Paper: Update with corrections from second read
This commit is contained in:
parent
7d573bfedf
commit
e18b67ae4b
3 changed files with 208 additions and 182 deletions
Binary file not shown.
|
|
@ -38,22 +38,25 @@
|
|||
\maketitle
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{abstract}
|
||||
In this paper, we introduce a novel countermeasure against physical attacks: Inertial hardware security modules (iHSMs).
|
||||
Conventional systems have in common that they try to detect attacks by crafting sensors responding to increasingly
|
||||
minute manipulations of the monitored security boundary or volume. Our approach is novel in that we reduce the
|
||||
sensitivity requirement of security meshes and other sensors and increase the complexity of any manipulations by
|
||||
rotating the security mesh or sensor at high speed---thereby presenting a moving target to an attacker. Attempts to stop
|
||||
the rotation are easily monitored with commercial MEMS accelerometers and gyroscopes. Our approach leads to a HSM that
|
||||
can easily be built from off-the-shelf parts by any university electronics lab, yet offers a level of security that is
|
||||
comparable to commercial HSMs. By building prototype hardware we have demonstrated solutions to the concept's
|
||||
engineering challenges.
|
||||
In this paper, we introduce a novel countermeasure against physical attacks: Inertial hardware security modules
|
||||
(iHSMs). Conventional systems have in common that their security requires the crafting of fine sensor structures
|
||||
that respond to minute manipulations of the monitored security boundary or volume. Our approach is novel in that we
|
||||
reduce the sensitivity requirement of security meshes and other sensors and increase the complexity of any
|
||||
manipulations by rotating the security mesh or sensor at high speed---thereby presenting a moving target to an
|
||||
attacker. Attempts to stop the rotation are easily monitored with commercial MEMS accelerometers and gyroscopes.
|
||||
Our approach leads to a HSM that can easily be built from off-the-shelf parts by any university electronics lab, yet
|
||||
offers a level of security that is comparable to commercial HSMs. We have built a proof of concept hardware
|
||||
prototype that demonstrates solutions to the concept's main engineering challenges. As part of this proof of
|
||||
concept, we have found that a system using a coarse security mesh made from commercial printed circuit boards and an
|
||||
automotive high g-force accelerometer already provides a useful level of security.
|
||||
\end{abstract}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Introduction}
|
||||
|
||||
While information security technology has matured a great deal in the last half century, physical security has barely
|
||||
changed. Given the right skills, physical access to a computer still often means full compromise. The physical
|
||||
security of modern server hardware hinges on what lock you put on the room it is in.
|
||||
While information security technology has matured a great deal in the last half century, physical security not kept up
|
||||
with the pace of the remainder of this industry. Given the right skills, physical access to a computer still often
|
||||
allows full compromise. The physical security of modern server hardware hinges on what lock you put on the room it is
|
||||
in.
|
||||
|
||||
Currently, servers and other computers are rarely physically secured as a whole. Servers sometimes have a simple lid
|
||||
switch and are put in locked ``cages'' inside guarded facilities. This usually provides a good compromise between
|
||||
|
|
@ -62,53 +65,56 @@ infrastructure, general-purpose and low-security servers are augmented with dedi
|
|||
co-processors such as trusted platform modules (TPMs) or hardware security modules (HSMs). Using a limited amount of
|
||||
trust in components such as the CPU, the larger system's security can then be reduced to that of its physically secured
|
||||
TPM~\cite{newman2020,frazelle2019,johnson2018}.
|
||||
|
||||
Like smartcards, TPMs rely on a modern IC being hard to tamper with. Shrinking things to the nanoscopic level to secure
|
||||
them against tampering is a good engineering solution for some years to come. However, in essence this is a type of
|
||||
security by obscurity: Obscurity here referring to the rarity of the equipment necessary to attack modern
|
||||
ICs~\cite{albartus2020,anderson2020}.
|
||||
|
||||
HSMs rely on a fragile foil with much larger-scale conductive traces being hard to remove intact. While we are certain
|
||||
that there still are many insights to be gained in both technologies, we wish to introduce a novel approach to sidestep
|
||||
the manufacturing issues of both and provide radically better security against physical attacks. Our core observation
|
||||
is that any cheap but coarse HSM technology can be made much more difficult to attack by moving it very quickly.
|
||||
In contrast to TPMs and Smartcards, HSMs rely on an active security barrier usually consisting of a fragile foil with
|
||||
conductive traces. These traces are much larger scale than a smart card IC's microscopic structures, and instead are
|
||||
designed to be very hard to remove intact. While we are certain that there still are many insights to be gained in both
|
||||
technologies, we wish to introduce a novel approach to sidestep the manufacturing issues of both and provide radically
|
||||
better security against physical attacks. Our core observation is that any cheap but coarse HSM technology can be made
|
||||
much more difficult to attack by moving it very quickly.
|
||||
|
||||
For example, consider an HSM as it is used in online credit card payment processing. Its physical security level is set
|
||||
by the structure size of its security mesh. An attack on its mesh might involve fine drill bits, needles, wires, glue,
|
||||
solder and lasers~\cite{drimer2008}. Now consider the same HSM mounted on a large flywheel. In addition to its usual
|
||||
defenses the HSM is now equipped with an accelerometer that it uses to verify that it is spinning at high speed. How
|
||||
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_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.
|
||||
defenses, this modified HSM is now equipped with an accelerometer that it uses to verify that it is spinning at high
|
||||
speed. How would an attacker approach this HSM? They would have to either slow down the rotation---which triggers the
|
||||
accelerometer's monitoring circuit---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_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:
|
||||
This paper contains the following contributions:
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item We present the \emph{Inertial HSM} concept. Inertial HSMs enable cost-effective small-scale production of
|
||||
\item We present the \emph{Inertial HSM} concept. Inertial HSMs enable cost effective, small scale production of
|
||||
highly secure 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.
|
||||
\item We present an analysis on the viability of using commodity MEMS accelerometers as braking sensors.
|
||||
% FIXME \item Measurement of the prototype HSM's susceptibility to various types of attack.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{prototype_pic2.jpg}
|
||||
\caption{The protoype as we used it to test power transfer and bidirectional communication between stator
|
||||
and rotor. In the picture, the prototype is missing the vertical security mesh struts connecting the circular top
|
||||
and bottom outer meshes that rotate around the stationary payload in the center.}
|
||||
\caption{The protoype as we used it to test power transfer and bidirectional communication between stator and rotor.
|
||||
This picture shows the proof of concept prototype's configuration that we used for accelerometer characterization
|
||||
(Section~\ref{sec_accel_meas}) without the vertical security mesh struts that connect the circular top and bottom
|
||||
outer meshes.}
|
||||
\label{prototype_picture}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
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}.
|
||||
In Section~\ref{sec_related_work}, we will give an overview of the state of the art in HSM physical security. 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 proof of concept hardware
|
||||
prototype that whose design we will elaborate in Section~\ref{sec_proto}. In Section~\ref{sec_accel_meas} we present our
|
||||
characterization of an automotive MEMS accelerometer IC as a rotation sensor in this proof of concept prototype. We
|
||||
conclude this paper with a general evaluation of our design in Section~\ref{sec_conclusion}.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Related work}
|
||||
\label{sec_related_work}
|
||||
|
|
@ -118,24 +124,24 @@ design in Section~\ref{sec_conclusion}.
|
|||
In this section, we will briefly explore the history of HSMs and the state of academic research on active tamper
|
||||
detection.
|
||||
|
||||
HSMs are an old technology tracing back decades in their electronic realization. Today's common approach of monitoring
|
||||
HSMs are an old technology that traces back decades in its electronic realization. Today's common approach of monitoring
|
||||
meandering electrical traces on a fragile foil that is wrapped around the HSM essentially transforms the security
|
||||
problem into the challenge to manufacture very fine electrical traces on a flexible foil~\cite{isaacs2013, immler2019,
|
||||
anderson2020}. There has been some research on monitoring the HSM's inside using e.g.\ electromagnetic
|
||||
radiation~\cite{tobisch2020, kreft2012} or ultrasound~\cite{vrijaldenhoven2004} but none of this research
|
||||
has found widespread adoption yet.
|
||||
radiation~\cite{tobisch2020, kreft2012} or ultrasound~\cite{vrijaldenhoven2004} but none of this research has found
|
||||
widespread adoption yet.
