research-article

Fault attacks on Tiaoxin-346

Authors:

Iftekhar Salam,

Hassan Qahur Al Mahri,

Leonie Simpson,

Harry Bartlett,

Ed Dawson,

Kenneth Koon-Ho WongAuthors Info & Claims

ACSW '18: Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference

Article No.: 5, Pages 1 - 9

https://doi.org/10.1145/3167918.3167940

Published: 29 January 2018 Publication History

Get Access

Abstract

This paper describes two different fault injection attacks on the authenticated encryption stream cipher Tiaoxin-346, a third round candidate in the CAESAR cryptographic competition. The first type of fault injection uses a bit-flipping fault model to conduct a forgery attack. The number of faulty bits required for this forgery attack is twice the number of bit modifications made in the input message. The second type of fault injection uses a random fault model in a differential fault attack to recover the secret key of the cipher. A successful attack can be performed with 36 random multi-byte faults and a computational complexity of 2³⁶. This second attack improves on the previous key recovery attack of Dey et. al., as the random fault model we use is more practical than the bit flipping model used in their attack.Ed Dawson

References

[1]

Nikolić, I., Tiaoxin-346: VERSION 2.0. CAESAR Competition. Retrieved from https://competitions.cr.yp.to/round2/tiaoxinv2.pdf, Accessed 26 Aug 2017.

Google Scholar

[2]

Nikolić, I., Tiaoxin-346: VERSION 1.0. CAESAR Competition. Retrieved from http://competitions.cr.yp.to/round1/tiaoxinv1.pdf, Accessed 29 May 2015.

Google Scholar

[3]

CAESAR: Competition for Authenticated Encryption: Security, Applicability, and Robustness. Available from: http://competitions.cr.yp.to/index.html, Accessed 20 September 2014.

Google Scholar

[4]

Daemen, J., Rijmen, V., The Design of Rijndael: AES -The Advanced Encryption Standard, Information Security and Cryptography, Springer, 2002.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[5]

Boneh, D., DeMillo, R.A., Lipton, R.J., On the importance of checking cryptographic protocols for faults, In Fumy, W. (ed.) Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 1997. LNCS, vol. 1233, pp. 37--51, Springer, Heidelberg, 1997.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[6]

Biham, E., Shamir, A., Differential fault analysis of secret key cryptosystems, In B.S. Kaliski Jr (Ed.), Advances in cryptology - CRYPTO '97, LNCS, vol. 1294, pp. 513--525, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1997.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[7]

Dey, P., Rohit, R.S., Sarkar, S., Adhikari, A., Differential Fault Analysis on Tiaoxin and AEGIS Family of Ciphers. In: Mueller, P., Thampi, S., Alam, B. M., Ko R., Doss, R., Alcaraz, C. J. (eds) Security in Computing and Communications - SSCC 201, vol 625., pp. 74--86, Springer, 2016.

Google Scholar

[8]

Roy, D., B., Chakraborti, A., Chang, D., Kumar, S., V., D., Mukhopadhyay, D., Nandi, M., Fault Based Almost Universal Forgeries on CLOC and SILC, In Carlet, C., Hasan, M., Saraswat, V. (eds) Security, Privacy, and Applied Cryptography Engineering. SPACE 2016, LNCS, vol 10076. Springer, 2016.

Google Scholar

[9]

Iwata, T., Minematsu, K., Guo, J., Morioka, S., Kobayashi, E., Re: Fault Based Forgery on CLOC and SILC. Available from: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/crypto-competitions/_qxORmqcSrY.

