First proofreading
This commit is contained in:
parent
304927c31b
commit
7ea8300468
1 changed files with 129 additions and 122 deletions
|
|
@ -355,44 +355,46 @@ evolution of our design, the spinning mesh could even be designed to \emph{be} a
|
|||
Conventional HSMs are limited by the construction of their security meshes which rely on plastics as their main
|
||||
structural material. The security mesh has to fit the highest components inside the HSM. Since creating a security mesh
|
||||
with a non-flat surface is difficult, this means there is an inevitable gap of a few millimeters between the surface of
|
||||
the payload CPU and the inside surface of the mesh. This distance is added to several millimeters of epoxy resin that
|
||||
the mesh is embedded inside so as to be hard to remove intact. Overall, this leads to a structure approximately a
|
||||
centimeter thick that includes several millimeters of poorly thermally conductive epoxy resin~\cite{obermaier2019}.
|
||||
Even if ``thermally conductive'' resins would be used, thermal conductivity is limited to a fraction of what can be
|
||||
achieved with a heatsink directly attached to the CPU. A modern high-end CPU heatsink with its fan running has a thermal
|
||||
resistance from CPU junction to air of around $\SI{0.1}{\kelvin\per\watt}$. If one were to make an HSM's security mesh
|
||||
out of an average thermally conductive epoxy with thermal conductivity
|
||||
$k=\SI{1}{\watt\per\meter\kelvin}$~\cite{kordyban1998,shabany2009,mgchemicals2017}, the resulting thermal resistance for
|
||||
a 5-by-5 centimeter, $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ thermal interface alone would $\SI{2}{\kelvin\per\watt}$, a more than
|
||||
10-fold increase. For an acceptable temperature delta from junction to air of $\SI{60}{\kelvin}$ this yields a maximum
|
||||
power dissipation of only $\SI{30}{\watt}$ compared to a theoretical $\SI{600}{\watt}$ for a conventional CPU cooler.
|
||||
Given that for modern high core-count CPUs, power dissipation is mostly linear in core count and for multithreaded
|
||||
applications performance is mostly linear in core count this severely limits the achievable performance in a
|
||||
traditional, hermetically sealed HSM.
|
||||
the payload CPU and the interior surface of the mesh. This distance is added to several millimeters of epoxy resin that
|
||||
the mesh must be embedded inside for it to be hard to remove intact. Overall, this leads to a structure approximately a
|
||||
centimeter thick that includes several millimeters epoxy resin with particularly poor thermal
|
||||
conductivity~\cite{obermaier2019}. Even if ``thermally conductive'' resins would be used, thermal conductivity is
|
||||
limited to a fraction of what can be achieved with a heatsink directly attached to the CPU. A modern high-end CPU
|
||||
heatsink with its fan running has a thermal resistance from CPU junction to air of around
|
||||
$\SI{0.1}{\kelvin\per\watt}$~\cite{anandtech2015}.
|
||||
If one were to make an HSM's security mesh out of an average thermally conductive epoxy with thermal conductivity
|
||||
$k\approx\SI{1}{\watt\per\meter\kelvin}$~\cite{kordyban1998,shabany2009,mgchemicals2017}, the resulting thermal
|
||||
resistance for a 5-by-5 centimeter, $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ thermal interface alone would $\SI{2}{\kelvin\per\watt}$, a
|
||||
more than 10-fold increase. For an acceptable temperature delta from junction to air of $\SI{60}{\kelvin}$ this yields a
|
||||
maximum power dissipation of only $\SI{30}{\watt}$ compared to a theoretical $\SI{600}{\watt}$ for a conventional CPU
|
||||
cooler. Given that for modern high core-count CPUs, both multithreaded performance and power dissipation are mostly
|
||||
linear in core count, this severely limits the achievable performance.