|
||||
|
||||
HSMs can be compared to physical seals~\cite{anderson2020}. Both are tamper evident devices. The difference is that a
|
||||
HSM continuously monitors itself whereas a physical seal only serves to record tampering and requires someone to examine
|
||||
it. This examination can be by eye in the field, but it can also be using complex equipment in a laboratory. An HSM in
|
||||
principle has to have this examination equipment built-in.
|
||||
it. This examination can be by eye in the field, but it can also be carried out in a laboratory using complex equipment.
|
||||
An HSM in 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 (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
|
||||
deployment. At the end of the seal's 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
|
||||
|
|
@ -146,16 +152,18 @@ reading, similar to an HSM. They are constructed from two components: A cable th
|
|||
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
|
||||
4758 HSM whose details are laid out in depth in~\cite{smith1998}. This HSM is an example of an industry-standard
|
||||
In~\cite{anderson2020}, Anderson gives a comprehensive overview on physical security. An example HSM that they cite is
|
||||
the IBM 4758 HSM whose details are laid out in depth in~\cite{smith1998}. This HSM is an example of an industry-standard
|
||||
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 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}.
|
||||
construction of a flexible mesh foil wrapped around the module's core. In~\cite{smith1998}, the authors state that 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}.
|
||||
|
||||
In~\cite{immler2019}, Immler et al. describe a HSM based on precise capacitance measurements of a mesh. In contrast to
|
||||
Shifting our focus from industry use to the academic state of the art, in~\cite{immler2019}, Immler et al. describe an
|
||||
HSM based on precise capacitance measurements of a security mesh, creating a PUF from the mesh. In contrast to
|
||||
traditional meshes, the mesh they use consists of a large number of individual traces (more than 30 in their example).
|
||||
Their concept promises a very high degree of protection. The main disadvantages of their concept are a limitation in
|
||||
covered area and component height, as well as the high cost of the advanced analog circuitry required for monitoring. A
|
||||
|
|
@ -167,39 +175,40 @@ around commodity WiFi hardware inside a conductive enclosure. In their design, a
|
|||
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 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.
|
||||
volume of the cavity will cause a significant change in its RF response. A core component of the work of Tobisch et
|
||||
al.~\cite{tobisch2020}\ is that they 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 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
|
||||
single chip. They theorize how an array of distributed RF transceivers can measure the physical properties of a potting
|
||||
compound that has been loaded with RF-reflective grains. In their concept, the RF response characterized by these
|
||||
transceivers is shaped by the precise three-dimensional distribution of RF-reflective grains within the potting
|
||||
compound.
|
||||
While Tobisch et al.~\cite{tobisch2020}\ approach the sensing frontend cost as their primary 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 single chip. They theorize how an array of distributed RF transceivers can measure the physical
|
||||
properties of a potting compound that has been loaded with RF-reflective grains. In their concept, the RF response
|
||||
characterized by these transceivers is shaped by the precise three-dimensional distribution of RF-reflective grains
|
||||
within the potting compound.
|
||||
|
||||
To the best of our knowledge, we are the the first to propose a mechanically moving HSM security barrier as part of a
|
||||
hardware security module. Most academic research concentrates on the issue of creating new, more sensitive security
|
||||
barriers for HSMs~\cite{immler2019} while commercial vendors concentrate on means to certify and cheaply manufacture
|
||||
these security barriers~\cite{drimer2008}. Our concept instead focuses on the issue of taking any existing, cheap
|
||||
low-performance security barrier and transforming it into a marginally more expensive but high-performance one. The
|
||||
low performance security barrier and transforming it into a marginally more expensive but high performance one. The
|
||||
closest to a mechanical HSM that we were able to find during our research is an 1988 patent~\cite{rahman1988} that
|
||||
describes a mechanism to detect tampering along a communication cable by enclosing the cable inside a conduit filled
|
||||
with pressurized gas.
|
||||
|
||||
\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.
|
||||
find any mentions of similar concepts either in academic literature or in patents. Thus, while we cannot give any
|
||||
guarantees, we seem likely to be 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.
