YiKyungsuk
ParkMinsu
ChaSungyong
KimSeungjoo
-
(The authors are with CIST (Center for Information Security Technologies) Korea University,
Seoul, 136-075, Korea
)
Copyright © The Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers(IEIE)
Index Terms
Integrated circuit attack, silicon-backside protection, secure design, secure shield, passive shield, active shield, connected car, abnormally detection
I. INTRODUCTION
As the protection methods used in security IC have been developed more and more, performing
invasive attacks has become increasingly difficult (2). As shown in Fig. 1, the structure of a security IC consists of a protection layer, like the silicon
surface protection layer published in JSTS (3). This protection layer is attached to a silicon surface in order to make invasive
attacks more difficult. The metal-4 layer is protecting layer with some signals in
the metal lines. If an attacker wants to get the important data signals from the metal-3
layer, he would bypass the metal-4 layer with some efforts. To make it difficult to
bypass the metal-4 layer, the IC designed with protective circuit. Nevertheless, IC
analysis tools are introducing a new attack method. The HEA (Hot Electron Analysis)
tool shows electrons moving on the IC (4). When an IC is performing some operation, it leads to electron movement which can
be captured by HEA. If an attacker wants to analyze the security operation of a hardware
DES (Data Encryption Standard), they can locate the IC with HEA and induce an IC operation
of DES and measurement. After that, the attacker can obtain the location of the DES
on the IC and start analysis for hacking or can start performing some fault injection
attack (5).
In order to perform an invasive attack, identifying the location of the attack point
is quite time-consuming. (6) With the use of HEA, an attack can easily identify this location, thereby saving
time.
Comparing IC front-side attacks with back-side attacks, finding the location of a
front-side attack is easier. However, there are many protection methods applied to
front-side attacks, so performing FIB (Focused Ion Beam) and making a probing attack
is time-consuming. Thanks to IC analysis tools, performing an invasive attack on the
IC back-side is more practical for an attacker. However, from an IC manufacturer’s
view, protecting the IC back-side is more difficult and cost-consuming. In order to
solve this issue, this paper proposes an effective solution to increase the protection
coverage.
Fig. 1. Vertical structure of security IC that has a silicon-surface- protection layer.
This paper’s contents are as follows: Silicon-backside-protection skills are described
in section 2, including the research results and patents relevant to the proposed
silicon-backside-protection method; the proposed silicon-backside-protection solution
is described in section 3; the proposed solution's performance measurement is described
in section 4, and the conclusion is presented in section 5.
II. PREVIOUS WORKS FOR SILICON-BACKSIDE-PROTECTION METHODS
1. Backside-attack Details
As introduced in section 1, due to the difficulty of IC front-side attacks, silicon
back-side attacks have been introduced (7). In Fig. 1, a silicon substrate is removed during the back-side grinding process for a package.
Following the package de-capsulation process, IC analysis on the back-side should
begin. Fig. 2 shows the procedures of IC back-side analysis. Following the de-capsulation of the
chip, the chip is thinned to 80~100um in order to perform the HEA. The thinning process
can help find a target location using HEA. If the target is a security block like
DES, when the chip is performing a DES operation, the location is highlighted because
the electrons are moving a lot. Following the identification of the target location,
the FIB operation is performed. Then, a probing pad is made to the DES block’s data
line, and we can get the signals of DES operation. As we can see, regarding the process
of a back-side attack, like the thinning process, it is difficult to make any structure
or add a protection circuit. The back-side grinding is a normal process for semiconductor
manufacturing, and it is hard to skip this process and make a protection circuit on
the silicon back-side.
Fig. 2. Procedures for backside attack.
2. Previous Silicon-backside-protection Methods
As discussed in the previous section, the silicon-backside-attack is more effective
than a front-side attack, and difficult to protect against. In this section, the previously
searched protection methods for silicon backsides are presented.
$\textit{A. Private Circuits II: Keeping Secrets in Tamperable Circuits}$ (8)
This idea aims to make it difficult for the attacker to find the valuable data line
to probe. As described in Fig. 3, in order to protect against probing attacks, newly-invented XOR and AND gates have
been introduced. The encoded XOR or AND is used to avoid a probing attack. In order
to obtain the right result, the input should be two times more than the original bit
as the output will be doubled. Performing a probing attack is more difficult because
making a probing pad is time-consuming and costly. It seems that this method can be
a good candidate for protecting against back-side attacks, but making one encoded
XOR needs more than six logical gates, so the size of the logic gate area should be
increased.
