2017 18th IEEE Latin American Test Symposium (LATS) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/latw.2017.7906747
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of fault attack detection on SRAM-based FPGAs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The percentage of undetected errors was used to evaluate the error detection capability. In [14], the fault injection results at the configuration memory of a SRAM-based FPGA with different detection mechanisms were divided into four categories: detected unrecoverable error (DUE), silent data corruption (SDC), functional interruption (SEFI) and successful completion (OK). The ratio of each category was discussed and used to evaluate different detection mechanisms.…”
Section: A Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The percentage of undetected errors was used to evaluate the error detection capability. In [14], the fault injection results at the configuration memory of a SRAM-based FPGA with different detection mechanisms were divided into four categories: detected unrecoverable error (DUE), silent data corruption (SDC), functional interruption (SEFI) and successful completion (OK). The ratio of each category was discussed and used to evaluate different detection mechanisms.…”
Section: A Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the cryptographic circuit which is implemented with the countermeasures, we use the security factor to quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of the countermeasures, i.e., the security of the cryptographic circuit. The security factor denoted by γ quantifies the difference between the actual amount of information leakage and the theoretical amount of information leakage, as shown in (14).…”
Section: B Security Factormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While two or three redundant copies of the design work correctly, errors will be masked and the output of the block will be correct [4]. In [22], many approaches are used to detect a laser SEU faults for LEON3 on SRAM-based FPGA with the integration of several fault countermeasure techniques, the results obtained show that the modular triplication with single voter is the best one to mask errors. In [23], authors announced that a TMR presents a portable and robust solution.…”
Section: A Principle Of Tmrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With respect to the fault duration and intensity, the injected faults can be classified into permanent, persistent, and transient, and into single-bit and multi-bit faults [21]. To resist FIA, countermeasures such as fault detection [5] and hardware redundancy have been explored [14]. However, it is hard to evaluate the effectiveness of the countermeasures until the chip is attacked.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The fault analysis and evaluation analyze the faulty cases of the circuit designs and quantitatively report the performance of the designs against FIAs. The number of faulty outputs caused by FIA was widely used as the evaluation metric [2,5,7]. The information-theory-based method was also proposed to evaluate the security of the encryption systems under DFA [8,28].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%