|
||||
|
||||
Since the concept is primarily attractive for small-scale production and since cheaper mass-production alternatives are
|
||||
already commercially available, we have decided against applying for a patent and we wish to make it available to the
|
||||
general public without any restrictions on its use. We invite you to use it as you wish and to base your own work on our
|
||||
publications without any fees or commercial restrictions. Where possible, we ask you to cite this paper and attribute
|
||||
the inertial HSM concept to its authors.
|
||||
general public without any restrictions on its use. We invite you build on our work as you wish and to base your own
|
||||
work on our publications without any fees or commercial restrictions. Where possible, we ask you to cite this paper and
|
||||
attribute the inertial HSM concept to its authors.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Inertial HSM construction and operation}
|
||||
\label{sec_ihsm_construction}
|
||||
|
|
@ -211,10 +220,10 @@ to use it in tamper detection.
|
|||
The core questions in the design of an inertial HSM are the following:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item What \textbf{type of motion} to use: Rotation, pendulum, linear.
|
||||
\item How to construct the \textbf{tamper detection mesh}.
|
||||
\item How to \textbf{detect braking} of the HSM's movement.
|
||||
\item The \textbf{mechanical layout} of the HSM.
|
||||
\item What \textbf{type of motion} to use, such as rotation, pendulum motion, or linear motion.
|
||||
\item How to construct the \textbf{tamper detection sensor}.
|
||||
\item How to \textbf{detect braking} of the IHSM's movement.
|
||||
\item The \textbf{mechanical layout} of the system.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
We will approach these questions one by one in the following subsections.
|
||||
|
|
@ -233,48 +242,50 @@ 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 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
|
||||
consumption and mechanical stress, 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}). 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.
|
||||
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 what we
|
||||
call a \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 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.
|
||||
systems that have a fixed axis of rotation due to their 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 which motion our IHSM's security barrier shall perform, what remains is the actual implementation
|
||||
Once we have decided how our IHSM's security barrier should move, 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.
|
||||
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 practical level of
|
||||
security. On the other hand, in contrast to this industry focus, academic research has largely focused on ways to
|
||||
fabricate enclosures that embed characteristics of a Physically Uncloneable Function. 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 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
|
||||
and its monitoring circuit and keep the payload inside the 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 during the
|
||||
beginning of a manipulation attempt.
|
||||
The security mesh is a critical component in the IHSM's 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 at the first signs 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
|
||||
|
|
@ -297,21 +308,21 @@ In a spinning IHSM, an accelerometer mounted at a known radius with its axis poi
|
|||
acceleration. Centrifugal acceleration rises linearly with radius, and with the square of frequency: $a=\omega^2 r$. For
|
||||
a given target speed of rotation, the accelerometer's location has to be carefully chosen to maximize dynamic range. A
|
||||
key point here is that for rotation speeds between $500$ and $\SI{1000}{rpm}$, centrifugal acceleration already becomes
|
||||
very large at a radius of just a few $\si{\centi\meter}$. At $\SI{1000}{rpm}=\SI{17}{\hertz}$ at a
|
||||
$\SI{10}{\centi\meter}$ radius acceleration already is above $\SI{1000}{\meter\per\second}$ or $100\,g$. Off-axis
|
||||
performance of commercial accelerometers is usually in the order of $\SI{1}{\percent}$ so this large acceleration will
|
||||
feed through into all accelerometer axes, even those that are tangential to the rotation. It also means that we either
|
||||
have to place the accelerometer close to the axis or we are limited to a small selection of high-$g$ accelerometers
|
||||
mostly used in automotive applications.
|
||||
very large at a radius of just a few $\si{\centi\meter}$. At $\SI{1000}{rpm}\approx\SI{17}{\hertz}$ at a
|
||||
$\SI{10}{\centi\meter}$ radius acceleration already is above $\SI{1000}{\meter\per\second}$ or $100\,g$. While
|
||||
beneficial for security, this large acceleration leads to two practical constraints. First, off-axis performance of
|
||||
commercial accelerometers is usually in the order of $\SI{1}{\percent}$ so this large acceleration will feed through
|
||||
into all accelerometer axes, even those that are tangential to the rotation. Second, we either have to place the
|
||||
accelerometer close to the axis or we are limited to a small selection of high-$g$ accelerometers mostly used in
|
||||
automotive applications.
