MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Going Deep: Using deep learning techniques with simplified mathematical models against XOR BR and TBR PUFs (Attacks and Countermeasures)

2020· preprint· en· W3084287521 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Khalafalla, Mahmoud A. Elmohr, Catherine H. Gebotys

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPhysical Unclonable Functions (PUFs) and Hardware Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilitySupport vector machineDeep learningArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkXOR gateVulnerability (computing)Machine learningAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceComputer securityLogic gate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper contributes to the study of PUFs vulnerability against modeling attacks by evaluating the security of XOR BR PUFs, XOR TBR PUFs, and obfuscated architectures of XOR BR PUF using a simplified mathematical model and deep learning (DL) techniques. DL modeling attacks were invoked against PUFs with different stage sizes (e.g. 64, 128, 256) and all are implemented on FPGA chips. Obtained results show that DL modeling attacks could easily break the security of 4-input XOR BR PUFs and 4-input XOR TBR PUFs with modeling accuracy ~99%. Similar attacks were executed using single-layer neural networks (NN) and support vector machines (SVM) with polynomial kernel and the obtained results showed that single NNs failed to break the PUF security. Furthermore, SVM results confirmed the same modeling accuracy reported in previous research ~50%. For the first time, this research empirically shows that DL networks can be used as powerful modeling techniques against these complex PUF architectures for which previous conventional machine learning techniques had failed. Furthermore, a detailed scalability analysis is conducted on the DL networks with respect to PUFs' stage size and complexity. The analysis shows that the number of layers and hidden neurons inside every layer has a linear relationship with PUFs' stage size, which agrees with the theoretical findings in deep learning. Consequently, A new obfuscated architecture is introduced as a first step to counter DL modeling attacks and it showed significant resistance against such attacks (16% - 40% less accuracy). This research provides an important step towards prioritizing the efforts to introduce new PUF architectures that are more secure and invulnerable to modeling attacks. Moreover, it triggers future discussions on the removal of influential bits and the level of obfuscation needed to confirm that a specific PUF architecture is resistant against powerful DL modeling attacks.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhysical Unclonable Functions (PUFs) and Hardware SecurityFrench-language works237,207