in Canada. The paper outlines an approach that reveals all 128 bits of the secret key within 300,500 power traces, highlighting insights on attacking the registers rather than the Sbox. Finally, the effect of applying the Hamming weight power model on different widths of the target register under attack in ASIC device is evaluated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptographic Implementations and SecurityFrench-language works237,207