LO-FAT: Low-Overhead Control Flow ATtestation in Hardware

Attacks targeting software on embedded systems are becoming increasingly prevalent. Remote attestation is a mechanism that allows establishing trust in embedded devices. However, existing attestation schemes are either static and cannot detect control-flow attacks, or require instrumentation of software incurring high performance overheads. To overcome these limitations, we present LO-FAT, the first practical hardware-based approach to control-flow attestation. By leveraging existing processor hardware features and commonly-used IP blocks, our approach enables efficient control-flow attestation without requiring software instrumentation. We show that our proof-of-concept implementation based on a RISC-V SoC incurs no processor stalls and requires reasonable area overhead.Comment: Authors' pre-print version to appear in DAC 2017 proceeding

Symbolic QED Pre-silicon Verification for Automotive Microcontroller Cores: Industrial Case Study

We present an industrial case study that demonstrates the practicality and effectiveness of Symbolic Quick Error Detection (Symbolic QED) in detecting logic design flaws (logic bugs) during pre-silicon verification. Our study focuses on several microcontroller core designs (~1,800 flip-flops, ~70,000 logic gates) that have been extensively verified using an industrial verification flow and used for various commercial automotive products. The results of our study are as follows: 1. Symbolic QED detected all logic bugs in the designs that were detected by the industrial verification flow (which includes various flavors of simulation-based verification and formal verification). 2. Symbolic QED detected additional logic bugs that were not recorded as detected by the industrial verification flow. (These additional bugs were also perhaps detected by the industrial verification flow.) 3. Symbolic QED enables significant design productivity improvements: (a) 8X improved (i.e., reduced) verification effort for a new design (8 person-weeks for Symbolic QED vs. 17 person-months using the industrial verification flow). (b) 60X improved verification effort for subsequent designs (2 person-days for Symbolic QED vs. 4-7 person-months using the industrial verification flow). (c) Quick bug detection (runtime of 20 seconds or less), together with short counterexamples (10 or fewer instructions) for quick debug, using Symbolic QED

When a Patch is Not Enough - HardFails: Software-Exploitable Hardware Bugs

In this paper, we take a deep dive into microarchitectural security from a hardware designer's perspective by reviewing the existing approaches to detect hardware vulnerabilities during the design phase. We show that a protection gap currently exists in practice that leaves chip designs vulnerable to software-based attacks. In particular, existing verification approaches fail to detect specific classes of vulnerabilities, which we call HardFails: these bugs evade detection by current verification techniques while being exploitable from software. We demonstrate such vulnerabilities in real-world SoCs using RISC-V to showcase and analyze concrete instantiations of HardFails. Patching these hardware bugs may not always be possible and can potentially result in a product recall. We base our findings on two extensive case studies: the recent Hack@DAC 2018 hardware security competition, where 54 independent teams of researchers competed world-wide over a period of 12 weeks to catch inserted security bugs in SoC RTL designs, and an in-depth systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art verification approaches. Our findings indicate that even combinations of techniques will miss high-impact bugs due to the large number of modules with complex interdependencies and fundamental limitations of current detection approaches. We also craft a real-world software attack that exploits one of the RTL bugs from Hack@DAC that evaded detection and discuss novel approaches to mitigate the growing problem of cross-layer bugs at design time