$\textit{B. Backside Polishing Detector}$ (9)
Fig. 3. Newly invented XOR and AND gates which protect the circuit against probing
attacks.
Fig. 4. TSV (Through Silicon Via) wire bonding and package technology (11).
Fig. 5. Principle of backside polishing detector.
This idea comes from the semiconductor 3D package method of using TSV(Through-Silicon
$V_{ia}$) (10). As we can see from the previous section, a backside attack relies on the process
of backside grinding. The TSV structure involves making a hole to interconnect the
chips after backside grinding. Fig. 4.
TSV holes are filled with a dielectric substance and measured by a capacitance meter.
If the measured value of capacitance is not normal or different from those of the
other TSV holes, a chip will give an alarm to the CPU and invoke protection actions.
TSV is normally used for interconnecting the silicon, so making many TSV holes to
increase the coverage is difficult.
$\textit{C. Magnetic detection of back-side layer}$ (12)
This invention uses magnetic fields and magnetic sensors to detect backside attack
intrusions. If the magnetic part is removed or damaged, the magnetic sensor can detect
the intrusion. This invention requires the magnetic field generation part and sensing
part. The magnetic field can be used by a permanent magnet or an electron magnetic,
regardless, making an electron magnetic on the integrated circuit or attaching a permanent
magnet is costly and also increases the size of the chip. Additionally, a security
chip is usually used for an IC card and passport, and this invention is not ideal
for these applications.
Fig. 6. Principle of magnetic detection of backside layer.
Table 1. Summary of protection methods
Protection Methods
|
Required
Area for
circuit
|
Protection area
|
Design complexity
|
A) Private Circuits II
|
Medium
|
Specific area
|
Middle
|
B) Backside Polishing Detector
|
Small
|
Specific Area
|
Middle
|
C) Magnetic detection of back-side layer
|
Large
|
Specific Area
|
High
|
3. Summary of Silicon-backside-protection Methods
Table 1 shows a summary of the existing silicon-backside-protection methods. According to
the table, we found a correlation between cost and protection area. In order to obtain
good protection coverage, an increased size is needed to protect the silicon backside
area, and this results in a higher monetary cost.
A) Private Circuits II needs a large size of area, due to six times more gates being
needed for one gate; the design is not difficult but applying it to all areas needs
to be considered. B) Backside Polishing Detector has small size due to the fact that
it only has capacitor, but it uses TSV, so applying it to protection areas is limited,
but its design is not difficult. C) Magnetic detection of the back-side layer needs
the full area of chip to make a magnetic detection area, but the protection area is
not fully covered because of the fact that the magnetic sensor cannot be located throughout
the entire chip. Additionally, magnetic detection and making a sensor are not easy.
III. PRACTICAL SILICON-BACKSIDE-PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND SUGGESTED SOLUTION
In this section, a more practical method for overcoming the previously mentioned weak-points
is introduced. With this suggested solution, the protection area will be increased
and the manufacturing cost will be minimized.
1. Design Considerations
From the previous section, the protection method’s main weak point is the size and
protection area. From the weakness of these suggestions, these requirements are summarized
as follows:
(a) Minimum area should be used for design in order to minimize production cost.
(b) Design of silicon-backside-protection layer (logic part) should not be visible
on the backside or the top level of the metal layer.
(c) Protection area should be maximized to avoid back side attack
2. Suggested Solution
The suggested solution involves two main ideas, the first one is using an unused metal
layer of the chip which is mainly used for security chip (smart card IC) (14). The second one is the use of capacitance between two metal lines, which can layer
an unused metal layer. In order to sense differences between capacitors, a ring oscillator
is used for detection. Fig. 8 shows the layout of the security chip without metal-3 and metal-4 layers to more
clearly see the location of each block. Normally, ASIC is used for CPU and control
logics, so the metal layout uses up to the metal-3 layer, and the metal-4 layer is
used as a chip protection layer and cannot be used for metal routing. In the case
of memories such as EEPROM, ROM, and RAM, they use up to the metal-2 layer for routing
and the metal-3 layer is used as a dummy protection layer (dummy metal shield or passive
shield) – Fig. 7 and 8.
In order to use this area for backside attack protection, two serpentine pattern type
capacitors are used (15). To minimize the cost of manufacturing, passive shield layer is used for layout the
capacitor sensors. This passive shield is used for not showing the metal layers under
the passive shield. This layer is utilized for capacitors patterns. –Fig. 9
Fig. 7. Layout of security chip without metal-3 and metal-4 layers.
Fig. 8. Metal-3 level view: metal passive shield area for un-used (no routing) metal-3
layer which is located under the metal-4 layer.
Fig. 9. Design of each back attack detectable inverter (capacitor sensor) which used
for ring oscillator with two serpentine patterns.
This pattern is working as a capacitor and the combination of the ring oscillator
and frequency counter, the main role of which is sensing the value of its changes
to detect the intrusion of bask-side attack. –Fig. 10
Two serpentine patterns - between these patterns, there is an insulator. If this insulator
is changed or damaged during the back side attack process – back side grinding or
making hole using FIB machine to probe metal lines, the value of capacitor is changed
and make frequency varies. Or if part of this pattern is removed or fragile, the probing
needle will sometimes be touched, leading to a change in the value of capacitance
and giving the change of frequency of the ring oscillator. The counter value is always
compared by the comparator. The compared value is not the same as the normal case
or usual, and it gives an alarm to the CPU to act against a backside attack. –Fig. 11
Fig. 10. Five-stage ring oscillator to generate clock frequency with five back attack
detectable inverter.
Fig. 11. Suggested design of silicon backside protection method using unused metal
layer.
In order to locate the capacitor, the unused area of the metal-3 layer and a dummy
metal shield are used. Fig. 12. shows the locations of the capacitors which can be the layout on the metal-3 level.
RAM and ASIC areas use metal 3 routing, and there is a small area that can be used
for this type of capacitor. Therefore, RAM and ASIC area cannot be covered full area
because of this area use the metal-3 layer for routing. If there is more important
or security information is located this area, a designer can added more sensors in
this area while the size of chip increased. Or a designer want to cover fully with
sensors, one metal layer is added for full protection but the manufacturing cost is
increased. The detailed cost of manufacturing is discussed in (3). EEPROM and ROM area has metal-3 shield against front-side attack, this metal-3 layer
is utilized for capacitor sensor, therefore this area is fully covered [Fig. 12]. In the next section, the coverage will be calculated based on this routing and
the size overhead will be calculated as well.
Fig. 12. Metal-3 level view: metal-3 shield replaced with capacitor sensor.
Table 2. Estimated size of suggested solution
Blocks
|
Ring-
Oscillator
|
Counter
|
Comparator
|
Size
|
EEPROM
|
8
|
8
|
4
|
138 $\mu \mathrm{m}^{2}$
|
ROM
|
8
|
8
|
4
|
138 $\mu \mathrm{m}^{2}$
|
ASIC
|
4
|
4
|
2
|
69 $\mu \mathrm{m}^{2}$
|
Others
|
4
|
4
|
2
|
69 $\mu \mathrm{m}^{2}$
|
Total
|
24
|
24
|
12
|
414 $\mu \mathrm{m}^{2}$
|
IV. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
The main target of this paper is increasing the protection coverage and reducing the
size of the protection method in order to minimize the manufacturing cost. This section
compares the suggested solution to other methods in terms of size overhead and protection
coverage against back-side attacks.
1. Size Estimation
Comparing the size of the proposed method’s circuit, 65nm logic technology (16) and the CMOS circuit design layout and simulation (15) are referenced. The ring oscillator has five transistors and its registers and capacitors
are in the metal-3 layer to detect an attack. The counter design uses an 8-bit counter
which has eight Flip-Flops, and one Flip-Flop has 20 transistors (17). The size of one transistor is 0.1 ${\mathrm{\mu}}$m$^{2}$, so the size of the 8-bit
counter is 16 ${\mathrm{\mu}}$m$^{2}$. The comparator design uses 20~transistors and
its size is 2 ${\mathrm{\mu}}$m$^{2}$. In Table 4, the estimated size of the suggested solution is shown.