|
||||
|
||||
To evaluate the feasibility of accelerometers as tamper sensors we can use a simple benchmark: Let us assume that an
|
||||
IHSM is spinning at $\SI{1000}{rpm}$ and that we wish to detect any attempt to brake it below $\SI{500}{rpm}$. The
|
||||
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 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.
|
||||
difference in centrifugal acceleration that our accelerometer will have to detect then is a factor of
|
||||
$\frac{\omega_2^2}{\omega_1^2}=4$. If we choose our accelerometer's location to maximize its dynamic range, any
|
||||
commercial MEMS accelerometer should suffice for this degree 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-$g$ MEMS
|
||||
accelerometer for braking detection in our prototype IHSM.
|
||||
|
|
@ -320,17 +331,17 @@ 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.
|
||||
axis of rotation, an accelerometer on the rotating part that is 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.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics{concept_vis_one_axis.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Concept of a simple spinning inertial HSM. 1 - Shaft. 2 - Security mesh. 3 - Payload. 4 -
|
||||
\caption{Concept of a simple spinning Inertial HSM. 1 - Shaft. 2 - Security mesh. 3 - Payload. 4 -
|
||||
Accelerometer. 5 - Shaft penetrating security mesh.}
|
||||
\label{fig_schema_one_axis}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
|
@ -341,19 +352,19 @@ to flow through to the payload. In traditional boundary-sensing HSMs, cooling o
|
|||
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.
|
||||
Using longitudinal gaps in the mesh, 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}
|
||||
|
||||
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, 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.
|
||||
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
|
||||
traditional HSM. Only, they will either have to perform these attack steps with a tool that follows the HSMs rotation
|
||||
at high speed or they will first have 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.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{The Swivel Chair Attack}
|
||||
\label{sec_swivel_chair_attack}
|
||||
|
|
@ -408,7 +419,7 @@ variations of the shaft interface with increasing complexity.
|
|||
\caption{A second moving tamper detection mesh also enables more complex topographies.}
|
||||
\label{shaft_cm_a}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\caption{Mechanical countermeasures to attacks through or close to a rotating IHSM's shaft.}
|
||||
\caption{Mechanical countermeasures to attacks through or close to the shaft of a fixed-axis rotating IHSM.}
|
||||
\label{shaft_cm}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -430,7 +441,7 @@ 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
|
||||
MEMS accelerometers usually use a cantilever design in which 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
|
||||
|
|
@ -458,20 +469,22 @@ To prevent replay attacks link latency must continuously be measured, so this li
|
|||
\subsection{Fast and violent attacks}
|
||||
|
||||
A variation of the above attacks on the alarm circuitry is to simply destroy the part of the HSM that erases data in
|
||||
response to tampering before it can perform its job using a tool such as a large hammer or a gun. To mitigate this
|
||||
type of attack, the HSM's tamper response circuitry must be mechanically robust enough to withstand an attack for long
|
||||
enough to carry out its function or else to reliably destory the payload during an attack.
|
||||
response to tampering before it can perform its job using a tool such as a large hammer or a gun. To mitigate this type
|
||||
of attack, the HSM must be engineered to be either tough or brittle: Tough enough that the tamper response circuitry
|
||||
will reliably withstand any attack for long enough to carry out its function or brittle in a way that during any attack,
|
||||
the payload is reliably destroyed before the tamper response circuitry.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Prototype implementation}
|
||||
\section{Proof of Concept Prototype implementation}
|
||||
\label{sec_proto}
|
||||
|
||||
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 (Figure~\ref{prototype_picture}). The
|
||||
main engineering challenges we set out to solve in this prototype were:
|
||||
As we elaborated above, the mechanical component of an IHSM significantly increases the complexity of any 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 proof of concept prototype IHSM
|
||||
(Figure~\ref{prototype_picture}). The main engineering challenges we set out to solve in this proof of concept prototype
|
||||
were:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item The Fundamental mechanical design suitable for rapid prototyping that can withstand at least $\SI{500}{rpm}$.
|
||||
\item A 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.
|
||||
|
|
@ -481,22 +494,23 @@ We will outline our findings on these challenges one by one in the following par
|
|||
|
||||
\subsection{Mechanical design}
|
||||
|
||||
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{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.
|
||||
We sized our proof of concept prototype to have sufficient payload space for up to two full-size Raspberry Pi boards to
|
||||
approximate 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{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}
|
||||
|
||||
% FIXME censor link in peer-review version!
|
||||
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
|
||||
generation of this security mesh through 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.
|
||||
covering the grid. Finally, individual mesh traces are traced according to a depth-first search through this tree.
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -504,7 +518,7 @@ StepUp plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design
|
|||
\begin{subfigure}{0.35\textwidth}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[height=7cm]{proto_3d_design.jpg}
|
||||
\caption{The 3D CAD design of the prototype.}
|
||||
\caption{The 3D CAD design of the proof of concept prototype.}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\hfill
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.6\textwidth}
|
||||
|
|
@ -512,7 +526,7 @@ StepUp plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design
|
|||
\center
|
||||
\caption{Assembled mechanical prototype rotor (left) and stator (right) PCB components.}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\caption{Our prototype IHSM's PCB security mesh design}
|
||||
\caption{Our proof of concept prototype IHSM's PCB security mesh design}
|
||||
\label{fig_proto_mesh}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -520,9 +534,9 @@ StepUp plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design
|
|||
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{mesh_gen_viz.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Overview of the automatic security mesh generation process. 1 - the blob is the example target area. 2 - A
|
||||
grid is overlayed. 3 - Grid cells outside of the target area are removed. 4 - A random tree covering the remaining
|
||||
cells is generated. 5 - The mesh traces are traced along a depth-first walk of the tree. 6 - Result.}
|
||||
\caption{Overview of the automatic security mesh generation process. 1 - Example target area. 2 - Grid overlay.
|
||||
3 - Grid cells outside of the target area are removed. 4 - A random tree covering the remaining cells is
|
||||
generated. 5 - The mesh traces are traced along a depth-first walk of the tree. 6 - Result.}
|
||||
\label{mesh_gen_viz}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
|
||||
|
|
@ -535,44 +549,44 @@ StepUp plugin, this results in an efficient toolchain from mechanical CAD design
|
|||
\label{mesh_gen_fig}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Power transmission through the rotating joint}
|
||||
\subsection{Power transmission from stator to rotor}
|
||||
|
||||
The spinning mesh has its own autonomous monitoring circuit. This spinning monitoring circuit needs both power and data
|
||||
connectivity to the stator. To design the power link, we first have to estimate the monitoring circuit's power
|
||||
consumption. We base our calculation on the (conservative) assumption that the spinning mesh sensor should send its
|
||||
tamper status to the static monitoring circuit at least once every $T_\text{tx} = \SI{10}{\milli\second}$. At
|
||||
$\SI{100}{\kilo\baud}$ a transmission of a one-byte message in standard UART framing would take
|
||||
$\SI{100}{\kilo\baud}$, a transmission of a one-byte message in standard UART framing would take
|
||||
$\SI{100}{\micro\second}$ 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.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
This annual energy consumption is close to the capacity of a single CR123A lithium primary cell. Thus, by either using
|
||||
several such cells or by optimizing power consumption several years of battery life could easily be reached. In our
|
||||
proof of concept prototype we decided against using a battery to reduce rotor mass and balancing issues.
|
||||
|
||||
We also decided against mechanically complex solutions such as slip rings or electronically complex ones such as
|
||||
inductive power transfer. Instead, we chose a simple setup consisting of a stationary lamp pointing at several solar
|
||||
cells on the rotor. At the monitoring circuit's low power consumption, power transfer efficiency is irrelevant, so this
|
||||
cells on the rotor. At the monitoring circuit's low power consumption power transfer efficiency is irrelevant, so this
|
||||
solution is practical. Our system uses six series-connected solar cells mounted on the end of the cylindrical rotor
|
||||
that are fed into a large $\SI{33}{\micro\farad}$ ceramic buffer capacitor through a Schottky diode. This solution
|
||||
provides around $\SI{3.0}{\volt}$ at several tens of $\si{\milli\ampere}$ to the payload when illumination using either
|
||||
provides around $\SI{3.0}{\volt}$ at several tens of $\si{\milli\ampere}$ to the payload when illuminated 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 data link from the light bulb's considerable infrared output.}.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Data transmission through the rotating joint}
|
||||
\subsection{Data transmission between stator and rotor}
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
transistor. The receiver has an IR PIN photodiode reverse-biased at $\frac{1}{2}V_\text{CC}$ feeding into an
|
||||
\texttt{MCP6494} general purpose opamp configured as an $\SI{100}{\kilo\ohm}$ transimpedance amplifier. As shown in
|
||||
Figure \ref{photolink_schematic}, the output of this TIA is amplified one more time, before being squared up by a
|
||||
Figure \ref{photolink_schematic}, the output of this TIA is amplified one more time before being squared up by a
|
||||
comparator. Our design trades off stator-side power consumption for a reduction in rotor-side power consumption by
|
||||
using a narrow-angle IR led and photodiode on the rotor, and wide-angle components at a higher LED current on the
|
||||
stator. Figure~\ref{ir_tx_schema} shows the physical arrangement of both links. The links face opposite one another and
|
||||
are shielded by the motor's body in the center of the PCB.
|
||||
are shielded from one another by the motor's body in the center of the PCB.
|
||||
|
||||
% We used an \texttt{MCP6494} quad CMOS op-amp. At a specified $\SI{2}{\milli\ampere}$ current
|
||||
% consumption it is within our rotor's power budget, and its Gain Bandwidth Product of $\SI{7.5}{\mega\hertz}$ yields a
|
||||
|
|
@ -595,20 +609,28 @@ are shielded by the motor's body in the center of the PCB.
|
|||
\caption{IR data link implementation}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Evaluation}
|
||||
|
||||
The compoleted proof of concept hardware worked as intended. Both rotating power and data links worked well. As we
|
||||
expected, the mechanical design vibrated at higher speeds but despite these unintended vibrations we were able reach
|
||||
speeds in excess of $\SI{1000}{rpm}$ by clamping the device to the workbench. Even at high speeds, both the power link
|
||||
and the data links continued to function without issue.
|
||||
|
||||
\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
|
||||
Using the proof of concept 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
|
||||
$\SI{55}{\milli\meter}$ from the axis of rotation to the center of the device's package. The \partnum{AIS1120} provides
|
||||
a measurement range of $\pm 120\,g$. At its 14-bit resolution, one LSB corresponds to $15\,\mathrm{m}g$.
|
||||
|
||||
Our prototype IHSM uses a motor controller intended for use in RC quadcopters. In our experimental setup, we manually
|
||||
control this motor controller through an RC servo tester. We measure the devices rotation speed using a magnet fixed to
|
||||
the rotor and a reed switch held closeby by an articulating arm. The reed switch output is digitized using an USB logic
|
||||
analyzer at a sampling rate of $\SI{100}{\mega\hertz}$. We calculcate rotation frequency as a $\SI{1}{\second}$ running
|
||||
average over debounced interval lengths of this captured signal\footnote{A regular frequency counter or commercial
|
||||
tachometer would have been easier, but were not available in our limited COVID-19 home office lab.}.
|
||||
control this motor controller through an RC servo tester. In our experiments we externally measured the device's speed
|
||||
of rotation using a magnet fixed to the rotor and a reed switch held close. The reed switch output is digitized using an
|
||||
USB logic analyzer at a sampling rate of $\SI{100}{\mega\hertz}$. We calculcate rotation frequency as a
|
||||
$\SI{1}{\second}$ running average over debounced interval lengths of this captured signal\footnote{A regular frequency
|
||||
counter or commercial tachometer would have been easier, but neither was available in our limited COVID-19 home office
|
||||
lab.}.
|
||||
|
||||
The accelerometer is controlled from the \partnum{STM32} microcontroller on the rotor of our IHSM prototype platform.
|
||||
Timed by an external quartz, the microcontroller samples accelerometer readings at $\SI{10}{\hertz}$. Readings are
|
||||
|
|
@ -638,24 +660,29 @@ and scale error is its slope. We then apply this correction to all captured data
|
|||
Despite its simplicity, this approach already leads to a good match of measurements and theory modulo a small part of
|
||||
the device's offset remaining. At high speeds of rotation this remaining offset does not have an appreciable impact, but
|
||||
due to the quadratic nature of centrifugal acceleration at low speeds it causes a large relative error of up to
|
||||
$\SI{10}{\percent}$ (at $\SI{95}{rpm}$).
