MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585587358 · doi:10.1109/icecs.2016.7841220

Secure scan chain using test port for tester authentication

2016· article· en· W2585587358 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPhysical Unclonable Functions (PUFs) and Hardware Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScan chainComputer scienceTestabilitySide channel attackCryptographyDesign for testingAuthentication (law)Key (lock)Embedded systemEncryptionField-programmable gate arrayComputer hardwareComputer engineeringComputer securityEngineeringIntegrated circuitReliability engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design-for-Test (DFT) techniques have been developed to improve testability of integrated circuits. Among the known DFT techniques, scan-based testing is considered an efficient solution for digital circuits. However, scan architecture can be exploited to wage a side channel attack. Scan chains can be used to access a cryptographic core to extract the private encryption key. There is an emerging demand for a secure scan architecture while maintaining the testability. For a scan enabled chip, if an attacker is given unlimited access to apply all sorts of inputs to the Circuit-Under-Test (CUT) and observe the outputs the probability of success increases. In this paper, a solution is presented in which, initially the CUT requests the tester to provide a secret code for authentication. The tester authentication limits the access to the scan architecture to just known testers. Moreover, in the proposed solution the number of attempts to apply test vectors and observe the results through the scan architecture is limited to make brute-force attacks practically impossible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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