Simple power analysis applied to nonlinear feedback shift registers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs) and nonlinear feedback shift register (NLFSRs) are major components of stream ciphers. It has been shown that, under certain idealised assumptions, LFSRs and LFSR‐based stream ciphers are susceptible to cryptanalysis using simple power analysis (SPA). In this study, the authors show that SPA can be practically applied to a CMOS digital hardware circuit to determine the bit values of an NLFSR and SPA therefore has applicability to NLFSR‐based stream ciphers. A new approach is used with the cryptanalyst collecting power consumption information from the system on both edges (triggering and non‐triggering) of the clock in the digital hardware circuit. The method is applied using simulated power measurements from an 80‐bit NLFSR targeted to an 180 nm CMOS implementation. To overcome inaccuracies associated with mapping power measurements to the cipher data, the authors offer novel analytical techniques which help the analysis to find the bit values of the NLFSR. Using the obtained results, the authors analyse the complexity of the analysis on the NLFSR and show that SPA is able to successfully determine the NLFSR bits with modest computational complexity and a small number of power measurement samples.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it