Screening for counterfeit electronic parts

Sood, Bhanu; Das, Diganta; Pecht, Michael

doi:10.1007/s10854-011-0500-0

Cited by 25 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, similarly to how DNA is used as forensic evidence in criminal proceedings, DNA marking technologies involve tagging a label or the part itself with a unique botanical DNA compound, which can then be later authenticated via a secure server, and is virtually impossible to duplicate . Advances have also been made in testing technologies ranging from visual inspections to microscopy, X‐ray inspection, and die inspection, although some of these methods can be destructive . The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has a test laboratory standards development committee (G‐19A) that has been developing a test methods standard specific to electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts that has incorporated guidance for conducting a risk assessment and mitigating actions commensurate with the identified risk.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(13) Advances have also been made in testing technologies ranging from visual inspections to microscopy, X-ray inspection, and die inspection, although some of these methods can be destructive. (16) The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has a test laboratory standards development committee (G-19A) that has been developing a test methods standard specific to electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts that has incorporated guidance for conducting a risk assessment and mitigating actions commensurate with the identified risk. It is anticipated that the standard will be published before the end of 2015.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Traceability and Risk Analysis Strategies for Addressing Counterfeit Electronics in Supply Chains for Complex Systems

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the microelectronics industry, there is a growing concern regarding the introduction of counterfeit electronic parts into the supply chain. Even though this problem is widespread, there have been limited attempts to implement risk-based approaches for testing and supply chain management. Supply chain risk management tends to focus on the highly visible disruptions of the supply chain instead of the covert entrance of counterfeits; thus counterfeit risk is difficult to mitigate. This article provides an overview of the complexities of the electronics supply chain, and highlights some gaps in risk assessment practices. In particular, this article calls for enhanced traceability capabilities to track and trace parts at risk through various stages of the supply chain. Placing the focus on risk-informed decision making through the following strategies is needed, including prioritization of high-risk parts, moving beyond certificates of conformance, incentivizing best supply chain management practices, adoption of industry standards, and design and management for supply chain resilience.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traceability and Risk Analysis Strategies for Addressing Counterfeit Electronics in Supply Chains for Complex Systems

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several methods of hardware identification are described in [12, 13], including incoming inspection, which refers to shipping conditions. One can also use an external visual inspection to find labels, or use X‐ray to identify the contents of a package [14].…”

Section: Hardware Identificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…‘Counterfeiting’ is a major problem for the microelectronics industry. Basically three types of counterfeiting exist [12]. The first is ‘relabelling’.…”

Section: Threat Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey of hardware protection of design data for integrated circuits and intellectual properties

Colombier

Bossuet

2014

IET Computers & Digital Techniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the current situation regarding design protection in the microelectronics industry. Over the past ten years, the designers of integrated circuits and intellectual properties have faced increasing threats including counterfeiting, reverse-engineering and theft. This is now a critical issue for the microelectronics industry, mainly for fabless designers and intellectual properties designers. Coupled with increasing pressure to decrease the cost and increase the performance of integrated circuits, the design of a secure, efficient, lightweight protection scheme for design data is a serious challenge for the hardware security community. However, several published works propose different ways to protect design data including functional locking, hardware obfuscation, and IC/IP identification. This paper presents a survey of academic research on the protection of design data. It concludes with the need to design an efficient protection scheme based on several properties.

show abstract

“…Current methodology for identication of counterfeit ICs involves visual inspection by optical microscopy with a skilled operator to check for signs of tampering. A list of common methods is given by Sood et al 6 This list includes more advanced techniques, for example X-ray imaging to detect die shape and size irregularities, and X-ray uorescence to detect usage of non-qualied materials (metals) in lead-solder coatings (e.g., for 'tinning' of leads). While effective, these methods are time-consuming and rely on the knowledge and experience of expert technicians to perform testing and to interpret the results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of counterfeit electronic components through ambient mass spectrometry and chemometrics

Pfeuffer

Caldwell

Shelley

et al. 2014

Analyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last several years, illicit electronic components have been discovered in the inventories of several distributors and even installed in commercial and military products. Illicit or counterfeit electronic components include a broad category of devices that can range from the correct unit with a more recent date code to lower-specification or non-working systems with altered names, manufacturers and date codes. Current methodologies for identification of counterfeit electronics rely on visual microscopy by expert users and, while effective, are very time-consuming. Here, a plasma-based ambient desorption/ionization source, the flowing atmospheric pressure afterglow (FAPA) is used to generate a mass-spectral fingerprint from the surface of a variety of discrete electronic integrated circuits (ICs). Chemometric methods, specifically principal component analysis (PCA) and the bootstrapped error-adjusted single-sample technique (BEAST), are used successfully to differentiate between genuine and counterfeit ICs. In addition, chemical and physical surface-removal techniques are explored and suggest which surface-altering techniques were utilized by counterfeiters.

show abstract

Screening for counterfeit electronic parts

Cited by 25 publications

References 4 publications

Traceability and Risk Analysis Strategies for Addressing Counterfeit Electronics in Supply Chains for Complex Systems

Traceability and Risk Analysis Strategies for Addressing Counterfeit Electronics in Supply Chains for Complex Systems

Survey of hardware protection of design data for integrated circuits and intellectual properties

Detection of counterfeit electronic components through ambient mass spectrometry and chemometrics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About