Paper: First proofread
This commit is contained in:
parent
d27babde42
commit
9d40f0d0f1
3 changed files with 121 additions and 130 deletions
Binary file not shown.
|
|
@ -80,14 +80,15 @@ defenses the HSM is now equipped with an accelerometer that it uses to verify th
|
|||
would an attacker approach this HSM? They would have to either slow down the rotation---which triggers the
|
||||
accelerometer---or they would have to attack the HSM in motion. The HSM literally becomes a moving target. At slow
|
||||
speeds, rotating the entire attack workbench might be possible but rotating frames of reference quickly become
|
||||
inhospitable to human life (see Section~\ref{sec_ihsm_motion}). Since non-contact electromagnetic or optical attacks are
|
||||
more limited in the first place and can be shielded, we have effectively forced the attacker to use an attack robot.
|
||||
inhospitable to human life (see Section~\ref{sec_swivel_chair_attack}). Since non-contact electromagnetic or optical
|
||||
attacks are more limited in the first place and can be shielded, we have effectively forced the attacker to use an
|
||||
attack robot.
|
||||
|
||||
This work contains the following contributions:
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item We present the \emph{Inertial HSM} concept. Inertial HSMs enable cost-effective small-scale production of
|
||||
highly secure HSMs.
|
||||
\item We discuss possible boundary sensing modes for inertial HSMs.
|
||||
\item We discuss possible tamper sensors for inertial HSMs.
|
||||
\item We explore the design space of our inertial HSM concept.
|
||||
\item We present our work on a prototype inertial HSM (Figure~\ref{prototype_picture}).
|
||||
\item We present an anlysis on the viability of using commodity MEMS accelerometers as braking sensors.
|
||||
|
|
@ -106,8 +107,8 @@ This work contains the following contributions:
|
|||
In Section~\ref{sec_related_work}, we will give an overview of the state of the art in the physical security of HSMs. On
|
||||
this basis, in Section~\ref{sec_ihsm_construction} we will elaborate the principles of our inertial HSM approach. We
|
||||
will analyze its weaknesses in Section~\ref{sec_attacks}. Based on these results we have built a prototype system that
|
||||
we will illustrate in Section~\ref{sec_proto}. We conclude this paper with a general evaluation of our design in
|
||||
Section~\ref{sec_conclusion}.
|
||||
whose design we will elaborate in Section~\ref{sec_proto}. We conclude this paper with a general evaluation of our
|
||||
design in Section~\ref{sec_conclusion}.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Related work}
|
||||
\label{sec_related_work}
|
||||
|
|
@ -132,17 +133,17 @@ principle has to have this examination equipment built-in.
|
|||
Physical seals are used in a wide variety of applications, but the most interesting ones from a research point of view
|
||||
that are recorded in public literature are those used in monitoring of nuclear material under the International Atomic
|
||||
Energy Authority (IAEA). Most of these seals use the same approach that is used in Physically
|
||||
Uncloneable Functions, though their development predates that of PUFs by several decades. The seal is created in a way
|
||||
that intentionally causes large, random device to device variations. These variations are precisely recorded at
|
||||
deployment. At the end of the seals lifetime, the device is returned from the field to the lab and closely examined to
|
||||
Uncloneable Functions (PUFs), though their development predates that of PUFs by several decades. The seal is created in
|
||||
a way that intentionally causes large, random device to device variations. These variations are precisely recorded at
|
||||
deployment. At the end of the seals lifetime, the seal is returned from the field to the lab and closely examined to
|
||||
check for any deviations from the seal's prior recorded state. The type of variation used in these seals includes random
|
||||
scratches in metal parts and random blobs of solder (IAEA metal cap seal), randomly cut optical fibers (COBRA seal),
|
||||
the uncontrollably random distribution of glitter particles in a polymer matrix (COBRA seal prototypes) as well as the
|
||||
scratches in metal parts and random blobs of solder (IAEA metal cap seal), randomly cut optical fibers (COBRA seal), the
|
||||
uncontrollably random distribution of glitter particles in a polymer matrix (COBRA seal prototypes) as well as the
|
||||
precise three-dimensional surface structure of metal parts at microscopic scales (LMCV)~\cite{iaea2011}.
|
||||
|
||||
The IAEA's equipment portfolio does include electronic seals such as the EOSS. These devices are intended for remote
|
||||
reading, similar to an HSM. They are constructed from two components: A cable that is surveilled for tampering, and a
|
||||
monitoring device. The monitoring device itself is in effect an HSM and uses a security mesh foil like it is used in
|
||||
monitoring device. The monitoring device itself is in effect an HSM and uses a security mesh foil such as it is used in
|
||||
commercial HSMs.
|
||||
|
||||
In~\cite{anderson2020}, Anderson gives a comprehensive overview on physical security. An example they cite is the IBM
|
||||
|
|
@ -150,7 +151,7 @@ In~\cite{anderson2020}, Anderson gives a comprehensive overview on physical secu
|
|||
construction. Although its turn of the century design is now a bit dated, the construction techniques of the physical
|
||||
security mechanisms have not evolved much in the last two decades. Besides some auxiliary temperature and radiation
|
||||
sensors to guard against attacks on the built-in SRAM memory, the module's main security barrier uses the traditional
|
||||
construction of a flexible mesh wrapped around the module's core. In~\cite{smith1998}, the authors state the module
|
||||
construction of a flexible mesh foil wrapped around the module's core. In~\cite{smith1998}, the authors state the module
|
||||
monitors this mesh for short circuits, open circuits and conductivity. The fundamental approach to tamper detection and
|
||||
construction is similar to other commercial offerings~\cite{obermaier2018,drimer2008,anderson2020,isaacs2013}.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -162,16 +163,16 @@ core component of their design is that they propose its use as a PUF to allow fo
|
|||
similar to a smart card---but the design is not limited to this use.
|
||||
|
||||
In~\cite{tobisch2020}, Tobisch et al.\ describe a construction technique for a hardware security module that is based
|
||||
around commodity Wifi hardware inside a conductive enclosure. In their design, an RF transmitter transmits a reference
|
||||
around commodity WiFi hardware inside a conductive enclosure. In their design, an RF transmitter transmits a reference
|
||||
signal into the RF cavity formed by the conductive enclosure. One or more receivers listen for the signal's reflections
|
||||
and use them to characterize the RF cavity w.r.t.\ phase and frequency response. Their fundamental assumption is that
|
||||
the RF behavior of the cavity is inscrutable from the outside, and that even a small disturbance anywhere within the
|
||||
volume of the cavity will cause a significant change in its RF response. The core idea in~\cite{tobisch2020} is to use
|
||||
commodity Wifi hardware to reduce the cost of the HSM's sensing circuitry. The resulting system is likely both much
|
||||
cheaper and capable of protecting a much larger security envelope than e.g. the design from~\cite{immler2019}, at the
|
||||
cost of worse and less predictable security guarantees. Where~\cite{tobisch2020} use electromagnetic radiation,
|
||||
Vrijaldenhoven in~\cite{vrijaldenhoven2004} uses ultrasound waves travelling on a surface acoustic wave (SAW) device to
|
||||
a similar end.
|
||||
commodity WiFi hardware to reduce the cost of the HSM's sensing circuitry. The resulting system is likely both much
|
||||
cheaper and capable of protecting a much larger security envelope than designs using finely patterned foil security
|
||||
meshes such as~\cite{immler2019}, at the cost of worse and less predictable security guarantees.
|
||||
Where~\cite{tobisch2020} use electromagnetic radiation, Vrijaldenhoven in~\cite{vrijaldenhoven2004} uses ultrasound
|
||||
waves travelling on a surface acoustic wave (SAW) device to a similar end.
|
||||
|
||||
While~\cite{tobisch2020} approach the sensing frontend cost as their only optimization target, the prior work of Kreft
|
||||
and Adi~\cite{kreft2012} considers sensing quality. Their target is an HSM that envelopes a volume barely larger than a
|
||||
|
|
@ -189,7 +190,7 @@ closest to a mechanical HSM that we were able to find during our research is an
|
|||
describes a mechanism to detect tampering along a communication cable by enclosing the cable inside a conduit filled
|
||||
with pressurized gas.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Patents literature}
|
||||
\subsection{Patent literature}
|
||||
During development, we performed several hours of research on prior art for the inertial HSM concept. Yet, we could not
|
||||
find any mentions of similar concepts either in academic literature or in patents. Thus, we are likely the inventors of
|
||||
this idea and we are fairly sure it is not covered by any patents or other restrictions at this point in time.
|
||||
|
|
@ -225,75 +226,72 @@ First, there are several ways that we can approach motion. There is periodic, ap
|
|||
also linear motion as well as rotation. We can also vary the degree of electronic control in this motion. The main
|
||||
constraints we have on the HSM's motion pattern are that it needs to be (almost) continuous so as to not expose any weak
|
||||
spots during instantaneous standstill of the HSM. Additionally, for space efficiency the HSM has to stay within a
|
||||
confined space. This means that linear motion must be periodic, like that of a pendulum. Periodic linear motion will
|
||||
have to quickly reverse direction at its apex so the device is not stationary long enough for this to become a weak
|
||||
spot.
|
||||
confined space. This means that linear motion would have to be periodic, like that of a pendulum. Such periodic linear
|
||||
motion will have to quickly reverse direction at its apex so the device is not stationary long enough for this to become
|
||||
a weak spot.
|
||||
|
||||
In contrast to linear motion, rotation is space-efficient and can be continuous if the axis of rotation is inside the
|
||||
device. In case it has a fixed axis, rotation will expose a weak spot at the axis of rotation where the surface's
|
||||
tangential velocity is low. Faster rotation can lessen the severity of this at the expense of power consumption and
|
||||
mechanical load but can never eliminate it. This effect can be alleviated in two ways: Either by adding additional
|
||||
tamper protection at the axis, or by having the HSM perform a compound rotation that has no fixed axis.
|
||||
|
||||
A beneficial side-effect of rotation is that an attacker trying to follow the motion would have to rotate around
|
||||
the same axis. By choosing a suitable rotation frequency we can thus prevent an attacker from following the devices
|
||||
motion since doing so would subject them to impractically large centrifugal forces. Essentially, this limits the
|
||||
approximate maximum size and mass of an attacker based on an assumption on tolerable centrifugal force.
|
||||
|
||||
Large centrifugal acceleration at high speeds poses the engineering challenge of preventing rapid unscheduled
|
||||
tangential velocity is low. Faster rotation can lessen the security impact of this fact at the expense of power
|
||||
consumption and mechanical load, but it can never eliminate it. This effect can be alleviated in two ways: Either by
|
||||
adding additional tamper protection at the axis, or by having the HSM perform a compound rotation that has no fixed
|
||||
axis. Large centrifugal acceleration at high speeds poses the engineering challenge of preventing rapid unscheduled
|
||||
disassembly of the device, but it also creates an obstacle to any attacker trying to manipulate the device in a
|
||||
\emph{swivel chair attack} (see Section~\ref{sec_swivel_chair_attack}).
|
||||
\emph{swivel chair attack} (see Section~\ref{sec_swivel_chair_attack}). An attacker trying to follow the motion would
|
||||
have to rotate around the same axis. By choosing a suitable rotation frequency we can prevent an attacker from following
|
||||
the devices motion since doing so would subject them to impractically large centrifugal forces. Essentially, this
|
||||
limits the approximate maximum size and mass of an attacker based on an assumption on tolerable centrifugal force.
|
||||
|
||||
In this paper we focus on rotating IHSMs for simplicity of construction. For our initial research, we are focusing on
|
||||
systems having a fixed axis of rotation due to their relative simplicity in prototype construction but we note the
|
||||
challenge of hardening the shaft against tampering.
|
||||
systems having a fixed axis of rotation due to their relatively simple construction but we do wish to note the challenge
|
||||
of hardening the shaft against tampering that any production device would have to tackle.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Tamper detection mesh construction}
|
||||
|
||||
Once we have decided on a type of motion our IHSM's security barrier shall perform, what remains is the actual
|
||||
implementation of that security barrier. There are two movements that we have observed that are key to our work. On the
|
||||
one hand, there is the widespread industry use of delicate tamper sensing mesh membranes. The widespread usage of such
|
||||
membranes in systems deployed in the field for a variety of use cases from low-security payment processing devices to
|
||||
high-security certificate management at a minimum tells us that a properly implemented mesh \emph{can} provide a
|
||||
significant level of security. On the other hand, research has mostly focused on various ways to fabricate enclosures
|
||||
that embed characteristics of a physically uncloneable function (PUF). By using stochastic properties of the enclosure
|
||||
material to form a PUF, such academic designs effectively leverage signal processing techniques to improve the system's
|
||||
hardness by a large factor.
|
||||
Once we have decided which motion our IHSM's security barrier shall perform, what remains is the actual implementation
|
||||
of that security barrier. There are two movements that we have observed that are key to our work. On the one hand, there
|
||||
is the widespread industry use of delicate tamper sensing mesh membranes. The usage of such membranes in systems
|
||||
deployed in the field for a variety of use cases from low-security payment processing devices to high-security
|
||||
certificate management at a minimum tells us that a properly implemented mesh \emph{can} provide a significant level of
|
||||
security. On the other hand, in contrast to this industry focus, academic research has mostly developed ways to
|
||||
fabricate enclosures that embed characteristics of a Physically Uncloneable Function that do not employ a traditional
|
||||
security mesh. By using stochastic properties of the enclosure material to form a PUF, such academic designs effectively
|
||||
leverage signal processing techniques to improve the system's security level by a significant margin.
|
||||
|
||||
In our research, we focus on security meshes as our IHSM's tamper sensors. Most of the cost in commercial security mesh
|
||||
implementations lies in the advanced manufacturing techniques and special materials necessary to achieve a sensitive
|
||||
mesh at fine structure sizes. The foundation of an IHSM security is that by moving the mesh even a primitive, coarse
|
||||
mesh made e.g.\ from mesh traces on a PCB becomes very hard to attack in practice. This allows us to a simple
|
||||
construction made up from low-cost components. Additionally, use of a mesh allows us to only spin the mesh itself
|
||||
around and keep the payload stationary in the center of the IHSM. Tamper sensing technologies that use the entire volume
|
||||
of the HSM such as RF-based systems do not allow for this degree of freedom in their design. They would require the
|
||||
entire IHSM to spin, including its payload. This would entail costly and complex systems for data and power transfer
|
||||
from the outside to the payload.
|
||||
mesh made e.g.\ from mesh traces on a PCB becomes very hard to attack in practice. This allows us to use a simple
|
||||
construction made up from low-cost components. Additionally, the use of a mesh allows us to only spin the mesh itself
|
||||
and its monitoring circuit and keep the payload inside this mesh stationary. Tamper sensing technologies that use the
|
||||
entire volume of the HSM such as RF-based systems do not allow for this degree of freedom in their design: They would
|
||||
require the entire IHSM to spin, including its payload, which would entail costly and complex systems for data and power
|
||||
transfer from the outside to the payload.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Braking detection}
|
||||
|
||||
The security mesh is a critical component in the IHSM's primary defense against physical attacks, but its monitoring is
|
||||
only one half of this defense. The other half consists of a reliable and sensitive braking detection system. This system
|
||||
must be able to quickly detect any slowing of the IHSM's rotation. Ideally, a sufficiently sensitive sensor should be
|
||||
able to measure any external force applied to the IHSM's rotor and should already trigger a response on the attempt of
|
||||
manipulation.
|
||||
able to measure any external force applied to the IHSM's rotor and should already trigger a response during the
|
||||
beginning of a manipulation attempt.
|
||||
|
||||
While the obvious choice to monitor rotation would be a tachometer such as a magnetic or opitical sensor attached to the
|
||||
IHSM's shaft, this would be a poor choice in our application. Both optical and magnetic sensors are susceptible to
|
||||
contact-less interference from outside. Another option would be to use feedback from the motor driver electronics. When
|
||||
using a BLDC motor, the driver electronics precisely know the rotor's position at all times. The issue with this
|
||||
contact-less interference from outside. A different option would be to use feedback from the motor driver electronics.
|
||||
When using a BLDC motor, the driver electronics precisely know the rotor's position at all times. The issue with this
|
||||
approach is that depending on construction, it might invite attacks at the mechanical interface between mesh and the
|
||||
motor's shaft. If an attacker can decouple the mesh from the motor e.g.\ by drilling, laser ablation or electrical
|
||||
discharge machining (EDM) on the motor's shaft, the motor could keep spinning at its nominal frequency while the mesh is
|
||||
already standing still.
|
||||
|
||||
Instead of a stator-side sensor like a magnetic tachometer or feedback from a BLDC controller, an accelerometer placed
|
||||
inside the rotor's mesh monitoring circuit is a good component to serve as an IHSM's tamper sensor. Modern fully
|
||||
Instead of a stator-side sensor like a magnetic tachometer or feedback from the BLDC controller, an accelerometer placed
|
||||
inside the spinning mesh monitoring circuit would be a good component to serve as an IHSM's tamper sensor. Modern, fully
|
||||
intergrated MEMS accelerometers are very precise. By comparing acceleration measurements against a model of the device's
|
||||
mechanical motion, deviations can quickly be detected. This limits an attacker's ability to tamper with the device's
|
||||
motion. It may also allow remote monitoring of the device's mechanical components such as bearings. MEMS accelerometers
|
||||
motion. It may also allow remote monitoring of the device's mechanical components such as bearings: MEMS accelerometers
|
||||
are fast enough to capture vibrations, which can be used as an early warning sign of failing mechanical
|
||||
components~\cite{kvk2019,si2016,adc2019,e2013}.
|
||||
components~\cite{kvk2019,sh2016,adc2019,e2013}.
|
||||
|
||||
In a spinning IHSM, an accelerometer mounted at a known radius with its axis pointing radially will measure centrifugal
|
||||
acceleration. Centrifugal acceleration rises linearly with radius, and with the square of frequency: $a=\omega^2 r$. For
|
||||
|
|
@ -311,11 +309,11 @@ IHSM is spinning at $\SI{1000}{rpm}$ and that we wish to detect any attempt to b
|
|||
difference in centrifugal acceleration will be a factor of $\frac{\omega_2^2}{\omega_1^2}=4$. This results in a
|
||||
factor-$4$ difference in absolute acceleration that our accelerometer must be able to detect. If we choose our
|
||||
accelerometer's location to maximize its dynamic range, any commercial MEMS accelerometer should suffice for this degree
|
||||
of accuracy. For rapid deceleration, commercial accelerometers will be much more sensitive as effects of long-term drift
|
||||
can be ignored. If we wish to also detect very slow deceleration, we have to take into account the accelerometer's drift
|
||||
characteristics.
|
||||
of accuracy even over long timespans. For rapid deceleration, commercial accelerometers will be much more sensitive as
|
||||
effects of long-term drift can be ignored. If we wish to also detect very slow deceleration, we have to take into
|
||||
account the accelerometer's drift characteristics.
|
||||
|
||||
In Section~\ref{sec_accel_meas} below we conduct an empirical evaluation of a commercial automotive high-$g$
|
||||
In Section~\ref{sec_accel_meas} below we conduct an empirical evaluation of a commercial automotive high-$g$ MEMS
|
||||
accelerometer for braking detection in our prototype IHSM.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Mechanical layout}
|
||||
|
|
@ -323,15 +321,11 @@ accelerometer for braking detection in our prototype IHSM.
|
|||
With our IHSM's components taken care of, what remains to be decided is how to put together these individual components
|
||||
into a complete device. A basic spinning HSM might look like shown in Figure~\ref{fig_schema_one_axis}. Shown are the
|
||||
axis of rotation, an accelerometer on the rotating part used to detect braking, the protected payload and the area
|
||||
covered by the rotating tamper detection mesh.
|
||||
|
||||
A key observation is that we only have to move the tamper protection mesh, not the entire contents of the HSM.
|
||||
The HSM's payload and with it most of the HSM's mass can be stationary. This reduces the moment of inertia of the
|
||||
moving part.
|
||||
|
||||
This basic schema accepts a weak spot at the point where the shaft penetrates the spinning mesh. This trade-off makes
|
||||
for a simple mechanical construction and allows power and data connections to the stationary payload through a hollow
|
||||
shaft.
|
||||
covered by the rotating tamper detection mesh. A key observation is that we only have to move the tamper protection
|
||||
mesh, not the entire contents of the HSM. The HSM's payload and with it most of the HSM's mass can be stationary. This
|
||||
reduces the moment of inertia of the moving part. This basic schema accepts a weak spot at the point where the shaft
|
||||
penetrates the spinning mesh. This trade-off makes for a simple mechanical construction and allows power and data
|
||||
connections to the stationary payload through a hollow shaft.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
|
|
@ -341,15 +335,15 @@ shaft.
|
|||
\label{fig_schema_one_axis}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
The spinning mesh must be designed to cover the entire surface of the payload, but in contrast to a traditional HSM it
|
||||
suffices if it sweeps over every part of the payload once per rotation. This means we can design longitudinal gaps into
|
||||
the mesh that allow outside air to flow through to the payload. In traditional boundary-sensing HSMs, cooling of the
|
||||
payload processor is a serious issue since any air duct or heat pipe would have to penetrate the HSM's security
|
||||
boundary. This problem can only be solved with complex and costly siphon-style constructions, so in commercial systems
|
||||
heat conduction is used exclusively~\cite{isaacs2013}. This limits the maximum power dissipation of the payload and thus
|
||||
its processing power. Our setup allows direct air cooling of regular heatsinks. This greatly increases the maximum
|
||||
possible power dissipation of the payload and unlocks much more powerful processing capabilities. In an evolution of
|
||||
our design, the spinning mesh could even be designed to \emph{be} a cooling fan.
|
||||
The spinning mesh must be designed to cover the entire surface of the payload, but it suffices if it sweeps over every
|
||||
part of the payload once per rotation. This means we can design longitudinal gaps into the mesh that allow outside air
|
||||
to flow through to the payload. In traditional boundary-sensing HSMs, cooling of the payload processor is a serious
|
||||
issue since any air duct or heat pipe would have to penetrate the HSM's security boundary. This problem can only be
|
||||
solved with complex and costly siphon-style constructions, so in commercial systems heat conduction is used
|
||||
exclusively~\cite{isaacs2013}. This limits the maximum power dissipation of the payload and thus its processing power.
|
||||
Our setup allows direct air cooling of regular heatsinks. This unlocks much more powerful processing capabilities that
|
||||
greatly increase the maximum possible power dissipation of the payload. In an evolution of our design, the spinning
|
||||
mesh could even be designed to \emph{be} a cooling fan.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Attacks}
|
||||
\label{sec_attacks}
|
||||
|
|
@ -357,11 +351,11 @@ our design, the spinning mesh could even be designed to \emph{be} a cooling fan.
|
|||
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 that is also 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 traditional HSM.
|
||||
Only to attack an IHSM, assuming that the braking detection system works they will have to perform these steps with a
|
||||
tool that follows the HSMs rotation at high speed. This may require specialized mechanical tools, CNC actuators or
|
||||
even a contactless attack using a laser, plasma jet or water jet.
|
||||
Only, assuming that the braking detection system works they will have to perform these attack steps with a tool that
|
||||
follows the HSMs rotation at high speed. This may require specialized mechanical tools, CNC actuators or even a
|
||||
contactless attack using a laser, plasma jet or water jet.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Swivel chair attacks}
|
||||
\subsection{The Swivel Chair Attack}
|
||||
\label{sec_swivel_chair_attack}
|
||||
|
||||
First we will consider the most basic of all attacks: A human attacker holding a soldering iron trying to rotate
|
||||
|
|
@ -384,14 +378,12 @@ used, the meshes speed may vary by location and over time. Our example configura
|
|||
continuously, so it does not have any time-dependent weak spots. It does however have a weak spot at its axis of
|
||||
rotation, at the point where the shaft penetrates the mesh. The meshes tangential velocity decreases close to the shaft,
|
||||
and the shaft itself may allow an attacker to insert tools such as probes into the device through the opening it
|
||||
creates.
|
||||
|
||||
This issue is related to the issue conventional HSMs also face with their power and data connections. In conventional
|
||||
HSMs, power and data are routed into the enclosure through the PCB or flat flex cables sandwiched in between
|
||||
security mesh foil layers. By using a thin substrate and by creating a meandering path by folding the interconnect
|
||||
substrate/security mesh layers several times, in traditional HSMs this interface rarely is a mechanical weak spot. In
|
||||
inertial HSMs, careful engineering is necessary to achieve the same effect. Figure~\ref{shaft_cm} shows variations
|
||||
of the shaft interface of increasing level of complexity.
|
||||
creates. This issue is related to the issue conventional HSMs also face with their power and data connections. In
|
||||
conventional HSMs, power and data are routed into the enclosure through the PCB or flat flex cables sandwiched in
|
||||
between security mesh foil layers. In traditional HSMs this interface rarely is a mechanical weak spot since they use a
|
||||
thin mesh substrate and create a meandering path by folding the interconnect substrate/security mesh layers several
|
||||
times. In inertial HSMs, careful engineering is necessary to achieve the same effect. Figure~\ref{shaft_cm} shows
|
||||
variations of the shaft interface with increasing complexity.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.3\textwidth}
|
||||
|
|
@ -423,16 +415,14 @@ of the shaft interface of increasing level of complexity.
|
|||
\subsection{Attacking the mesh in motion}
|
||||
|
||||
To disable the mesh itself, an attacker can choose two paths. One is to attack the mesh itself, for example by bridging
|
||||
its traces to allow for a hole to be cut. The other option is to tamper with the monitoring
|
||||
circuit to prevent a damaged mesh from triggering an alarm~\cite{dexter2015}.
|
||||
|
||||
Attacks in both locations are electronic attacks, i.e. they require electrical contact to
|
||||
parts of the circuit. Traditionally, this contact is made by soldering or by placing a probe such as a thin needle. We
|
||||
consider this type of attack hard to perform on an object spinning at high speed. Possible remaining attack avenues may
|
||||
be to rotate an attack tool in sync with the mesh, or to use a laser or ion beam fired at the mesh to cut traces or
|
||||
carbonize parts of the substrate to create electrical connections. Encapsulating the mesh in a potting compound and
|
||||
shielding it with a metal enclosure as is common in traditional HSMs will significantly increase the complexity of such
|
||||
attacks.
|
||||
its traces. The other option is to tamper with the monitoring circuit to prevent a damaged mesh from triggering an
|
||||
alarm~\cite{dexter2015}. Attacks in both locations are electronic attacks, i.e.\ they require electrical contact to
|
||||
parts of the circuit. Traditionally, this contact is made by soldering a wire or by placing a probe such as a thin
|
||||
needle. We consider this type of attack hard to perform on an object spinning at high speed. Possible remaining attack
|
||||
avenues may be to rotate an attack tool in sync with the mesh, or to use a laser or ion beam fired at the mesh to cut
|
||||
traces or carbonize parts of the substrate to create electrical connections. Encapsulating the mesh in a potting
|
||||
compound and shielding it with a metal enclosure as is common in traditional HSMs will significantly increase the
|
||||
complexity of such attacks.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Attacks on the rotation sensor}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -440,11 +430,9 @@ Instead of attacking the mesh in motion, an attacker may also try to first stop
|
|||
to falsify the rotor's MEMS accelerometer measurements. We can disregard electronic attacks on the sensor or the
|
||||
monitoring microcontroller because they would be no easier than attacking the mesh traces. What remains would be
|
||||
physical attacks of the accelerometer's sensing mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
MEMS accelerometers usually use a cantilever design, where a proof mass moves a cantilever whose precise position is
|
||||
measured electronically. A topic of recent academic interest have been acoustic attacks tampering with these
|
||||
mechanics~\cite{trippel2017}, but such attacks do not yield sufficient control to precisely falsify sensor readings.
|
||||
|
||||
A possible more invasive attack may be to first decapsulate the sensor MEMS using laser ablation synchronized with the
|
||||
device's rotation. Then, a fast-setting glue such as a cyanoacrylate could be deposited on the MEMS, locking the
|
||||
mechanism in place. This type of attack can be mitigated by mounting the accelerometer in a shielded location inside the
|
||||
|
|
@ -456,10 +444,10 @@ Besides trying to deactivate the tamper detection mesh, an electronic attack cou
|
|||
inside the stationary payload, or the communication link between rotor and payload. The link can be secured using a
|
||||
cryptographically secured protocol like one would use for wireless radio links along with a high-frequency heartbeat
|
||||
message. The alarm circuitry has to be designed such that it is entirely contained within the HSM's security envelope.
|
||||
Like in conventional HSMs it has to be built to either tolerate or detect environmental attacks using sensors for
|
||||
Like in conventional HSMs, it has to be built to either tolerate or detect environmental attacks using sensors for
|
||||
temperature, ionizing radiation, laser radiation, supply voltage variations, ultrasound or other vibration and gases or
|
||||
liquids. If a wireless link is used between the IHSM's rotor and stator, this link must be cryptographically secured.
|
||||
To prevent replay attacks this link must be bidirectional so link latency can be measured continuously.
|
||||
To prevent replay attacks link latency must continuously be measured, so this link must be bidirectional.
|
||||
% If it were unidirectional, an attacker could
|
||||
% act as a Man-in-the-Middle and replay the mesh's authenticated ``no alarm'' signal at slightly below real-time speed
|
||||
% (say at $\SI{99}{\percent}$ speed). The receiver would not be able to distinguish between this attack and ordinary
|
||||
|
|
@ -479,12 +467,12 @@ enough to carry out its function or else to reliably destory the payload during
|
|||
|
||||
As we elaboreated above, the mechanical component of an IHSM significantly increases the complexity of any successful
|
||||
attack even when implemented using only common, off-the-shelf parts. In view of this amplification of design security we
|
||||
have decided to validate our theoretical studies by implementing a prototype IHSM. The main engineering challenges we
|
||||
set out to solve in this prototype were:
|
||||
have decided to validate our theoretical studies by implementing a prototype IHSM (Figure~\ref{prototype_picture}). The
|
||||
main engineering challenges we set out to solve in this prototype were:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Fundamental mechanical design suitable for rapid prototyping that can withstand at least $\SI{500}{rpm}$.
|
||||
\item Automatic generation of security mesh PCB layouts for quick adaption to new form factors.
|
||||
\item The Fundamental mechanical design suitable for rapid prototyping that can withstand at least $\SI{500}{rpm}$.
|
||||
\item The Automatic generation of security mesh PCB layouts for quick adaption to new form factors.
|
||||
\item Non-contact power transmission from stator to rotor.
|
||||
\item Non-contact bidirectional data communication between stator and rotor.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
|
@ -495,22 +483,22 @@ We will outline our findings on these challenges one by one in the following par
|
|||
|
||||
We sized our prototype to have space for up to two full-size Raspberry Pi boards for an approximation of a traditional
|
||||
HSM's processing capabilities. We use printed circuit boards as the main structural material for the rotating part, and
|
||||
2020 aluminium extrusion for its mounting frame. Figure~\ref{proto_3d_design} shows the rotor's mechanical PCB designs
|
||||
in FreeCAD. The design uses a $\SI{6}{\milli\meter}$ brass tube as its shaft, which is already sufficiently narrow to
|
||||
pose a challenge to an attacker. The rotor is driven by a small hobby quadcopter motor. Our prototype incorporates a
|
||||
2020 aluminium extrusion for its mounting frame. Figure~\ref{fig_proto_mesh} shows the rotor's mechanical PCB designs.
|
||||
The design uses a $\SI{6}{\milli\meter}$ brass tube as its shaft, which is already sufficiently narrow to pose a
|
||||
challenge to an attacker. The rotor is driven by a small hobby quadcopter motor. Our prototype incorporates a
|
||||
functional PCB security mesh. As we observed previously, this mesh only needs to cover every part of the system once per
|
||||
revolution, so we designed the longituninal PCBs as narrow strips to save weight.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{PCB security mesh generation}
|
||||
|
||||
Our proof-of-concept security mesh covers a total of five interlocking PCBs (cf.\ Figure~\ref{mesh_gen_sample}). A sixth
|
||||
Our proof-of-concept security mesh covers a total of five interlocking mesh PCBs (Figure~\ref{mesh_gen_sample}). A sixth
|
||||
PCB contains the monitoring circuit and connects to these mesh PCBs. To speed up design iterations, we automated the
|
||||
generation of this security mesh using a plugin for the KiCAD EDA
|
||||
suite\footnote{\url{https://blog.jaseg.de/posts/kicad-mesh-plugin/}}. Figure~\ref{mesh_gen_viz} visualizes the mesh
|
||||
generation process. First, the target area is overlaid with a grid. Then, the algorithm produces a randomized tree
|
||||
covering the grid. Finally, individual mesh traces are then traced according to a depth-first search through this tree.
|
||||
We consider the quality of the plugin's output sufficient for practical applications. Along with FreeCAD's KiCAD StepUp
|
||||
plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design to production-ready PCB files.
|
||||
We consider the quality of the plugin's output sufficient for practical applications. Together with FreeCAD's KiCAD
|
||||
StepUp plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design to production-ready PCB files.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.35\textwidth}
|
||||
|
|
@ -524,8 +512,8 @@ plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design to pro
|
|||
\center
|
||||
\caption{Assembled mechanical prototype rotor (left) and stator (right) PCB components.}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\label{proto_3d_design}
|
||||
\caption{Our prototype IHSM's PCB security mesh design}
|
||||
\label{fig_proto_mesh}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
|
|
@ -543,8 +531,8 @@ plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design to pro
|
|||
\caption{Detail of a PCB produced with a generated mesh.}
|
||||
\label{mesh_gen_sample}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\label{mesh_gen_fig}
|
||||
\caption{Our automatic security mesh generation process}
|
||||
\label{mesh_gen_fig}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Power transmission through the rotating joint}
|
||||
|
|
@ -557,9 +545,9 @@ $\SI{100}{\kilo\baud}$ a transmission of a one-byte message in standard UART fra
|
|||
$\SI{100}{\micro\second}$ and yield an $\SI{1}{\percent}$ duty cycle. If we assume an optical or RF transmitter that
|
||||
requires $\SI{10}{\milli\ampere}$ of active current, this yields an average operating current of
|
||||
$\SI{100}{\micro\ampere}$. Reserving another $\SI{100}{\micro\ampere}$ for the monitoring circuit itself we arrive at an
|
||||
energy consumption of $\SI{1.7}{\ampere\hour\per\year}$ (Ampère hour per year).
|
||||
energy consumption of $\SI{1.7}{\ampere\hour}$ per year.
|
||||
|
||||
The annual energy consumption we calculated above is about equivalent to the capacity of a single CR123A lithium primary
|
||||
The annual energy consumption we calculated above is close to the capacity of a single CR123A lithium primary
|
||||
cell. Using several such cells or optimizing power consumption would thus easily yield several years of battery life.
|
||||
In our prototype we decided against using a battery to reduce rotor mass and balancing issues.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -571,11 +559,11 @@ that are fed into a large $\SI{33}{\micro\farad}$ ceramic buffer capacitor throu
|
|||
provides around $\SI{3.0}{\volt}$ at several tens of $\si{\milli\ampere}$ to the payload when illumination using either
|
||||
a $\SI{60}{\watt}$ incandescent light bulb or a flicker-free LED studio light of similar brightness\footnote{LED lights
|
||||
intended for room lighting exhibit significant flicker that can cause the monitoring circuit to reset. Incandescent
|
||||
lighting requires some care in shielding the IR data link from interference.}.
|
||||
lighting requires some care in shielding the data link from the light bulb's considerable infrared output.}.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Data transmission through the rotating joint}
|
||||
|
||||
Besides power transfer from stator to rotor we need a reliable, bidirectional data link to transmit mesh status and a
|
||||
Besides power transfer from stator to rotor, we need a reliable, bidirectional data link to transmit mesh status and a
|
||||
low-latency heartbeat signal. We chose to transport an $\SI{115}{\kilo\baud}$ UART signal through a simple IR link for a
|
||||
quick and robust solution. The link's transmitter directly drives a standard narrow viewing angle IR led through a
|
||||
transistor. The receiver has an IR PIN photodiode reverse-biased at $\frac{1}{2}V_\text{CC}$ feeding into a an
|
||||
|
|
@ -608,6 +596,7 @@ are shielded by the motor's body in the center of the PCB.
|
|||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Using MEMS accelerometers for braking detection}
|
||||
\label{sec_accel_meas}
|
||||
|
||||
Using the prototype from the previous section, we performed an evaluation of an \partnum{AIS1120} commercial automotive
|
||||
MEMS accelerometer as a braking sensor. The device is mounted inside our prototype at a radius of
|
||||
|
|
@ -694,7 +683,7 @@ blue, and theoretical behavior is shown in orange.
|
|||
\section{Conclusion}
|
||||
\label{sec_conclusion}
|
||||
|
||||
In this paper we introduced inertial hardware security modules (iHSMs), a novel concept for the construction of advanced
|
||||
In this paper we introduced Inertial Hardware Security Modules (iHSMs), a novel concept for the construction of advanced
|
||||
hardware security modules from simple components. We analyzed the concept for its security properties and highlighted
|
||||
its ability to significantly strengthen otherwise weak tamper detection barriers. We validated our design by creating a
|
||||
hardware prototype. In this prototype we have demonstrated practical solutions to the major electronics design
|
||||
|
|
@ -702,14 +691,16 @@ challenges: Data and power transfer through a rotating joint, and mechanized mes
|
|||
to perform several experiments to validate the rotary power and data links and the onboard accelerometer. Our
|
||||
measurements have shown that our proof-of-concept solar cell power link works well. Our simple IR data link already is
|
||||
sufficiently reliable for telemetry. Our experiments with the \partnum{AIS1120} off-the-shelf automotive accelerometer
|
||||
showed that this part is well-suited for braking detection in the range of rotation speed relevant to the
|
||||
IHSM scenario.
|
||||
showed that this part is well-suited for braking detection in the range of rotation speed relevant to the IHSM
|
||||
scenario.
|
||||
|
||||
Inertial HSMs offer a high level of security beyond what traditional techniques can offer. They allow the construction
|
||||
of devices secure against a wide range of practical attacks at prototype quantities and without 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 secure hardware.
|
||||
Overall, our findings validate the viability of IHSMs as an evolutionary step beyond traditional HSM technology. IHSMs
|
||||
offer a high level of security beyond what traditional techniques can offer even when built from simple components. They
|
||||
allow the construction of devices secure against a wide range of practical attacks in small quantities and without
|
||||
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 secure
|
||||
hardware.
|
||||
|
||||
\printbibliography[heading=bibintoc]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Binary file not shown.
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue