300 lines
18 KiB
TeX
300 lines
18 KiB
TeX
\documentclass[10pt,journal,a4paper]{IEEEtran}
|
|
\usepackage[english]{babel}
|
|
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
|
|
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
|
|
\usepackage[
|
|
backend=biber,
|
|
style=numeric,
|
|
natbib=true,
|
|
url=false,
|
|
doi=true,
|
|
eprint=false
|
|
]{biblatex}
|
|
\addbibresource{rotohsm.bib}
|
|
\usepackage{amssymb,amsmath}
|
|
\usepackage{listings}
|
|
\usepackage{eurosym}
|
|
\usepackage{wasysym}
|
|
\usepackage{amsthm}
|
|
\usepackage{tabularx}
|
|
\usepackage{multirow}
|
|
\usepackage{multicol}
|
|
\usepackage{tikz}
|
|
\usepackage{mathtools}
|
|
\DeclarePairedDelimiter{\ceil}{\lceil}{\rceil}
|
|
\DeclarePairedDelimiter{\paren}{(}{)}
|
|
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{arrows}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{chains}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{backgrounds}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{calc}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.markings}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.pathreplacing}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{fit}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{patterns}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{positioning}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{shapes}
|
|
|
|
\usepackage[binary-units]{siunitx}
|
|
\DeclareSIUnit{\baud}{Bd}
|
|
\DeclareSIUnit{\year}{a}
|
|
\usepackage{hyperref}
|
|
\usepackage{tabularx}
|
|
\usepackage{commath}
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx,color}
|
|
\usepackage{ccicons}
|
|
\usepackage{subcaption}
|
|
\usepackage{float}
|
|
\usepackage{footmisc}
|
|
\usepackage{array}
|
|
\usepackage[underline=false]{pgf-umlsd}
|
|
\usetikzlibrary{calc}
|
|
%\usepackage[pdftex]{graphicx,color}
|
|
\usepackage{epstopdf}
|
|
\usepackage{pdfpages}
|
|
\usepackage{minted} % pygmentized source code
|
|
|
|
\renewcommand{\floatpagefraction}{.8}
|
|
\newcommand{\degree}{\ensuremath{^\circ}}
|
|
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{>{\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
|
|
|
|
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
|
|
\fancyhf{}
|
|
\fancyfoot[C]{\thepage}
|
|
\newcommand{\includenotebook}[2]{
|
|
\fancyhead[C]{Included Jupyter notebook: #1}
|
|
\includepdf[pages=1,
|
|
pagecommand={\thispagestyle{fancy}\section{#1}\label{#2_notebook}}
|
|
]{resources/#2.pdf}
|
|
\includepdf[pages=2-,
|
|
pagecommand={\thispagestyle{fancy}}
|
|
]{resources/#2.pdf}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\begin{document}
|
|
|
|
\title{Tech Report: Inerial HSMs Thwart Advanced Physical Attacks}
|
|
\author{\IEEEauthorblockN{
|
|
Jan Sebastian Götte\IEEEauthorrefmark{1}\IEEEauthorrefmark{2} \and
|
|
Björn Scheuermann\IEEEauthorrefmark{1}\IEEEauthorrefmark{2}
|
|
}\\
|
|
\IEEEauthorblockA{
|
|
\IEEEauthorrefmark{1}Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und Gesellschaft (HIIG)\\
|
|
\IEEEauthorrefmark{2}Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin\\
|
|
\texttt{\textbf{\small goette@jaseg.de}}, \texttt{\textbf{\small scheuermann@informatik.hu-berlin.de}}
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
\date{2021-01-05}
|
|
\maketitle
|
|
|
|
\section*{Abstract}
|
|
|
|
In this tech report, 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.
|
|
|
|
This tech report is the abridged version of our forthcoming paper.
|
|
|
|
\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.
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
physical security and ease of maintenance. To handle highly sensitive data in applications such as banking or public key
|
|
infrastructure, general-purpose and low-security servers are augmented with dedicated, physically secure cryptographic
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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. 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.
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
conclude this paper with a general evaluation of our concept in Section~\ref{sec_conclusion}.
|
|
|
|
\section{Related work}
|
|
\label{sec_related_work}
|
|
% summaries of research papers on HSMs. I have not found any actual prior art on anything involving mechanical motion
|
|
% beyond ultrasound.
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
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 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
|
|
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}.
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
\section{Inertial HSM construction and operation}
|
|
\label{sec_ihsm_construction}
|
|
|
|
Mechanical motion has been proposed as a means of making things harder to see with the human eye~\cite{haines2006} and is
|
|
routinely used in military applications to make things harder to hit~\cite{terdiman2013} but we seem to be the first to
|
|
use it in tamper detection. If we consider different ways of moving an HSM to make it harder to tamper with, we find
|
|
that making it spin has several advantages.
|
|
|
|
First, the HSM has to move fairly fast. If any point of the HSM's tamper sensing mesh moves slow enough for a human to
|
|
follow, it becomes a weak spot. E.g.\ in a linear pendulum motion, the pendulum becomes stationary at its apex. Second,
|
|
a spinning HSM is compact compared to alternatives like an HSM on wheels. Finally, rotation leads to easily predictable
|
|
accelerometer measurements. A beneficial side-effect of spinning the HSM is that if the axis of rotation is within the
|
|
HSM itself, an attacker trying to follow the motion would have to rotate around the same axis. Their tangential linear
|
|
velocity would rise linearly with the radius from the axis of rotation, which allows us to limit the approximate maximum
|
|
size and mass of an attacker using an assumption on tolerable centrifugal force. In this consideration the axis of
|
|
rotation is a weak spot, but that can be mitigated using multiple nested layers of protection.
|
|
|
|
\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 -
|
|
Accelerometer. 5 - Shaft penetrating security mesh.}
|
|
\label{fig_schema_one_axis}
|
|
\end{figure}
|
|
|
|
In a rotating reference frame, centrifugal force is proportional to the square of angular velocity and proportional to
|
|
distance from the axis of rotation. We can exploit this fact to create a sensor that detects any disturbance of the
|
|
rotation by placing a linear accelerometer at some distance from the axis of rotation. During constant rotation, after
|
|
subtracting gravity both acceleration tangential to the rotation and along the axis of rotation will be zero.
|
|
Centrifugal acceleration will be constant.
|
|
|
|
Large centrifugal acceleration at high speeds poses the engineering challenge of preventing the whole thing from flying
|
|
apart, but it also creates an obstacle to any attacker trying to manipulate the sensor. We do not need to move the
|
|
entire contents of the HSM. It suffices if we move the tamper detection barrier around a stationary payload. This
|
|
reduces the moment of inertia of the moving part and it means we can use cables for payload power and data. Even at
|
|
moderate speeds above $\SI{500}{rpm}$, an attack would have to be carried out using a robot.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Mechanical layout}
|
|
|
|
Thinking about the concrete construction of our mechanical HSM, the first challenge is mounting both mesh and payload on
|
|
a single shaft. The simplest way we found to mount a stationary payload inside of a spinning security mesh is a hollow
|
|
shaft. The payload can be mounted on a fixed rod threaded through this hollow shaft along with wires for power and
|
|
data. The shaft is a weak spot of the system, but this weak spot can be alleviated through either careful construction
|
|
or a second layer of rotating meshes with a different axis of rotation. Configurations that do not use a hollow-shaft
|
|
motor are possible, but may require additional bearings to keep the stator from vibrating.
|
|
|
|
The next design choice we have to make is the physical structure of the security mesh. The spinning mesh must be
|
|
designed to cover the entire surface of the payload, but compared 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.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Spinning mesh power and data transmission}
|
|
|
|
On the electrical side, the idea of a security mesh spinning at more than $\SI{500}{rpm}$ leaves us with a few
|
|
implementation challenges. Since the spinning mesh must be monitored for breaks or short circuits continuously, we need
|
|
both a power supply for the spinning monitoring circuit and a data link to the stator.
|
|
|
|
We think that a bright lamp shining at a rotating solar panel is a good starting point. In contrast to e.g.\ slip
|
|
rings, this setup is mechanically durable at high speeds and it also provides reasonable output power. A battery may not
|
|
provide a useful lifetime without power-optimization. Likewise, an energy harvesting setup may not provide enough
|
|
current to supply peak demand.
|
|
|
|
Since the monitoring circuit uses little current, power transfer efficiency is not important. On the other hand, cost
|
|
may be a concern in a production device. Here it may prove worthwhile to replace the solar cell setup with an extra
|
|
winding on the rotor of the BLDC motor driving the spinning mesh. This motor is likely to be a custom part, so adding
|
|
an extra winding is unlikely to increase cost significantly. More traditional inductive power transfer may also be an
|
|
option if it can be integrated into the mechanical design.
|
|
|
|
\begin{figure}
|
|
\center
|
|
\includegraphics{ir_tx_schema.pdf}
|
|
\caption{Example of a bidirectional IR communication link between rotor and stator, view along axis of rotation. 1
|
|
- Rotor base plate. 2 - Stator base plate. 3 - Motor. 4 - receiver PIN photodiode. 5 - transmitter IR LED.}
|
|
\label{ir_tx_schema}
|
|
\end{figure}
|
|
|
|
Besides power, the data link between spinning mesh and payload is critical to the HSM's design. This link is used to
|
|
transmit the occassional status report along with a low-latency alarm trigger (``heartbeat'') signal from mesh to payload.
|
|
A simple infrared optical link as shown in Figure~\ref{ir_tx_schema} may be a good solution for this purpose.
|
|
|
|
\section{Conclusion}
|
|
|
|
\label{sec_conclusion} To conclude, in this tech report we introduced inertial hardware security modules (iHSMs), a
|
|
novel concept for the construction of highly secure hardware security modules from inexpensive, commonly available
|
|
parts. We elaborated the engineering considerations underlying a practical implementation of this concept.
|
|
|
|
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. We
|
|
hope that this simple construction will stimulate academic research into secure hardware.
|
|
|
|
\printbibliography[heading=bibintoc]
|
|
\appendix
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Patents and licensing}
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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. This paper itself is licensed CC-BY-SA (see below). As for the
|
|
inertial HSM concept, 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.
|
|
|
|
\center{
|
|
\center{\ccbysa}
|
|
|
|
\center{This work is licensed under a Creative-Commons ``Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International'' license. The
|
|
full text of the license can be found at:}
|
|
|
|
\center{\url{https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/}}
|
|
|
|
\center{For alternative licensing options, source files, questions or comments please contact the authors.}
|
|
|
|
\center{This is version \texttt{\input{version.tex}\unskip} generated on \today. Once the full paper has been
|
|
published, this project's git repository will be available at:}
|
|
|
|
\center{\url{https://git.jaseg.de/rotohsm.git}}
|
|
}
|
|
\end{document}
|