Table 3. Estimated overhead and coverage comparison of suggest solution with backside
polishing detector
Protection Methods
|
Coverage
|
Overhead
|
C) Backside Polishing Detector
|
0.0072%
|
0.0084%
(84 ppm)
|
Suggested Solution
|
87.5%
|
0.0073%
(73 ppm)
|
A secure microcontroller like the one above has a size of 2 mm * 2.8 mm = 5.6 mm$^{2}$.
Therefore, the estimated overhead of the proposed solution is 0.0073% (1).
2. Coverage Estimation
The EEPROM and ROM area can be almost 100% covered, because this area is using the
metal-1 and metal-2 (assuming that the routing path is included in the ASIC). ASIC
area as well as RAM and other areas can be covered around 50% because they are using
metal-3 for routing and can place the sensing capacitor on the 50% area. If we assume
that ROM and EEPROM’s areas are almost half, the coverage of the suggested solution
is 87.5% (2) and Table 3.
In the case of the backside polishing detector (9), EEPROM and ROM areas cannot be covered, and only the specific area where the detector
is located can be covered because it uses all metal layers and silicon layers to implement.
If designer want to increase the coverage, the size of the chip will increased and
impact the cost of production.
In Table 4, the result of the suggested solution and other protection methods are compared.
The aims of this paper, increasing the protection area and minimizing the area for
the circuit, are both achieved.
Table 4. Comparison of suggested solution to other protection methods.
Protection Methods
|
Required
area for
circuit
|
Protection area
|
Design complexity
|
A) Private Circuits II(3)
|
Medium
|
Specific area
|
Middle
|
B) Backside Polishing Detector (4)
|
Small
|
Specific Area
|
Middle
|
C) Magnetic detection of back-side layer(5)
|
Large
|
Specific Area
|
High
|
Suggested Solution
|
Small
|
Almost Full Area
|
Middle
|
3. Implementation and Measurement
The suggested solution operates very low frequency, so does not to impact other metal
layer signal and not impacted by those signals. Nowadays, semiconductor manufacturing
process has the trimming test process to adjust the capacitor value to make the aimed
frequency to fit it to aimed frequency. So, even though there is a small difference
in frequency due to capacitance variation during manufacturing, it can be trimmed
to right frequency to check and detect the change of capacitance value to due back
side attack. Trimming test uses few bits to adjust the value to aimed frequency. These
bits are located at counter. Under the testing process the counter value is not the
aimed value, these bits are set and reset to adjust the counter value to targeted
value. Trimming test approach is reducing the cost of analog circuit for manufacturing
and also helps to reduce the cost of fabrication of suggested solution (18).
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a practical silicon-backside-protection method using capacitors which
meets the requirements of increasing the coverage and minimizing the size is proposed.
In the cases of security chips, new attack methods are developed every day. Chip manufacturers
also work hard to make good protection methods. One of the dilemmas is cost. Normally,
a security chip is more expensive than other non-secure chips for the above reason.
Still, if the manufacturing cost is higher than that of the competitor’s, a manufacturer
can lose their competitiveness. To keep the manufacturing competitiveness, a practical
method is always needed. In addition, failure analysis tools for integrated circuits
are one of the new challenges for security chip developers; the back-side attack is
one of the relevant cases. However, a practical protection method against back-side
attack has now been introduced. New invasive attacks for secure chips will continue
to be found. In order to achieve more secure chips, endless efforts to design new
protection methods in a practical manner should not be stopped.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper was result of the research project supported by SK Hynix Inc. and the authors
would like to thank Synopsys providing TCAD tool.
REFERENCES
Mayes Keith E, Konstantinos Markantonakis, 2008, Smart cards, tokens, security and
applications, New York: Springer, Vol. 2, No. 3
Torrance Randy, Dick James, 2009, The state-of-the-art in IC reverse engineering.,
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Kyungsuk Yi, Park Minsu, Kim Seungjoo, 2016, Practical silicon-surface-protection
method using metal layer., Journal of Semiconductor Technology and Science, Vol. 16,
No. 4, pp. 470-480
Song Xu, 2016, IC security evaluation against fault injection attack based on FPGA
emulation., International Conference on Field-Programmable Technology (FPT).IEEE
April 2019, Application of Attack Potential to Smartcards Similar Devices Version
3.0, Joint Interpretation Library
April 2019, Application of Attack Potential to Smartcards Similar Devices Version
3.0, Joint Interpretation Library
Helfmeier C., Nedospasov D., Tarnovsky C., Krissler J. S., Boit C., Seifert J. P.,
2013, November, Breaking and entering through the silicon, In Proceedings of the 2013
ACM SIGSAC conference on Computer & communications security ACM, pp. 733-744
Ishai Y., Prabhakaran M., Sahai A., Wagner D., 2006, May, Private circuits II: Keeping
secrets in tamperable circuits, In Annual International Conference on the Theory and
Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. Springer Berlin Heidelberg., pp. 308-327
Manich S., Arumi D., Rodriguez R., Mujal J., Hernandez D., 2015, Backside polishing
detector: a new protection against backside attacks. A: Conference on Design of Circuits
and Integrated Systems, DCIS'15 - XXX Conference on Design of Circuits and Integrated
Systems, pp. 1-6
Knechtel , Johann , et al , 2017, Large-scale 3D chips: Challenges and solutions for
design automation, testing, and trustworthy integration., IPSJ Transactions on System
LSI Design Methodology, Vol. 10, pp. 45-62
http://samsungsemiconstory.com/817?category=537531
Victor Zieren, Robertus A. M., Wolters Nxp B.V., US patent- US20100283456 Magnetic
detection of back-side layer
John Walker, Itsik Mantin, US patent - US 7,966,666 Chip attack protection
Wolfgang Rankl, Wolfgang Effing, , SmartCard Handbook 4th Edition, ISBN: 978-0-470-74367-6
Baker R. Jacob, 2019, CMOS: circuit design, layout, and simulation, Wiley-IEEE press
Bai , Peng , 2004, A 65nm logic technology featuring 35nm gate lengths, enhanced channel
strain, 8 Cu interconnect layers, low-k ILD and 0.57/spl mu/m/sup 2/SRAM cell., IEDM
Technical Digest. IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting,IEEE, 2004
Sheshadri Vijay Benakanakere, 2010, UPSET TRENDS IN FLIP-FLOP DESIGNS AT DEEP, Diss.
Vanderbilt University
Bullag Rex F., Rolando C. Ortega, Sorina B. Bullag, 2014, Adaptive trimming test approach—The
efficient way on trimming analog trimmed devices at wafer sort., 36th International
Electronics Manufacturing Technology Conference. IEEE
Author
Kyungsuk Yi received his B.S degree in Control and Instru-mentation engineering in
Chungang University (CAU) of Korea, in 1993 and also received his M.S degree in Information
Security from Ajou University of Korea, in 2005.
He is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in Information Security, Korea University,
Korea.
His research interests are mainly on Information Assurance, Hardware Security and
Reverse Engineering.
E-mail : bryant@korea.ac.kr
Minsu Park received his B.S degree in Computer Network from Silla University of Korea,
in 2010 and also received his M.S. and Ph.D. degree in Information Security from Korea
University, Korea, in 2013 and 2018.
He is currently working at LG Electronics as an information security specialist.
His research interests include Information Assurance, IoT Security, Digital Forensic
and Usable Security.
E-mail : minsoon2@korea.ac.kr
Sungyong Cha received his B.S degree in Computer Science at Korea Military Academy
in 2004 and a M.S degree in Electrical Engineering at SUNY Buffalo in the United States
in 2008.
Also, he received a Ph.D. degree in Information Security from Korea University in
2019. He is currently working at Korea Ministry of National Defense in cybersecurity
area.
His research interests include Information Assurance, C4I, Risk Management and SDLC.
E-mail : coolhead@korea.ac.kr
Seungjoo Kim received his B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. from Sungkyunkwan University (SKKU)
of Korea, in 1994, 1996 and 1999, respectively.
Prior to joining the faculty at Korea University (KU) in 2011, He served as Assistant
& Associate Professor at SKKU for 7 years. Before that, He served as Director of the
Cryptographic Technology Team and the (CC-based) IT Security Evaluation Team of the
Korea Internet & Security Agency (KISA) for 5 years.
He is currently a Professor in the Graduate School of Information Security Technologies
(CIST).
Also, He is a Founder and Advisory director of a hacker group, HARU and an international
security & hacking conference, SECUINSIDE.
Prof. Seungjoo Kim’s research interests are mainly on cryptography, Cyber Physical
Security, IoT Security, and HCI Security.
He is a corresponding author.
E-mail : skim71@korea.ac.kr