journal article·2021-02-23

Satisfiability Attack-Resistant Camouflaged Two-Dimensional Heterostructure Devices

Akshay Wali, Shamik Kundu, Andrew J. Arnold, Guangwei Zhao, Kanad Basu, Saptarshi Das

ACS Nano· Volume 15· Issue 2
Publisher page

Abstract

Reverse engineering (RE) is one of the major security threats to the semiconductor industry due to the involvement of untrustworthy parties in an increasingly globalized chip manufacturing supply chain. RE efforts have already been successful in extracting device level functionalities from an integrated circuit (IC) with very limited resources. Camouflaging is an obfuscation method that can thwart such RE. Existing work on IC camouflaging primarily involves transformable interconnects and/or covert gates where variation in doping and dummy contacts hide the circuit structure or build cells that look alike but have different functionalities. Emerging solutions, such as polymorphic gates based on a giant spin Hall effect and Si nanowire field effect transistors (FETs), are also promising but add significant area overhead and are successfully decamouflaged by the satisfiability solver (SAT)-based RE techniques. Here, we harness the properties of two-dimensional (2D) transition-metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) including MoS2, MoSe2, MoTe2, WS2, and WSe2 and their optically transparent transition-metal oxides (TMOs) to demonstrate area efficient camouflaging solutions that are resilient to SAT attack and automatic test pattern generation attacks. We show that resistors with resistance values differing by 5 orders of magnitude, diodes with variable turn-on voltages and reverse saturation currents, and FETs with adjustable conduction type, threshold voltages, and switching characteristics can be optically camouflaged to look exactly similar by engineering TMO/TMD heterostructures, allowing hardware obfuscation of both digital and analog circuits. Since this 2D heterostructure devices family is intrinsically camouflaged, NAND/NOR/AND/OR gates in the circuit can be obfuscated with significantly less area overhead, allowing 100% logic obfuscation compared to only 5% for complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS)-based camouflaging. Finally, we demonstrate that the largest benchmarking circuit from ISCAS’85, comprised of more than 4000 logic gates when obfuscated with the CMOS-based technique, is successfully decamouflaged by SAT attack in <40 min; whereas, it renders to be invulnerable even in more than 10 h when camouflaged with 2D heterostructure devices, thereby corroborating our hypothesis of high resilience against RE. Our approach of connecting material properties to innovative devices to secure circuits can be considered as a one of a kind demonstration, highlighting the benefits of cross-layer optimization.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Memory and Neural Computing · Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning · Ferroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Electrical Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080, United States

Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States

Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States

Materials Research Institute, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States

References (66)

Show source-provided references
1. Tehranipoor M. · 2011
2. 10.1145/275556310.1145/2755563 ↗
3. 10.1109/TETC.2013.229491810.1109/TETC.2013.2294918 ↗
4. Torrance R. · 2009 · 5747 · 363
5. Torrance, R.; James, D. The State-of-the-Art in Semiconductor Reverse Engineering. Proceedings from the 48th Design Automation Conference 2011, San Diego, CA, June, 2011; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, 2011; pp 333–338.10.1145/2024724.2024805 ↗
6. James, R. Intel’s 22-nm Trigate Transistors Exposed. http://chipworksrealchips.blogspot.com/2012/04/intels-22-nm-trigate-transistors.html (Accessed 2021-01-21)
7. Rajendran, J.; Sam, M.; Sinanoglu, O.; Karri, R. Security Analysis of Integrated Circuit Camouflaging. Proceedings from the 2013 ACM SIGSAC conference on Computer and Communications Security, Berlin, Germany, November, 2013; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, 2013; pp 709–720.10.1145/2508859.2516656 ↗
8. El Massad, M.; Garg, S.; Tripunitara, M. V. Integrated Circuit (IC) Decamouflaging: Reverse Engineering Camouflaged ICs within Minutes. In Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), 22nd ed; The Internet Society: San Diego, 2015; pp 1–14.10.14722/ndss.2015.23218 ↗
9. Collantes, M. I. M.; El Massad, M.; Garg, S. Threshold-Dependent Camouflaged Cells to Secure Circuits against Reverse Engineering Attacks. Proceedings from the IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI, Pittsburgh, PA, July 11–13, 2016; IEEE: New York: IEEE, 2016; pp 443–448.
10. Erbagci, B.; Erbagci, C.; Akkaya, N. E. C.; Mai, K. A Secure Camouflaged Threshold Voltage Defined Logic Family. Proceedings from the 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware Oriented Security and Trust, McLean, VA, May 3–5, 2016; IEEE: New York, 2016; pp 229–235.10.1109/HST.2016.7495587 ↗
11. Iyengar, A.; Ghosh, S. Threshold Voltage-Defined Switches for Programmable Gates. arXiv (Cryptography and Security), December 4, 2015, 1512.01581, ver. 1. https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.01581v1 (accessed 2021-01-21).
12. Becker G. T. · 2013 · 8086 · 197
13. Chow, L.W.; Clark, W. M., Jr; Baukus, J. P., Covert Transformation of Transistor Properties as a Circuit Protection Method. US 7217977 B2, May 15, 2007.
14. Shamsi, K.; Li, M.; Meade, T.; Zhao, Z.; Pan, D. Z.; Jin, Y. Cyclic Obfuscation for Creating Sat-Unresolvable Circuits. Proceedings from the Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI 2017, Alberta, Banff, Canada, May, 2017; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, 2017; pp 173–178.10.1145/3060403.3060458 ↗
15. Lee, Y.W.; Touba, N. A. Improving logic Obfuscation via Logic Cone Analysis. Proceedings from the 2015 16th Latin-American Test Symposium (LATS 2015), Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, March 25–27, 2015; IEEE: New York, 2015; pp 1–6.10.1109/LATW.2015.7102410 ↗
16. Rajendran, J.; Pino, Y.; Sinanoglu, O.; Karri, R. SecurityAnalysis of Logic Obfuscation. Proceedings from the 49th Annual Design Automation Conference, San Francisco, CA, June, 2012; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, 2012; pp 83–89.10.1145/2228360.2228377 ↗
17. Esmaeilzadeh, H.; Blem, E.; Amant, R. S.; Sankaralingam, K.; Burger, D. Dark Silicon and the End of Multicore Scaling. Proceedings from the 38th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, San Jose, CA, June, 2011; IEEE: New York, 2011; pp 365–376.10.1145/2000064.2000108 ↗
18. 10.1147/rd.504.033910.1147/rd.504.0339 ↗
19. Kruger, C. P.; Hancke, G. P. Benchmarking Internet of Things Devices. Proceedings from the 12th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, Porto Alegre, Brazil, July, 2014; IEEE: New York, 2014; pp 611–616.10.1109/INDIN.2014.6945583 ↗
20. 10.1038/natrevmats.2017.3310.1038/natrevmats.2017.33 ↗
21. 10.1038/nnano.2014.20710.1038/nnano.2014.207 ↗
22. 10.1038/nnano.2012.19310.1038/nnano.2012.193 ↗
23. 10.1021/acsnano.5b0555610.1021/acsnano.5b05556 ↗
24. 10.1146/annurev-matsci-070214-02103410.1146/annurev-matsci-070214-021034 ↗
25. 10.1038/s41467-019-12035-610.1038/s41467-019-12035-6 ↗
26. 10.1038/s41467-019-11381-910.1038/s41467-019-11381-9 ↗
27. 10.1142/S012915641740001810.1142/S0129156417400018 ↗
28. 10.1109/5.91537410.1109/5.915374 ↗
29. 10.1109/TED.2013.228459110.1109/TED.2013.2284591 ↗
30. 10.1126/science.aah469810.1126/science.aah4698 ↗
31. 10.1146/annurev-matsci-070214-02090110.1146/annurev-matsci-070214-020901 ↗
32. 10.1021/nl500903710.1021/nl5009037 ↗
33. 10.1038/nnano.2016.28110.1038/nnano.2016.281 ↗
34. 10.1021/nl303583v10.1021/nl303583v ↗
35. 10.1038/s41928-020-00466-910.1038/s41928-020-00466-9 ↗
36. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b0031410.1021/acs.nanolett.5b00314 ↗
37. English, C. D.; Smithe, K. K. H.; Xu, R. L.; Pop, E. Approaching Ballistic Transport in Monolayer MoS2 Transistors with Self-Aligned 10 nm Top Gates. Proceedings from the 2016 IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting, San Francisco, CA, December, 2016; IEEE: New York, 2016; pp 5.6.1–5.6.4.10.1109/IEDM.2016.7838355 ↗
38. 10.1021/acsami.7b0053810.1021/acsami.7b00538 ↗
39. 2DCC 2D-Crystal-Consortium. https://www.mri.psu.edu/2d-crystal-consortium/user-facilities/thin-films/list-thin-film-samples-available (accessed 2021-01-21).
40. 10.1038/nature1441710.1038/nature14417 ↗
41. 10.1039/C5CP07194A10.1039/C5CP07194A ↗
42. 10.1021/acsaelm.8b0005910.1021/acsaelm.8b00059 ↗
43. 10.1088/2053-1583/ab2fa710.1088/2053-1583/ab2fa7 ↗
44. Pang, C.S.; Hung, T. Y. T.; Khosravi, A.; Addou, R.; Wang, Q.; Kim, M. J.; Wallace, R. M.; Chen, Z. Atomically Controlled Tunable Doping in High Performance WSe2 Devices. arXiv (Physics - Applied Physics), October, 2019, ver. 1. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv191008619P (accessed 2019-10-01).
45. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b0039010.1021/acs.nanolett.6b00390 ↗
46. 10.1016/S0169-4332(98)00252-910.1016/S0169-4332(98)00252-9 ↗
47. 10.1063/1.482040810.1063/1.4820408 ↗
48. 10.1039/C7CS00828G10.1039/C7CS00828G ↗
49. 10.1038/s41467-020-18195-010.1038/s41467-020-18195-0 ↗
50. 10.1021/acsnano.0c0557210.1021/acsnano.0c05572 ↗
51. 10.1002/pssr.20130701510.1002/pssr.201307015 ↗
52. 10.1021/nl401831u10.1021/nl401831u ↗
53. 10.1021/acsnano.5b0098510.1021/acsnano.5b00985 ↗
54. Yasin, M.; Mazumdar, B.; Sinanoglu, O.; Rajendran, J. CamoPerturb: Secure IC Camouflaging for Minterm Protection. Proceedings from the 2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, Austin, TX, November, 2016; IEEE: New York, 2016; pp 1–8.10.1145/2966986.2967012 ↗
55. 10.1109/TCAD.2017.265222010.1109/TCAD.2017.2652220 ↗
56. 10.1145/339801210.1145/3398012 ↗
57. Patnaik, S.; Rangarajan, N.; Knechtel, J.; Sinanoglu, O.; Rakheja, S. Advancing Hardware Security Using Polymorphic and Stochastic Spin-Hall Effect Devices. Proceedings from the 2018 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition, Dresden, Germany, March, 2018; IEEE: New York, 2018; pp 97–102.10.23919/DATE.2018.8341986 ↗
58. 10.46586/tches.v2019.i3.86-11810.46586/tches.v2019.i3.86-118 ↗
59. Patil, V. C.; Kundu, S. On Leveraging Multi-Threshold FinFETs for Design Obfuscation. Proceedings from the 2020 IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI, Limassol, Cyprus, July, 2020; IEEE: New York, 2020; pp 108–113.10.1109/ISVLSI49217.2020.00029 ↗
60. 10.1002/aelm.20180088810.1002/aelm.201800888 ↗
61. 10.1109/TVLSI.2020.300715910.1109/TVLSI.2020.3007159 ↗
62. Acharya, R. Y.; Chowdhury, S.; Ganji, F.; Forte, D. Attack of the Genes: Finding Keys and Parameters of Locked Analog ICs Using Genetic Algorithm. Proceedings from the IEEE International Symposium on Hardware Oriented Security and Trust (HOST), San Jose, CA, December 7–11, 2020; IEEE: New York, 2020. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9300277 (accessed 2021-01-21).10.1109/HOST45689.2020.9300277 ↗
63. 10.1088/2053-1583/ab20d610.1088/2053-1583/ab20d6 ↗
64. 10.1021/acsnano.5b0134110.1021/acsnano.5b01341 ↗
65. 10.1021/acsnano.5b0028910.1021/acsnano.5b00289 ↗
66. 10.1109/MNANO.2017.267924010.1109/MNANO.2017.2679240 ↗