|
||||
|
||||
This estimated performance discrepancy matches up with our observation. Vendor of conventional HSMs Thales reports
|
||||
$\SI{20}{\kilo Ops\per\second}$ ECC signature operations on NIST Curve P-256 per device of their top-of-range ``Luna HSM
|
||||
790''~\cite{thales2021}, which compares to be slightly more than half of the $\SI{36}{\kilo Ops\per\second}$ signing
|
||||
operations that \texttt{openssl speed} in single-thread mode is able to do on an AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750U laptop CPU at a
|
||||
power consumption of $\SI{2.0}{\watt}$ on the active core.
|
||||
This estimated performance discrepancy matches up with our observation. Thales, a manufacturer of conventional HSMs
|
||||
reports $\SI{20}{\kilo Ops\per\second}$ ECC signature operations on NIST Curve P-256 on one of their top-of-range
|
||||
``Luna HSM 790''~\cite{thales2021}, which compares to be slightly more than half of the $\SI{36}{\kilo Ops\per\second}$
|
||||
signing operations that \texttt{openssl speed} in single-thread mode is able to do on an AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750U laptop
|
||||
CPU using $\SI{2.0}{\watt}$ of power on the active core. Using today's technology, we expect a performance jump of one
|
||||
to two orders of magnitude in computing power to be feasible in an IHSM compared to a conventional HSM.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Long-term Operation}
|
||||
|
||||
Like with other HSMs, practical use may require an IHSM to continuously run for a decade or even longer. As with other
|
||||
setups utilizing HSMs, a setup including IHSMs must be designed in a way that the failure of a small number of IHSMs
|
||||
Like with other HSMs, in a practical application an IHSM may have to run continuously for a decade or even longer. As
|
||||
with any networked system, a setup including IHSMs must be designed in a way that the failure of a small number of IHSMs
|
||||
does not compromise the system's security or reliability. Neither IHSMs nor traditional HSMs can withstand fire or
|
||||
flooding, so while a breach of security can be ruled out, a catastrophic failure of the device and erasure of data
|
||||
cannot~\cite{heise2021ovh}. Traditionally, this problem is solved by storing all secrets in multiple, geographically
|
||||
redundant HSMs~\cite{thales2015hsmha}. The problem of providing fault-tolerance in IHSMs is easier since they are based
|
||||
on general-purpose computer hardware and use general-purpose operating systems and thus allow for state-of-the-art
|
||||
database replication techniques to be applied. One example of this approach is a 2019 technology
|
||||
demonstration~\cite{signal2019} created by the signal.org, the organization running the signal secure messenger app. In
|
||||
this demonstration, signal.org have implemented the Raft consensus algorithm~\cite{ongaro2019} inside Intel SGX to
|
||||
replicate state between redundant instances.
|
||||
redundant HSMs~\cite{thales2015hsmha}. On IHSMs this task is aided on the software layer since they are based on
|
||||
general-purpose computer hardware and for state-of-the-art database replication techniques to be applied without first
|
||||
porting them to an embedded operating system or foreign CPU architecture. A practical example of this approach is a 2019
|
||||
technology demonstration~\cite{signal2019} created by the signal.org, the organization running the signal secure
|
||||
messenger app. In this demonstration, signal.org have implemented the Raft consensus algorithm~\cite{ongaro2019} inside
|
||||
Intel SGX to replicate state between redundant instances.
|
||||
|
||||
There are three main categories of challenges to an IHSM's longevity: Failure of components of the IHSM due to age and
|
||||
wear, failure of the external power supply and spurious triggering of the intrusion alarm by changes in the IHSM's
|
||||
environment. In the following paragraphs we will evaluate each of these categories in its practical impact.
|
||||
Excluding natural disasters there are three main categories of challenges to an IHSM's longevity: Failure of components
|
||||
of the IHSM due to age and wear, failure of the external power supply and spurious triggering of the intrusion alarm by
|
||||
changes in the IHSM's environment. In the following paragraphs we will evaluate each of these categories in its
|
||||
practical impact.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Component failure.}
|
||||
The failure mode of an IHSM's components is the same as in any other computer system and the same generic mitigation
|
||||
|
|
@ -411,45 +413,42 @@ considered is power loss. Traditional HSMs solve the need for an always-on backu
|
|||
batteries. The low static power consumption of a traditional HSM's simple tamper detection circuitry allows for the use
|
||||
of non-replaceable backup batteries. An IHSM in contrast would likely require a rechargeable backup battery since its
|
||||
motor requires more power than the mesh monitoring circuit of a traditional HSM. In principle, a conventional
|
||||
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) can be used, but in practice a productized IHSM might have a small, simple UPS
|
||||
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) can be used, but in practice a productized IHSM might have a smaller backup battery
|
||||
integrated into its case. Conservatively assuming an average operating power consumption of $\SI{10}{\watt}$ for an
|
||||
IHSM's motor, a single large laptop battery with a capacity of $\SI{100}{\watt\hour}$~\cite{faa2018} could already power
|
||||
an IHSM for 10 hours continuously. If a built-in battery is undesirable, or if power outages of more than a few seconds
|
||||
at a time are unlikely (e.g.\ because the IHSM is connected to an external UPS or generator), the IHSM's rotor itself
|
||||
can be used as a flywheel for energy storage up to several seconds. By designing the IHSM's rotor to have low friction
|
||||
loss and high mass (e.g.\ by coupling it to an actual metal flywheel), longer power outages can be bridged. % FIXME
|
||||
can be used as a flywheel for energy storage up to several seconds.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Spurious alarms.}
|
||||
A spurious alarm would be as catastrophic as a failure of a critical component of an IHSM. For this reason, the
|
||||
likelihood of such an alarm failure must be minimized. In principle, there are two possible causes for a spurious alarm.
|
||||
One is a component failure such as a mesh trace breaking under vibration. This failure mode can be mitigated in the same
|
||||
way other failure modes are mitigated. The second possible cause is that the device is accelerated in excess of the
|
||||
range expected by its designers. There are several possible causes why an IHSM might move during normal operation. The
|
||||
IHSM may have to be transported between datacenters or relocated within a dataceter. Other vibrating machinery such as
|
||||
backup generators or large hard disk storage arrays may conduct vibration through the rack the IHSM is mounted inside
|
||||
into the IHSM. People working in the datacenter might bump the IHSM. Vibrations from nearby traffic such as trains may
|
||||
couple through the ground into the datacenter and into the IHSM. Finally, earthquakes will couple through any reasonable
|
||||
amount of vibration dampening.
|
||||
Even with all components working to their specification, an IHSM could still catastrophically fail if for some reason
|
||||
its alarm would be spuriously activated due to movement of the device. The likelihood of such an alarm failure must be
|
||||
minimized, e.g.\ by employing vibration damping. There are several possible causes why an IHSM might move during
|
||||
normal operation. The IHSM may have to be relocated between datacenters. Other vibrating machinery such as backup
|
||||
generators or large hard disk storage arrays may conduct vibration through the rack the IHSM is mounted inside and into
|
||||
the IHSM. People working in the datacenter might bump the IHSM. Vibrations from nearby traffic such as trains may
|
||||
couple through the ground into the datacenter and into the IHSM. Finally, earthquakes are a common occurrence in some
|
||||
regions of the world and will couple through any reasonable amount of vibration damping.
|
||||
|
||||
There are two key points to note on vibration dampening. One, the instantaneous mechanical power of a vibrating motion
|
||||
There are two key points to note on vibration damping. One, the instantaneous mechanical power of a vibrating motion
|
||||
is proportional to the square of its amplitude when fixing frequency and the cube of its frequency when fixing
|
||||
amplitude. This means that to reach a certain instantaneous acceleration, much more power is needed in a high-frequency
|
||||
vibrating motion compared to lower frequencies. This observation interacts the second key point we want to note here:
|
||||
An ideal vibration dampener works the better the higher the frequency, and has a lower bound below which it does no
|
||||
longer dampen vibration transmission~\cite{kelly1993,beards1996,dixon2007}. In conclusion, these two observations mean
|
||||
that if we wish to reduce the likelihood of false detections by our IHSM tamper alarm we can effectively achieve this
|
||||
goal by damping high-frequency shock and vibration, as low-frequency shock or vibration components will not reach
|
||||
accelerations large enough to cause a false alarm.
|
||||
An ideal vibration damper works better with higher frequencies, and has a lower bound below which it does no longer
|
||||
damp vibration transmission~\cite{kelly1993,beards1996,dixon2007}. From these two observations it follows that if we
|
||||
wish to reduce the likelihood of false detections by our IHSM tamper alarm, we can achieve this goal effectively by
|
||||
damping high-frequency shock and vibration, as low-frequency shock or vibration components will not reach accelerations
|
||||
large enough to cause a false alarm.
|
||||
|
||||
To put the above relations into perspective, consider that at an angular frequency of $\SI{1000}{rpm}$, we can expect an
|
||||
IHSM's tamper sensor to measure an acceleration of about $\SI{100}{g}$. Even the strongest earthquakes rarely reach a
|
||||
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) of $\SI{0.1}{g}$~\cite{yoshimitsu1990}. The highest PGA measured during the 2011 Tohoku
|
||||
earthquake was approximately $\SI{0.3}{g}$. Since earthquake vibrations are low-frequency and happen across a large
|
||||
geographic area, they nontheless dissipate a tremendous amound of mechanical power through an absolute acceleration that
|
||||
may seem low at first glance, but we can largely ignore them for the purposes of our tamper detection system. As
|
||||
another point of reference, consider a car crash. An acceleration above $\SI{10}{g}$ corresponds to a crash at roughly
|
||||
To put this into perspective, consider that at an angular frequency of $\SI{1000}{rpm}$, we can expect an IHSM's tamper
|
||||
sensor to measure an acceleration of about $\SI{100}{g}$. Even the strongest earthquakes rarely reach a Peak Ground
|
||||
Acceleration (PGA) of $\SI{0.1}{g}$~\cite{yoshimitsu1990}. The highest PGA measured during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake
|
||||
was approximately $\SI{0.3}{g}$. Since earthquake vibrations are low-frequency and happen across a large geographic
|
||||
area, they dissipate a tremendous amound of mechanical power despite this at first glance seemingly low absolute
|
||||
acceleration. For the purposes of our tamper detection system, we can ignore them. As another point of reference,
|
||||
consider a car crash. An acceleration above $\SI{10}{g}$ corresponds to a crash at roughly
|
||||
$\SI{30}{\kilo\meter\per\hour}$~\cite{ika2002}. Thus, an IHSM's tamper detection subsystem will be able to clearly
|
||||
distinguish attempts to stop the IHSM's rotation at an amplitude of $\SI{100}{g}$ from external accelerations. External
|
||||
distinguish attempts to stop the IHSM's rotation, producing approximately $\SI{100}{g}$ at $\SI{1000}{rpm}$. External
|
||||
acceleration that would come close in order of magnitude to the operating centrifugal acceleration at the periphery of
|
||||
an IHSM's rotor would likely destroy the IHSM.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -461,13 +460,13 @@ respond to tipping with a precession force. This could become an issue when a la
|
|||
the manufacturer's premises and its destination data center. One solution to this problem is to transport the IHSM
|
||||
elastically mounted inside a shipping box that is weighted to resist precession forces. To reduce the amount of
|
||||
precession, the IHSM should be transported with its axis of rotation pointing upwards and its speed of rotation set to
|
||||
the lower end of the range permitted by its application's security requirements. The IHSM's software could allow for a
|
||||
the lower end of the range permitted by the application's security requirements. The IHSM's software could allow for a
|
||||
temporary ``shipping mode'' to be entered that could slow down the IHSM and increase the tamper sensing accelerometer's
|
||||
thresholds.
|
||||
|
||||
During shipping, the IHSM will require a continuous power supply. The most practical solution to this challenge is to
|
||||
ship the IHSM along with a small backup battery. Following our conservative estimate in Section~\ref{sec-power-failure},
|
||||
a 48-hour shipping window as is offered by many courier shipping services could easily be bridged with the equivalent of
|
||||
a 48-hour shipping window as offered by many courier shipping services could easily be bridged with the equivalent of
|
||||
5-10 laptop batteries. In case a built-in battery backup is not necessary in the IHSM's application, these batteries
|
||||
could be connected as an external device akin to a ``power bank'' that is disconnected and sent back to the IHSM's
|
||||
manufacturer after the IHSM has been installed.
|
||||
|
|
@ -477,10 +476,10 @@ manufacturer after the IHSM has been installed.
|
|||
|
||||
After outlining the basic mechanical design of an inertial HSM above, in this section we will detail possible ways to
|
||||
attack it. At the core of an IHSM's defenses is the same security mesh or other technology as it is used in traditional
|
||||
HSMs. This means that in the end an attacker will have to perform the same steps they would have to perform to attack a
|
||||
HSMs. This means that ultimately an attacker will have to perform the same steps they would have to perform to attack a
|
||||
traditional HSM. However, they will either need to perform these attack steps with a tool that follows the HSM's
|
||||
rotation at high speed or they will first need to defeat the braking sensor. Attacking the IHSM in motion may require
|
||||
specialized mechanical tools, CNC actuators or even a contactless attack using a laser, plasma jet or water jet.
|
||||
rotation at high speed or they will first need to defeat the braking sensor. Attacking the IHSM in motion requires
|
||||
specialized mechanical tools such as CNC actuators or for contactless attack a laser.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Attacks that don't work}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -494,17 +493,17 @@ attacker willing to invest some effort can also try to uncover the mesh traces b
|
|||
mesh, bridging over a part that will subsequently be removed. HSMs attempt to detect such attacks by measuring the mesh
|
||||
traces' resistance instead of only checking their continuity~\cite{obermaier2019}. However, if an attacker only wishes
|
||||
to disable a small section of the mesh to insert a handful of fine probes into the device, this hardening approach
|
||||
becomes challenging. Consider a mesh is covering an area of $\SI{100}{\milli\meter}$ by $\SI{100}{\milli\meter}$. An
|
||||
attacker who circumvents a $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ by $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ section of this mesh using wires with a low
|
||||
resistance will change the mesh trace's resistance by approximately
|
||||
$\frac{\SI{5}{\milli\meter}\cdot\SI{5}{\milli\meter}}{\SI{100}{\milli\meter}\cdot\SI{100}{\milli\meter}} = 0.25
|
||||
\%$. Detecting this change would require a resistance measurement of at least $\SI{9}{bit}$ of precision and
|
||||
corresponding temperature stability of the mesh material.
|
||||
becomes challenging. Consider a mesh that covers an area of $\SI{100}{\milli\meter}$ by $\SI{100}{\milli\meter}$. An
|
||||
attacker who short-circuits a $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ by $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ section of this mesh will change the mesh
|
||||
trace's resistance by approximately
|
||||
$\frac{\SI{5}{\milli\meter}\cdot\SI{5}{\milli\meter}}{\SI{100}{\milli\meter}\cdot\SI{100}{\milli\meter}} = 0.25 \%$.
|
||||
Detecting this change would require a resistance measurement of at least $\SI{9}{bit}$ of precision and corresponding
|
||||
temperature stability of the mesh material.
|
||||
|
||||
The second way to attack a HSM is to go \emph{around} the mesh. Many commercial HSMs sandwich the payload PCB between
|
||||
two mesh-equipped enclosure halves. This design in particular is vulnerable to attempts to stick a fine needle through
|
||||
the interface between mesh lid and PCB. Conventional HSMs mitigate this weak spot by wrapping a patterned conductive
|
||||
foil that forms the security mesh around the HSM, leaving only the foil's corners and the payload's power and data
|
||||
foil around the HSM that forms the security mesh, leaving only the corners and the payload's power and data
|
||||
feed-through as potential weak spots.
|
||||
|
||||
The third and last way to attack a conventional HSM is to disable the mesh monitoring circuit~\cite{dexter2015}. An
|
||||
|
|
@ -515,18 +514,26 @@ any fail-open failure modes.
|
|||
|
||||
\subsection{Attacks that work on any HSM}
|
||||
|
||||
While an IHSM provides an effective mitigation against direct attacks on the security mesh as described in the previous
|
||||
paragraphs, certain attacks are generic against any HSM technology, conventional or IHSM. One type of such attacks are
|
||||
contactless attacks such as electromagnetic (EM) sidechannel attacks. EM sidechannel attacks can be mitigated by
|
||||
shielding and by designing the IHSM's payload such that critical components such as CPUs are physically distant to the
|
||||
security mesh, preventing EM probes from being brought close. Conducted EMI sidechannels that could be used for power
|
||||
analysis can be mitigated by placing filters on the inside of the security mesh at the point where the power and network
|
||||
connections penetrate the
|
||||
mesh~\cite{anderson2020}.
|
||||
An IHSM provides an effective mitigation against direct attacks on the security mesh as described in the previous
|
||||
paragraphs. However, there are certain generic attacks that work against any HSM technology, conventional or IHSM.
|
||||
One type of such attacks are contactless attacks such as electromagnetic (EM) sidechannel attacks.
|
||||
EM sidechannel attacks can be mitigated by shielding and by designing the IHSM's payload such that critical components
|
||||
such as CPUs are physically distant to the security mesh, preventing EM probes from being brought close.
|
||||
Conducted EMI sidechannels that could be used for power analysis can be mitigated by placing filters on the inside of
|
||||
the security mesh at the point where the power and network connections penetrate the mesh~\cite{anderson2020}.
|
||||
Finally, the API between the HSM's payload and the outside world provides attack surface. Attacks through the network
|
||||
interface must be prevented as in any other networked system by only exposing the minimum necessary amount of API
|
||||
surface to the outside world, and by carefully vetting this remaining attack surface~\cite{anderson2020}.
|
||||
|
||||
IHSMs do not provide an inherent benefit against such contactless attacks. However, there are two mitigating factors in
|
||||
play that still give IHSMs an advantage over conventional HSMs in this scenario. Because IHSM meshes can be made using
|
||||
more primitive technology than conventional HSM meshes at the same level of security, IHSMs can use larger meshes and
|
||||
are less space-constrained. This larger volume allows for a greater physical distance between security-critical
|
||||
components from places accessible to an attacker using an electromagnetic side channel probe. By allowing the use of
|
||||
conventional server hardware, IHSMs additionally enable the use of modern security techniques such as MMUs and
|
||||
well-audited open source software such as OpenSSL that may be unavailable on the embedded processors found in
|
||||
conventional HSMs.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{The Swivel Chair Attack}
|
||||
\label{sec_swivel_chair_attack}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -556,29 +563,28 @@ kind of mechanical tool.
|
|||
\label{fig_attack_robot}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
While it is certainly possible to create a mechanical tool to attack an IHSM in motion, we also consider this attack
|
||||
method reasonably remote. Figure~\ref{fig_attack_robot} shows a schematic overview of what such an attack tool would
|
||||
have to look like. Most fundamentally, the tool itself has to rotate at the IHSM's speed, and cannot simply rotate the
|
||||
IHSM. If the tool were to counter-rotate the IHSM such that relative to a stationary observer the rotor would be slowed
|
||||
down, the accelerometer on the rotor would measure lower centrifugal acceleration and detect this attempt. Instead, the
|
||||
attack tool has to follow the rotation of the IHSM. At the high speeds an IHSM would be rotating at, following the
|
||||
rotation closely enough that a manipulator mounted on the attack tool is stationary w.r.t.\ the IHSM is not easy. To
|
||||
stay within $\pm\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ of a target over a period of $\SI{10}{\second}$ on an IHSM mesh with radius
|
||||
$r=\SI{100}{\milli\meter}$ requires both speeds to be matched to better than
|
||||
Figure~\ref{fig_attack_robot} shows a schematic overview of the structure of such a rotating attack tool.
|
||||
A first point to note is that the tool itself has to rotate at the IHSM's speed.
|
||||
If we were to counter-rotate the IHSM such that relative to a stationary observer the rotor would be slowed
|
||||
down, the accelerometer on the rotor would measure lower centrifugal acceleration and detect the manipulation attempt.
|
||||
To follow an IHSM's rotation closely enough that a manipulator mounted on the attack tool is stationary w.r.t.\ the IHSM
|
||||
is hard. Let us assume a small IHSM mesh with radius $r=\SI{100}{\milli\meter}$.
|
||||
To keep a manipulator stationary within a $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ by $\SI{5}{\milli\meter}$ window over a period of
|
||||
$\SI{10}{\second}$ requires attack tool and IHSM speeds to be matched to an accuracy better than
|
||||
$\frac{\SI{5}{\milli\meter}}{\SI{10}{\second}} \cdot \frac{1}{2\pi r} = \SI{8.0}{\milli\hertz} = \SI{0.048}{rpm}$.
|
||||
Relative to a realsistic IHSM's speed of $\SI{1000}{rpm}$ this corresponds to approximately $\SI{50}{ppm}$. Active servo
|
||||
control of the attack tool's rotation locked against optical tracking of the IHSM's rotor would likely be the most
|
||||
realistic option to achieve this precision. This strict accuracy requirement leads to a complex attack setup.
|
||||
Relative to a realsistic IHSM's speed of $\SI{1000}{rpm}$ this corresponds to approximately $\SI{50}{ppm}$.
|
||||
Achieving this accuracy would likely require active servo control of the attack tool's rotation that is locked by
|
||||
optically tracking of the IHSM's rotor.
|
||||
|
||||
If an attacker were to solve the tracking issue, the remaining issue is that they still need to construct a
|
||||
remote-controlled manipulator that can be mounted on the attack tool's rotating stage and that is able to actually
|
||||
disable the IHSM's mesh. Consider that simply bypassing the mesh e.g. by drilling an undetected hole does not gain an
|
||||
attacker much in this scenario, as the payload is stationary and an attack tool rotating at $\SI{1000}{rpm}$ is useless
|
||||
against it. Instead, the attacker would have to disable the mesh using the rotating tool, in order to then cut an
|
||||
opening into it through which they could insert a stationary tool to attack the payload with. Given the degree of manual
|
||||
skill necessary even for normal soldering work, we estimate that creating a remote-controllable manipulator that can be
|
||||
used to successfully attack a security mesh is infeasible.
|
||||
remote-controlled manipulator that can be mounted on the attack tool's rotating stage that is able to disable the IHSM's
|
||||
mesh.
|
||||
To complicate matters, the attacker will not succeed by simply drilling a small undetected hole into the mesh.
|
||||
While both mesh and attack tool are spinning, the payload is stationary.
|
||||
The attacker thus has to create an opening in the mesh large enough that the attacker can insert a second set of
|
||||
\emph{stationary} probes to contact the payload.
|
||||
In conclusion, we estimate that creating a rotating, remote-controllable manipulator that can be used to successfully
|
||||
attack a security mesh is infeasible given the degree of manual skill necessary even for normal soldering work.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Mechanical weak spots}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -850,6 +856,27 @@ lines indicate centrifugal acceleration as calculated from rotor speed measureme
|
|||
measurements and theory closely match. Our frequency measurements are accurate and the main source of error are the
|
||||
accelerometer's intrinsic errors as well as error in its placement due to construction tolerances.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=1.1\textwidth]{../prototype/sensor-analysis/fig-acc-trace-steps-run50.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Raw recording of accelerometer measurements during one experiment run. Shaded areas indicate time
|
||||
intervals when we manually adjusted speed.}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-steps}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\hfill
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=1.1\textwidth]{../prototype/sensor-analysis/fig-acc-trace-stacked-run50.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Valid measurements cropped out from \ref{fig-acc-steps} for various frequencies. Intermodulation
|
||||
artifacts from the accelerometer's $\SI{10}{\hertz}$ sampling frequency and the $\SI{3}{\hertz}$ to
|
||||
$\SI{18}{\hertz}$ rotation frequency due to gravity and device vibration are clearly visible.}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-stacked}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-traces}
|
||||
\caption{Traces of acceleration measurements during one experiment run.}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
The accelerometer's primary intrinsic errors are offset error and scale error. Offset error is a fixed additive offset
|
||||
to all measurements. Scale error is an error proportional to a measurements value that results from a deviation between
|
||||
the device's specified and actual sensitivity. We correct for both errors by first extracting all stable intervals from
|
||||
|
|
@ -884,27 +911,6 @@ without stopping the rotor.
|
|||
\label{fig-acc-theory}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=1.1\textwidth]{../prototype/sensor-analysis/fig-acc-trace-steps-run50.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Raw recording of accelerometer measurements during one experiment run. Shaded areas indicate time
|
||||
intervals when we manually adjusted speed.}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-steps}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\hfill
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=1.1\textwidth]{../prototype/sensor-analysis/fig-acc-trace-stacked-run50.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Valid measurements cropped out from \ref{fig-acc-steps} for various frequencies. Intermodulation
|
||||
artifacts from the accelerometer's $\SI{10}{\hertz}$ sampling frequency and the $\SI{3}{\hertz}$ to
|
||||
$\SI{18}{\hertz}$ rotation frequency due to gravity and device vibration are clearly visible.}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-stacked}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-traces}
|
||||
\caption{Traces of acceleration measurements during one experiment run.}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Conclusion}
|
||||
\label{sec_conclusion}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -924,10 +930,11 @@ allow the construction of devices secure against a wide range of practical attac
|
|||
specialized tools. The rotating mesh allows longitudinal gaps, which enables new applications that are impossible with
|
||||
traditional HSMs. Such gaps can be used to integrate a fan for air cooling into the HSM, allowing the use of powerful
|
||||
computing hardware inside the HSM. We hope that this simple construction will stimulate academic research into (more)
|
||||
secure hardware. We have published all design artifacts of our PoC online, see Appendix~\ref{sec_repo}. The next steps
|
||||
towards a practical application of our design will be to design a manufacturable stator/rotor interface with inductive
|
||||
power and data transfer integrated into the motor's magnetics and a custom motor driver tuned for the application that
|
||||
is able to precisely measure both angular velocity and winding current for an added degree of tamper detection.
|
||||
secure hardware. We have published all design artifacts of our PoC online, please refer to Appendix~\ref{sec_repo} for
|
||||
details. The next steps towards a practical application of our design will be to design a manufacturable stator/rotor
|
||||
interface with inductive power and data transfer integrated into the motor's magnetics and a custom motor driver tuned
|
||||
for the application that is able to precisely measure both angular velocity and winding current for an added degree of
|
||||
tamper detection.
|
||||
|
||||
\printbibliography[heading=bibintoc]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue