On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 05:51:50PM +1300, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> For the past several years I've been making a point of asking users of crypto
> on embedded systems (which would be particularly good targets for side-channel
> attacks, particularly ones that provide content-protection capabilities)
> whether they'd consider enabling side-channel attack (SCA - no, not that SCA)
> protection in their use of crypto.  So far I've never found anyone who's made

> In other words the user has to make a conscious decision that SCA protection
> is important enough that performance/power consumption can be sacrificed for
> it.  Can anyone provide any data on users making this tradeoff?  And since
> negative results are also results, a response of "I've never found anyone who
> cares either" is also useful.  Since the information may be commercially

I have little experience on the embedded crypto side but I do maintain
a crypto library that has some non-zero number of users on general
desktop and server machines.

Basic protections ala your point 2 are provided and enabled by default
(blinding, and checking private key operations for consistency with
the public, to prevent the really easy attacks). There used to be a
toggle to disable blinding, which as far as I know was never used - or
at least nobody complained when I removed the toggle.

To my memory nobody has ever asked about what SCA measures are or are
not enabled, or how to toggle them, though I do have a FAQ entry about
it, so perhaps people who really wanted serious side-channel
resistence just read that FAQ and moved on to another implementation
without ever bothering to contact me - certainly there are some
self-selection problems with my sampling.

When FlexSecure wrote Botan's ECC implementation for BSI, they
implemented a number of anti-timing attack countermeasures - but they
were being paid to care about that, so this is probably not a valid


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

Reply via email to