Design and Implementation of Warbler Family of Lightweight Pseudorandom Number Generators for Smart Devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the advent of ubiquitous computing and the Internet of Things (IoT), the security and privacy issues for various smart devices such as radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags and wireless sensor nodes are receiving increased attention from academia and industry. A number of lightweight cryptographic primitives have been proposed to provide security services for resource-constrained smart devices. As one of the core primitives, a cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator (PRNG) plays an important role for lightweight embedded applications. The most existing PRNGs proposed for smart devices employ true random number generators as a component, which generally incur significant power consumption and gate count in hardware. In this article, we present Warbler family, a new pseudorandom number generator family based on nonlinear feedback shift registers (NLFSRs) with desirable randomness properties. The design of the Warbler family is based on the combination of modified de Bruijn blocks together with a nonlinear feedback Welch-Gong (WG) sequence generator, which enables us to precisely characterize the randomness properties and to flexibly adjust the security level of the resulting PRNG. Some criteria for selecting parameters of the Warbler family are proposed to offer the maximum level of security. Two instances of the Warbler family are also described, which feature two different security levels and are dedicated to EPC C1 Gen2 RFID tags and wireless sensor nodes, respectively. The security analysis shows that the proposed instances not only can pass the cryptographic statistical tests recommended by the EPC C1 Gen2 standard and NIST but also are resistant to the cryptanalytic attacks such as algebraic attacks, cube attacks, time-memory-data tradeoff attacks, Mihaljević et al.’s attacks, and weak internal state and fault injection attacks. Our ASIC implementations using a 65nm CMOS process demonstrate that the proposed two lightweight instances of the Warbler family can achieve good performance in terms of speed and area and provide ideal solutions for securing low-cost smart devices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".