Fingerprinting Computers – Part II – Hardware

The fingerprinting of a computer using data accessible or generated by software is subjected to a Replay attack or could be easily disrupted by malware. This method should not be used to authenticate the machine.
In order to defeat Replay attacks, the fingerprinting algorithm needs to generate a one time string, based on some unique property of the hardware and that can be used by the verifier to check the identity of the computer.
One example of such technology is the Intel IPT (Identity Protection Technology) that works by generating a unique 6 digit number every 30 seconds. This number is generated by a section of the chip that is inaccessible to the Operating system and holds some secret key shared with the validator/server. Once a particular processor is linked to a server, the server will be able to identify the CPU and validate the computer. Of course this does not imply user authentication and the intended use of this technology is as an additional factor on a multi-factor authentication scheme.
A Public Key infrastructure (Certificate Authority) is still needed to defeat the Man in the Middle attack.
Technologies that can identify hardware to the chip level are being developed to prevent counterfeiting. These are based on the PUF (Physically Unclonable Functions) that use physical variations of the circuit to extract certain parameters that are unique to each chip and cannot be reproduced nor manipulated without physically tampering with the circuit.
Related:
Power-up of a SRAM as a source of Entropy and Identification
Secure Processors, the ultimate battlefield
A PUF Design for Secure FPGA-Based Embedded Systems

Advertisement

Secure Processors, the ultimate battlefield

Continuing with the main theme my last two posts, hacking, I am going to wrap up with this post about Secure Processors.

A secure processor is meant to protect the information and the communications, validate the communications channel and be tamper-resistant, should it falls into the adversary’s hands.  

Successful hacking of secrets has the duality of being a happy/sad event, depending on which team are you playing for. The design of secure processors makes this duality patent as, in practice, the most important evaluation criterion is that the resulting product should resist the designer’s best attempts at hacking it.

The current research and development efforts are guided by U.S. DoD Anti-Tamper specifications. To prevent reverse engineering, architectures of secure processors are based on a combination of hardware and encrypted software in such a way that if the hardware is captured, its exact functions cannot be guessed without knowing the encryption keys. During WWII, the capture of an ENIGMA machine paved the way for the breaking of the enciphering by the allied forces. These historical lessons are incorporated into today’s design criteria. Some design even incorporate sensors that will detect attempts at using physical means to force the hardware and destroy the critical information upon detection (often called zeroization).

A new dimension to the problem is added by procurement system. Electronic chips are nowadays a commodity and absolute control over the manufacturing of  chips is not possible. Therefore it is essential to ensure that the critical parts, that is the processors, are designed and made in controlled facilities.

The lessons learned in military applications are now being applied to commercial system. This is where the lines blurred because in the interconnected world the enemy can wreak havoc on the infrastructure without firing a shot. Communication and control networks associated with utilities will become more resistant to attacks by using computers fitted with secure processors.

Related:

New Chip Brings Military Security to Commercial Processors

The Hunt for the Kill Switch

Secure Processors – IBM

Acalis White Paper

 

del.icio.us Tags: anti-tamper,secure processor,encryption,hacking,security,technology,kill switch,Cryptoblog