|
||||
$\SI{10}{\percent}$ at $\SI{95}{rpm}$.
|
||||
|
||||
After offset and scale correction, we applied a low-pass filter to our data. The graphs show both raw and filtered data.
|
||||
Raw data contains significant harmonic content. This content is due to vibrations in our prototype. FFT analysis shows
|
||||
that this harmonic content is a clean intermodulation product of the accelerometers sampling rate and the speed of
|
||||
rotation with no other visible artifacts.
|
||||
Raw data contains significant harmonic content. This content is due to vibrations in our prototype as well as gravity
|
||||
since we tested our proof of concept prototype lying down, with its shaft pointing sideways. FFT analysis shows that
|
||||
this harmonic content is a clean intermodulation product of the accelerometers sampling rate and the speed of rotation
|
||||
with no other visible artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Figure~\ref{fig-acc-theory} shows a plot of our measurement results against frequency. Data points are shown in dark
|
||||
blue, and theoretical behavior is shown in orange.
|
||||
blue, and theoretical behavior is shown in orange. From our measurements we can conclude that an accelerometer is a good
|
||||
choice for an IHSM's braking sensor. A simple threshold set according to the sensor's calculated expected centrifugal
|
||||
force should be sufficient to reliably detect manipulation attempts without resulting in false positives. Periodic
|
||||
controlled changes in the IHSM's speed of rotation allow an offset and scale calibration of the accelerometer on the
|
||||
fly, without stopping the rotor.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\center
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{../../prototype/sensor-analysis/fig-acc-theory-meas-run50.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{Centrifugal acceleration versus angular frequency in theory and in our experiments. Experimental
|
||||
measurements are shown after correction for device-specific offset and scale error. As is evident, our measurements
|
||||
agree very well with our theoretical results. Above \SI{300}{rpm}, the relative acceleration error was consistently
|
||||
below $\SI{0.5}{\percent}$. Below $\SI{300}{rpm}$, residual offset error remaining after our first-order corrections
|
||||
has a strong impact ($0.05\,g$ absolute or $8\%$ relative at $\SI{95}{rpm}$.}
|
||||
measurements are shown after correction for device-specific offset and scale error. Our measurements
|
||||
showed good agreement with our theoretical results. Above \SI{300}{rpm}, the relative acceleration error was consistently
|
||||
below $\SI{0.5}{\percent}$. Below $\SI{300}{rpm}$, the residual offset error that remains after our first-order
|
||||
corrections has a strong impact ($0.05\,g$ absolute or $8\%$ relative at $\SI{95}{rpm}$.)}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-theory}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -664,7 +691,7 @@ blue, and theoretical behavior is shown in orange.
|
|||
\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, leading to invalid measurements.}
|
||||
intervals when we manually adjusted speed.}
|
||||
\label{fig-acc-steps}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
\hfill
|
||||
|
|
@ -672,8 +699,8 @@ blue, and theoretical behavior is shown in orange.
|
|||
\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 $\SIrange{3}{18}{\hertz}$
|
||||
rotation frequency due to device vibration are clearly visible.}
|
||||
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}
|
||||
|
|
@ -686,21 +713,20 @@ blue, and theoretical behavior is shown in orange.
|
|||
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
|
||||
challenges: Data and power transfer through a rotating joint, and mechanized mesh generation. We have used our prototype
|
||||
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.
|
||||
proof of concept hardware prototype. In this prototype we have demonstrated practical solutions to the major electronics
|
||||
design challenges: Data and power transfer through a rotating joint, and mechanized mesh generation. We have used our
|
||||
prototype 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 and that our simple IR data link
|
||||
already is sufficiently reliable for telemetry. Our experiments with an \partnum{AIS1120} automotive MEMS accelerometer
|
||||
showed that this part is well-suited for braking detection in the range of rotation speed relevant to the IHSM scenario.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
computing hardware inside the HSM. We hope that this simple construction will stimulate academic research into (more)
|
||||
secure hardware.
|
||||
|
||||
\printbibliography[heading=bibintoc]
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Binary file not shown.
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue