Slashdot Mirror
Stealthy Dopant-Level Hardware Trojans
DoctorBit writes "A team of researchers funded in part by the NSF has just published a paper in which they demonstrate a way to introduce hardware Trojans into a chip by altering only the dopant masks of a few of the chip's transistors. From the paper: 'Instead of adding additional circuitry to the target design, we insert our hardware Trojans by changing the dopant polarity of existing transistors. Since the modified circuit appears legitimate on all wiring layers (including all metal and polysilicon), our family of Trojans is resistant to most detection techniques, including fine-grain optical inspection and checking against "golden chips."' In a test of their technique against Intel's Ivy Bridge Random Number Generator (RNG) the researchers found that by setting selected flip-flop outputs to zero or one, 'Our Trojan is capable of reducing the security of the produced random number from 128 bits to n bits, where n can be chosen.' They conclude that 'Since the Trojan RNG has an entropy of n bits and [the original circuitry] uses a very good digital post-processing, namely AES, the Trojan easily passes the NIST random number test suite if n is chosen sufficiently high by the attacker. We tested the Trojan for n = 32 with the NIST random number test suite and it passed for all tests. The higher the value n that the attacker chooses, the harder it will be for an evaluator to detect that the random numbers have been compromised.'"
I would guess that an intelligence agency figured this out a few years ago. One that can plant moles at Intel. That's why they also want to remove rdrand from Linux.
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/13/09/10/1311247/linus-responds-to-rdrand-petition-with-scorn
I wonder if they also considered that the NIST random number test suite might also be compromised by the NSA...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
There are easy numeric methods for determining how random data is.
Actually, no. Technically speaking, there is no such thing as random data, only a random process. You can certainly test how random a data stream seems, but if the data source is a black box, you never really know.
From TFS:
Since the Trojan RNG has an entropy of n bits and [the original circuitry] uses a very good digital post-processing, namely AES, the Trojan easily passes the NIST random number test suite if n is chosen sufficiently high by the attacker. We tested the Trojan for n = 32 with the NIST random number test suite and it passed for all tests.
What if your black box is just feeding you encrypted bits of pi? You would never know, but the black box's maker could trivially reproduce your "random" numbers.
NSA? Probably not. The Chinese chip fab that has been known to have a third shift and has full access to masks and such? Certainly.
The NSA isn't the only agency wanting to know everything a person does.
All they need to do? It's already been done at the fab! Why else would this be coming out now? These researchers have been under a gag order for years and only now got bold enough to stand up to the NSA.
Opinions above are exaggerated for entertainment purposes only
If I were a disgruntled member of the intelligence industrial complex and knew that this was actually being done by a government agency, and I did not relish the thought of a Russian sabbatical, couldn't I surface the news by telling researcher friends of mine how to do it?
Yes, yes it is.
In security, you're trying to change the behavior of corporate drones, idiots, and people who are invested in the status quo. People use these papers as ammunition for that.
The drones will call your attack "theoretical" and "impractical" unless you spell out exactly how to do it, step by step. If they hadn't detailed exactly how to do it, the attitude would basically have been that nobody could possibly figure out the impossible complexity of weakening a REAL RNG. I mean, look at the self tests! Nobody could get around that! In fact, even people who weren't complete idiots might have guessed, at first glance, that the self tests would be hard to defeat, or that you couldn't do this hack without screwing up the chip.
Even with a detailed paper, they will probably be ignored until somebody actually does it in the field. If you wrote a one-pager that said "Warning! Somebody could alter the behavior of gates by tweaking the dopants", they would 1000 percent ignore it.
As for the verbose background information, it's standard in the field (although they went a bit heavy on it). It has zero cost, and readers in the field who don't need it simply skip it. So I don't know why you're getting so upset about it.
Please don't trash people's work in fields you don't even slightly understand.
Given Hanlon's razor, an accidental, rather than malicious, error in doping would be even more likely. If the chip were inadvertently doped incorrectly, it would pass visual inspections and even software tests without awareness of the defect. How many defective dice, not merely with RNGs but also with other circuits, are already in service due to inspection failures?
Although this paper shows how insidious a threat from a well-funded adversary might be, even more it shows the need for more comprehensive inspection mechanisms to discover misdoping which might go undetected by existing standard procedures.
BTW, the paper includes a well written and readable introduction to the context of the problem. Good job.
Sigh.
"Hello, Intel. Under the terms of this national security letter, you must change your verification software to ignore certain errors. The engineers who carry out this order must not reveal anything about this. Anyone who does will be subject to a term of incarceration not exceeding..."
Tell me why this would not happen.
Sure, it's obscure, except all our chips are being made in a country that is actively in an electroni
THE PEOPLE'S GLORIOUS REPUBLIC DENIES THESE CLAIMS.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Sabotage would be to make something stop working. The mentioned chips will work just fine, but their RNGs will be predictable. Only the ones who caused it know and will take advantage of it. Looks like a trojan to me.
Well, there goes the mod I plopped in, but...
1) Intel's high-end chip fabs are in Oregon, Arizona, California... not exactly close to Beijing. (They're still building some rather massive additions to their Ronler Acres fab up here in Oregon).
2) ARM chips, on the other hand (e.g. tablets and smartphone bits)? In that case I hereby petition Slashdot to introduce the "scary as fuck" mod.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?