Using deep learning to combine static and dynamic power analyses of cryptographic circuits
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
Summary Side‐channel attacks have shown to be efficient tools in breaking cryptographic hardware. Many conventional algorithms have been proposed to perform side‐channel attacks exploiting the dynamic power leakage. In recent years, with the development of processing technology, static power has emerged as a new potential source for side‐channel leakage. Both types of power leakage have their advantages and disadvantages. In this work, we propose to use the deep neural network technique to combine the benefits of both static and dynamic power. This approach replaces the classifier in template attacks with our proposed long short‐term memory network schemes. Hence, instead of deriving a specific probability density model for one particular type of power leakage, we gain the ability of combining different leakage sources using a structural algorithm. In this paper, we propose three schemes to combine the static and dynamic power leakage. The performance of these schemes is compared using simulated test circuits designed with a 45‐nm library.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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