Udhay Shankar N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>Sounds like an interesting idea - using SRAM state as a source of randomness.
>Any of the folks here willing to comment on this?

The paper actually covers two (related) things, fingerprint extraction and
using SRAM power-up state as a random number source/seed, I assume your
question is about the latter so I'll only address that.  In addition I'm not
sure if you're looking only at RAM state in limited embedded devices or are
wondering whether it's a good source in general, e.g. in desktop PCs, so I'll
assume both.

The problem with using device state in this manner is that it's *completely*
dependent on the device technology and environment in which it's used.  Any
change in the manufacturing process can change the results.  Any change in the
environment (temperature, supply voltage, etc) can change the results.  A
deliberate attack, for example irradiating the device to change the RAM cell
threshold, can change the results.  Even without deliberate modification, SRAM
cells that store a constant value tend to acquire a set over time in which
they'll come up in that state when powered on (this has happened with crypto
hardware storing keys over long periods of time in SRAM).  In a PC, the +5VSB
may trickle enough power through the RAM to retain state for some time after
the machine is powered off, or possibly more or less indefinitely unless the
power is physically removed (I've measure 3-5W power consumption on several
PCs in the suppsedly turned-off state, which indicates that the +5VSB is
powering parts of the system).  ECC memory scrubbing may set the RAM into a
predetermined state.  A slow memory test during POST (which writes all cells
rather than doing a quick test with a large stride) would have the same
effect.  The list goes on and on...

The worst case is a change in the environment or manufacturing process, which
typically occurs without the end user even knowing about it.  You simply can't
guarantee anything about RAM state as an RNG source, you'd have to prove a
negative (no change in manufacturing technology or the environment will affect
the quality of the source) in order to succeed.  It's like the thread-timing-
based RNGs, you can never prove that some current variation of or future
change to the scheduler won't result in totally predictable "random" numbers.

So RAM state is entropy chicken soup, you may as well use it because it can't
make things any worse, but I wouldn't trust it as the sole source of entropy.
What I'd use is a device fingerprint (which is never revealed) seeding a PRNG
with a counter in nonvolatile memory to ensure the PRNG state never repeats.
However the publication of the fingerprint for device ID purposes tends to
negate this usage.


The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to