Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content

APDU-Level Attacks in PKCS#11 Devices

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Research in Attacks, Intrusions, and Defenses (RAID 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNSC,volume 9854))

Abstract

In this paper we describe attacks on PKCS#11 devices that we successfully mounted by interacting with the low-level APDU protocol, used to communicate with the device. They exploit proprietary implementation weaknesses which allow attackers to bypass the security enforced at the PKCS#11 level. Some of the attacks leak, as cleartext, sensitive cryptographic keys in devices that were previously considered secure. We present a new threat model for the PKCS#11 middleware and we discuss the new attacks with respect to various attackers and application configurations. All the attacks presented in this paper have been timely reported to manufacturers following a responsible disclosure process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.pcscworkgroup.com/.

  2. 2.

    This is typically done by using the operating system debug API to instrument or inspect the target process memory. Examples are the Event Tracing API for Windows and the Linux ptrace() syscall.

  3. 3.

    See https://secgroup.dais.unive.it/projects/tookan/.

References

  1. Anderson, R.: The correctness of crypto transaction sets. In: Christianson, B., Crispo, B., Malcolm, J.A., Roe, M. (eds.) Security Protocols 2000. LNCS, vol. 2133, pp. 128–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Barbu, G., Giraud, C., Guerin, V.: Embedded eavesdropping on Java card. In: Gritzalis, D., Furnell, S., Theoharidou, M. (eds.) SEC 2012. IFIP AICT, vol. 376, pp. 37–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Bond, M.: Attacks on cryptoprocessor transaction sets. In: Koç, Ç.K., Naccache, D., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2001. LNCS, vol. 2162, pp. 220–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Bond, M., Anderson, R.: API level attacks on embedded systems. IEEE Comput. Mag. 34(10), 67–75 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bortolozzo, M., Centenaro, M., Focardi, R., Steel, G.: Attacking and fixing PKCS#11 security tokens. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS 2010), pp. 260–269. ACM (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clulow, J.: On the Security of PKCS #11. In: Walter, C.D., Koç, Ç.K., Paar, C. (eds.) CHES 2003. LNCS, vol. 2779, pp. 411–425. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. De Cock, D., Wouters, K., Schellekens, D., Singelee, D., Preneel, B.: Threat modelling for security tokens in web applications. In: Chadwick, D., Preneel, B. (eds.) Communications and Multimedia Security, pp. 183–193. Springer, Cham (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. de Koning, G., Gans, J., de Ruiter.: The smartlogic tool: analysing and testing smart card protocols. In: Fifth IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST 2012, pp. 864–871 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Delaune, S., Kremer, S., Steel, G.: Formal analysis of PKCS#11 and proprietary extensions. J. Comput. Secur. 18(6), 1211–1245 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gkaniatsou, A., McNeill, F., Bundy, A., Steel, G., Focardi, R., Bozzato, C.: Getting to know your card: reverse-engineering the smart-card application protocol data unit. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, ACSAC 2015, pp. 441–450. ACM (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  11. ISO, IEC 7816–4.: Identification cards - Integrated circuit cards - Part 4: Organization, security and commands for interchange (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Longley, D., Rigby, S.: An automatic search for security flaws in key management schemes. Comput. Secur. 11(1), 75–89 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Murdoch, S.J., Drimer, S., Anderson, R.J., Bond, M.: Chip and PIN is broken. In: 31st IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P 2010), 16–19 May 2010, Berleley/Oakland, California, USA, pp. 433–446 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  14. OASIS Standard: PKCS #11 Cryptographic Token Interface Base Specification Version 2.40. http://docs.oasis-open.org/pkcs11/pkcs11-base/v2.40/pkcs11-base-v2.40.html

  15. RSA Laboratories: PKCS #11 v2.30: Cryptographic Token Interface Standard. http://www.emc.com/emc-plus/rsa-labs/standards-initiatives/pkcs-11-cryptographic-token-interface-standard.htm

  16. Schneier, B., Shostack, A., et al.: Breaking up is hard to do: modeling security threats for smart cards. In: USENIX Workshop on Smart Card Technology, Chicago, Illinois, USA (1999). http://www.counterpane.com/smart-card-threats.html

  17. Shostack, A.: Experiences threat modeling at microsoft. In: Modeling Security Workshop. Department of Computing, Lancaster University, UK (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Swiderski, F., Snyder, W.: Threat Modeling. Microsoft Press, Redmond (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, L., Wong, E., Dianxiang, X.: A threat model driven approach for security testing. In: Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Software Engineering for Secure Systems, SESS 2007, p. 10, Washington, D.C, USA. IEEE Computer Society (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Youn, P., Adida, B., Bond, M., Clulow, J., Herzog, J., Lin, A., Rivest, R., Anderson, R.: Robbing the bank with a theorem prover. Technical Report UCAM-CL-TR-644, University of Cambridge, August 2005

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Focardi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bozzato, C., Focardi, R., Palmarini, F., Steel, G. (2016). APDU-Level Attacks in PKCS#11 Devices. In: Monrose, F., Dacier, M., Blanc, G., Garcia-Alfaro, J. (eds) Research in Attacks, Intrusions, and Defenses. RAID 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9854. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45719-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45719-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45718-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45719-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics