MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285102970 · doi:10.1109/ectc51906.2022.00111

Split-Fabric: A Novel Wafer-Scale Hardware Obfuscation Methodology using Silicon Interconnect Fabric

2022· article· en· W4285102970 on OpenAlexaff
Yousef Safari, Yu-Tao Yang, Subramanian S. Iyer, Toshifumi Nakatani, Neal Levine, Boris Vaisband

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 72nd Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPhysical Unclonable Functions (PUFs) and Hardware Security
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHardware security moduleObfuscationOverhead (engineering)ScalabilityBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceEmbedded systemIntegrated circuitInterconnectionElectronic circuitComputer hardwareEngineeringCryptographyComputer networkElectrical engineeringComputer securityOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global manufacturing of integrated circuits provides cost-effective access to high-end fabrication facilities. Offshoring intellectual property (IP) to untrusted foundries, however, makes fab-less design houses vulnerable to several issues, such as reverse engineering, overbuilding, counterfeiting, IP piracy, and insertion of malicious circuits. Several hardware security methodologies and techniques have been proposed in the past few decades to thwart hardware attacks and reduce hardware vulnerabilities.Split-Fabric, a novel wafer-scale hardware security methodology that utilizes the silicon interconnect fabric (Si-IF) technology is proposed in this paper. Split-Fabric is a secure, scalable, low-overhead, and heterogeneous hardware security methodology that supports a fully-untrusted threat model. Two benchmark circuits, a nine-stage ring-oscillator and an 8x8 SRAM array, are designed and fabricated in part using TSMC 65 nm and in part using GF 45 nm to evaluate the performance overhead of Split-Fabric at different levels of obfuscation. According to simulation results, Split-Fabric exhibits orders of magnitude lower obfuscation overhead as compared to the split manufacturing approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 72nd Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC)Same topicPhysical Unclonable Functions (PUFs) and Hardware SecurityFrench-language works237,207