Combination Frequency Differencing for Identifying Design Weaknesses in Physical Unclonable Functions

Combinatorial coverage measures have been defined and applied to a wide range of problems. These methods have been developed using measures that depend on the inclusion or absence of t-tuples of values in inputs and test cases. We extend these coverage measures to include the frequency of occurrence of combinations, in an approach that we refer to as combination frequency differencing (CFD). This method is particularly suited to artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) applications, where training data sets used in learning systems are dependent on the prevalence of various attributes of elements of class and non-class sets. We illustrate the use of this method by applying it to analyzing the susceptibility of physical unclonable functions (PUFs) to machine learning attacks. Preliminary results suggest that the method may be useful for identifying bit combinations that have a disproportionately strong influence on PUF response bit values.

[1]  Laura J. Freeman,et al.  Systematic Training and Testing for Machine Learning Using Combinatorial Interaction Testing , 2022, 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW).

[2]  R. Kacker,et al.  Combination Frequency Differencing , 2021 .

[3]  D. Richard Kuhn,et al.  An exploration of combinatorial testing-based approaches to fault localization for explainable AI , 2021, Ann. Math. Artif. Intell..

[4]  Fuyuki Ishikawa,et al.  Parameter-Based Testing and Debugging of Autonomous Driving Systems , 2021, 2021 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium Workshops (IV Workshops).

[5]  Raghu N. Kacker,et al.  Combinatorial Coverage Difference Measurement , 2021 .

[6]  D. Richard Kuhn,et al.  Combinatorial Testing Metrics for Machine Learning , 2021, 2021 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW).

[7]  Eitan Farchi,et al.  Bridging the gap between ML solutions and their business requirements using feature interactions , 2019, ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE.

[8]  D. Richard Kuhn,et al.  Measuring Combinatorial Coverage at Adobe , 2019, 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW).

[9]  Eduard Paul Enoiu,et al.  On Measuring Combinatorial Coverage of Manually Created Test Cases for Industrial Software , 2019, 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW).

[10]  Máire O'Neill,et al.  A Theoretical Model to Link Uniqueness and Min-Entropy for PUF Evaluations , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[11]  Sylvain Guilley,et al.  An Improved Analysis of Reliability and Entropy for Delay PUFs , 2018, 2018 21st Euromicro Conference on Digital System Design (DSD).

[12]  Mark Zwolinski,et al.  A Machine Learning Attacks Resistant Two Stage Physical Unclonable Functions Design , 2018, 2018 IEEE 3rd International Verification and Security Workshop (IVSW).

[13]  James F. Plusquellic,et al.  Analysis of Entropy in a Hardware-Embedded Delay PUF , 2017, Cryptogr..

[14]  Murat Ozcan,et al.  Applications of Practical Combinatorial Testing Methods at Siemens Industry Inc., Building Technologies Division , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW).

[15]  Masaya Yoshikawa,et al.  Deep learning attack for physical unclonable function , 2016, 2016 IEEE 5th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics.

[16]  Sandip Kundu,et al.  Machine learning resistant strong PUF: Possible or a pipe dream? , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware Oriented Security and Trust (HOST).

[17]  Sandip Kundu,et al.  A novel modeling attack resistant PUF design based on non-linear voltage transfer characteristics , 2015, 2015 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE).

[18]  Yu Lei,et al.  Combinatorial coverage as an aspect of test quality , 2015 .

[19]  Srinivas Devadas,et al.  Physical Unclonable Functions and Applications: A Tutorial , 2014, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[20]  Wei Wu,et al.  Entropy loss in PUF-based key generation schemes: The repetition code pitfall , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware-Oriented Security and Trust (HOST).

[21]  Jean-Pierre Seifert,et al.  Physical vulnerabilities of Physically Unclonable Functions , 2014, 2014 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE).

[22]  Rajat Subhra Chakraborty,et al.  Model building attacks on Physically Unclonable Functions using genetic programming , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware-Oriented Security and Trust (HOST).

[23]  Jean-Pierre Seifert,et al.  Cloning Physically Unclonable Functions , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware-Oriented Security and Trust (HOST).

[24]  Jeff Yu Lei,et al.  Combinatorial Coverage Measurement Concepts and Applications , 2013, 2013 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops.

[25]  Maximilian Hofer,et al.  Physical Unclonable Functions in Theory and Practice , 2012 .

[26]  Miodrag Potkonjak,et al.  Testing Techniques for Hardware Security , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Test Conference.

[27]  G. Edward Suh,et al.  Physical Unclonable Functions for Device Authentication and Secret Key Generation , 2007, 2007 44th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference.

[28]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques, 3rd Edition , 1999 .

[29]  Michael Pehl,et al.  Machine Learning of Physical Unclonable Functions using Helper Data, Revealing a Pitfall in the Fuzzy Commitment Scheme , 2020, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..

[30]  Ingrid Verbauwhede,et al.  Physically Unclonable Functions: A Study on the State of the Art and Future Research Directions , 2010, Towards Hardware-Intrinsic Security.

[31]  Frank Sehnke,et al.  On the Foundations of Physical Unclonable Functions , 2009, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..