Google Scholar

[10]

Barenghi, A., Breveglieri, L., Koren, I., Naccache, D., Fault injection attacks on cryptographic devices: theory, practice, and countermeasures. Proc. IEEE 100(11), 3056-3076, 2012.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[11]

Skorobogatov, S.P., Anderson, R.J., Optical fault induction attacks, In Kaliski, B.S., Koç, K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2002. LNCS, vol. 2523, pp. 2--12., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2003.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

AlJabri ZAbawajy JHuda S(2023)A Comprehensive Review of Lightweight Authenticated Encryption for IoT DevicesWireless Communications & Mobile Computing10.1155/2023/90719692023Online publication date: 21-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1155/2023/9071969
Salam IYau WPhan RPieprzyk J(2023)Differential fault attacks on the lightweight authenticated encryption algorithm CLX-128Journal of Cryptographic Engineering10.1007/s13389-023-00326-013:3(265-281)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13389-023-00326-0
Salam IOoi TXue LYau WPieprzyk JPhan R(2021)Random Differential Fault Attacks on the Lightweight Authenticated Encryption Stream Cipher Grain-128AEADIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30788459(72568-72586)Online publication date: 2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3078845
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Fault attacks on Tiaoxin-346
1. Security and privacy
  1. Cryptography
    1. Cryptanalysis and other attacks

Recommendations

Collision Attacks Against CAESAR Candidates
Proceedings, Part II, of the 21st International Conference on Advances in Cryptology --- ASIACRYPT 2015 - Volume 9453

In this paper we study authenticated encryption algorithms inspired by the OCB mode Offset Codebook. These algorithms use secret offsets masks derived from a whitening key to turn a block cipher into a tweakable block cipher, following the XE or XEX ...
Plaintext recovery and tag guessing attacks on authenticated encryption algorithm COLM
Abstract
There are three main approaches related to cryptanalysis of Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (AEAD) algorithms: Simulating the encryption oracle (universal forgery attack), simulating the decryption oracle (plaintext ...
Highlights
- For the first time, we introduce plaintext recovery and tag guessing attacks against a CAESAR winner.
A Differential Fault Attack on MICKEY 2.0
Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems - CHES 2013
Abstract
In this paper we present a differential fault attack on the stream cipher MICKEY 2.0 which is in eStream’s hardware portfolio. While fault attacks have already been reported against the other two eStream hardware candidates Trivium and Grain, no ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

ACSW '18: Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference

January 2018

404 pages

ISBN:9781450354363

DOI:10.1145/3167918

Conference Chair:
David Abramson

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 January 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Government of the Sultanate of Oman

Conference

ACSW 2018

Sponsor:

CORE

ACSW 2018: Australasian Computer Science Week 2018

January 29 - February 2, 2018

Queensland, Brisband, Australia

Acceptance Rates

ACSW '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 49 of 96 submissions, 51%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 204 of 424 submissions, 48%

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
63
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)5
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 24 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

AlJabri ZAbawajy JHuda S(2023)A Comprehensive Review of Lightweight Authenticated Encryption for IoT DevicesWireless Communications & Mobile Computing10.1155/2023/90719692023Online publication date: 21-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1155/2023/9071969
Salam IYau WPhan RPieprzyk J(2023)Differential fault attacks on the lightweight authenticated encryption algorithm CLX-128Journal of Cryptographic Engineering10.1007/s13389-023-00326-013:3(265-281)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13389-023-00326-0
Salam IOoi TXue LYau WPieprzyk JPhan R(2021)Random Differential Fault Attacks on the Lightweight Authenticated Encryption Stream Cipher Grain-128AEADIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30788459(72568-72586)Online publication date: 2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3078845
Salam ILaw KXue LYau W(2021)Differential Fault Based Key Recovery Attacks on TRIADInformation Security and Cryptology – ICISC 202010.1007/978-3-030-68890-5_15(273-287)Online publication date: 7-Feb-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68890-5_15
Zhang FLiang ZYang BZhao XGuo SRen K(2019)Survey of design and security evaluation of authenticated encryption algorithms in the CAESAR competitionFrontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering10.1631/FITEE.180057619:12(1475-1499)Online publication date: 10-Jan-2019
https://doi.org/10.1631/FITEE.1800576
Bartlett HDawson EQahur Al Mahri HSalam MSimpson LWong K(2019)Random Fault Attacks on a Class of Stream CiphersSecurity and Communication Networks10.1155/2019/16802632019Online publication date: 1-Jan-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1155/2019/1680263

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Collision Attacks Against CAESAR Candidates

Plaintext recovery and tag guessing attacks on authenticated encryption algorithm COLM

A Differential Fault Attack on MICKEY 2.0