The threat of hardware Trojans has been widely recognized by academia, industry, and government agencies. A Trojan can compromise security of a system in spite of cryptographic protection. The damage caused by a Trojan may not be limited to a business or reputation, but could have a severe impact on public safety, national economy, or national security. An extremely stealthy way of implementing hardware Trojans has been presented by at CHES'2012. Their work have shown that it is possible to inject a Trojan in a random number generator compliant with FIPS 140-2 and NIST SP800-90 standards by exploiting non-zero aliasing probability of Logic Built-In-Self-Test (LBIST). In this paper, we present two methods for modifying LBIST to prevent such an attack. The first method makes test patterns dependent on a configurable key which is programed into a chip after the manufacturing stage. The second method uses a remote test management system which can execute LBIST using a different set of test patterns at each test cycle.
A successful detection of the stealthy dopant-level circuit trojan, proposed by at CHES 2013 [1], is reported. Contrary to an assumption made by , dopant types in active region are visible with either scanning electron microscopy SEM or focused ion beam FIB imaging. The successful measurement is explained by an LSI failure analysis technique called the passive voltage contrast [2]. The experiments are conducted by measuring a dedicated chip. The chip uses the diffusion programmable device [3]: an anti-reverse-engineering technique by the same principle as the stealthy dopant-level trojan. The chip is delayered down to the contact layer, and images are taken with 1 an optical microscope, 2 SEM, and 3 FIB. As a result, the four possible dopant-well combinations, namely i p+ n-well, ii p+ p-well, iii n+ n-well and iv n+ p-well are distinguishable in the SEM images. Partial but sufficient detection is also achieved with FIB. Although the stealthy dopant-level circuits are visible, however, they potentially make a detection harder. That is because the contact layer should be measured. We show that imaging the contact layer is at most 16-times expensive than that of a met al layer in terms of the number of images.