Leak-resistant cryptographic method and apparatus

Electrical computers and digital processing systems: support – Multiple computer communication using cryptography – Particular communication authentication technique

Reexamination Certificate

Rate now

  [ 0.00 ] – not rated yet Voters 0   Comments 0

Details

C713S174000, C713S340000, C705S065000

Reexamination Certificate

active

06381699

ABSTRACT:

FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The method and apparatus of the present invention relate generally to cryptographic systems and, more specifically, to securing cryptographic tokens that must maintain the security of secret information in hostile environments.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Most cryptosystems require secure key management. In public-key based security systems, private keys must be protected so that attackers cannot use the keys to forge digital signatures, modify data, or decrypt sensitive information. Systems employing symmetric cryptography similarly require that keys be kept secret. Well-designed cryptographic algorithms and protocols should prevent attackers who eavesdrop on communications from breaking systems. However, cryptographic algorithms and protocols traditionally require that tamper-resistant hardware or other implementation-specific measures prevent attackers from accessing or finding the keys.
If the cryptosystem designer can safely assume that the key management system is completely tamper-proof and will not reveal any information relating to the keys except via the messages and operations defined in the protocol, then previously known cryptographic techniques are often sufficient for good security. It is currently extremely difficult, however, to make hardware key management systems that provide good security, particularly in low-cost unshielded cryptographic devices for use in applications where attackers will have physical control over the device. For example, cryptographic tokens (such as smartcards used in electronic cash and copy protection schemes) must protect their keys even in potentially hostile environments. (A token is a device that contains or manipulates cryptographic keys that need to be protected from attackers. Forms in which tokens may be manufactured include, without limitation, smartcards, specialized encryption and key management devices, secure telephones, secure picture phones, secure web servers, consumer electronics devices using cryptography, secure microprocessors, and other tamper-resistant cryptographic systems.)
A variety of physical techniques for protecting cryptographic devices are known, including enclosing key management systems in physically durable enclosures, coating integrated circuits with special coatings that destroy the chip when removed, and wrapping devices with fine wires that detect tampering. However, these approaches are expensive, difficult to use in single-chip solutions (such as smartcards), and difficult to evaluate since there is no mathematical basis for their security. Physical tamper resistance techniques are also ineffective against some attacks. For example, recent work by Cryptography Research has shown that attackers can non-invasively extract secret keys using careful measurement and analysis of many devices' power consumption. Analysis of timing measurements or electromagnetic radiation can also be used to find secret keys.
Some techniques for hindering external monitoring of cryptographic secrets are known, such as using power supplies with large capacitors to mask fluctuations in power consumption, enclosing devices in well-shielded cases to prevent electromagnetic radiation, message blinding to prevent timing attacks, and buffering of inputs/outputs to prevent signals from leaking out on I/O lines. Shielding, introduction of noise, and other such countermeasures are often, however, of limited value, since skilled attackers can still find keys by amplifying signals and filtering out noise by averaging data collected from many operations. Further, in smartcards and other tamper-resistant chips, these countermeasures are often inapplicable or insufficient due to reliance on external power sources, impracticality of shielding, and other physical constraints. The use of blinding and constant-time mathematical algorithms to prevent timing attacks is also known, but does not prevent more complex attacks such as power consumption analysis (particularly if the system designer cannot perfectly predict what information will be available to an attacker, as is often the case before a device has been physically manufactured and characterized).
The present invention makes use of previously-known cryptographic primitives and operations. For example: U.S. Pat. No. 5,136,646 to Haber et al. and the pseudorandom number generator used in the RSAREF cryptographic library use repeated application of hash functions; anonymous digital cash schemes use blinding techniques; zero knowledge protocols use hash functions to mask information; and key splitting and threshold schemes store secrets in multiple parts.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention introduces leak-proof and leak-resistant cryptography, mathematical approaches to tamper resistance that support many existing cryptographic primitives, are inexpensive, can be implemented on existing hardware (whether by itself or via software capable of running on such hardware), and can solve problems involving secrets leaking out of cryptographic devices. Rather than assuming that physical devices will provide perfect security, leak-proof and leak-resistant cryptographic systems may be designed to remain secure even if attackers are able to gather some information about the system and its secrets. This invention describes leak-proof and leak-resistant systems that implement symmetric authentication, Diffie-Hellman exponential key agreement, ElGamal public key encryption, ElGamal signatures, the Digital Signature Standard, RSA, and other algorithms.
One of the characteristic attributes of a typical leak-proof or leak-resistant cryptosystem is that it is “self-healing” such that the value of information leaked to an attacker decreases or vanishes with time. Leak-proof cryptosystems are able to withstand leaks of up to L
MAX
bits of information per transaction, where L
MAX
is a security factor chosen by the system designer to exceed to the maximum anticipated leak rate. The more general class of leak-resistant cryptosystems includes leak-proof cryptosystems, and others that can withstand leaks but are not necessarily defined to withstand any defined maximum information leakage rate. Therefore, any leak-proof system shall also be understood to be leak-resistant. The leak-resistant systems of the present invention can survive a variety of monitoring and eavesdropping attacks that would break traditional (non-leak-resistant) cryptosystems.
A typical leak-resistant cryptosystem of the present invention consists of three general parts. The initialization or key generation step produces secure keying material appropriate for the scheme. The update process cryptographically modifies the secret key material in a manner designed to render useless any information about the secrets that may have previously leaked from the system, thus providing security advantages over systems of the background art. The final process performs cryptographic operations, such as producing digital signatures or decrypting messages.


REFERENCES:
patent: 4200770 (1980-04-01), Hellman et al.
patent: 4405829 (1983-09-01), Rivest et al.
patent: 4759063 (1988-07-01), Chaum
patent: 4799258 (1989-01-01), Davies
patent: 5136646 (1992-08-01), Haber et al.
patent: 5401950 (1995-03-01), Yoshida
patent: 5546463 (1996-08-01), Caputo et al.
patent: 5663896 (1997-09-01), Aucsmith
patent: 5848159 (1998-12-01), Collins et al.
patent: 5991415 (1999-11-01), Shamir
RSA Data Security, RSAREF Cryptographic Toolkit Source Code, File R_Random.C, available from ftp://ftp.rsa.com.
“Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules,” Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS PUB) 140-1, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Jan. 1994.
M. Bellare et al., “Incremental Cryptography: The Case of Hashing and Signing” in: Desmedt, Y., Advances in Cryptology—Crypto 94 Proceedings (Berlin, Springer, 1994) pp. 216-233.
Paul C. Kocher, “Timing Attacks on Implementations of Diffie-Hellman, RSA, DSS, and Other Systems,” in Koblitz, N., Advances in Cryptography—Crypto &apos

LandOfFree

Say what you really think

Search LandOfFree.com for the USA inventors and patents. Rate them and share your experience with other people.

Rating

Leak-resistant cryptographic method and apparatus does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

If you have personal experience with Leak-resistant cryptographic method and apparatus, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Leak-resistant cryptographic method and apparatus will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

     

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2817017

  Search
All data on this website is collected from public sources. Our data reflects the most accurate information available at the time of publication.