From: stef <[email protected]>
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 02:35:39AM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Bill Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I've been noodling the idea of a USB stick designed in a way that we
>> > can trust the crypto that goes on there.  It's a hard problem, but
> >> there
 seems to be some guidelines that could help:

>as hinted earlier in the pcp/pbp discussion, i'm working on such a beast:
>  https://www.ctrlc.hu/~stef/PITCHFORK.pdf

>>> Anyway, it's just a fun idea.  I'd love to have such a
>>> device in my pocket.  There's a lot of applications I can think of
>>> that could benefit from it, from electronic voting to
>>> microtransactions.

>PITCHFORK will allow you to develop your own extensions, so indeed i expect a
>lot of experiments and innovation if this gets off.

>currently some of my code has licensing problems and needs to be reimplemented
>before publication :/

>> Many of these open hardware ideas come down to the fab level...
>indeed, there's a lot of trust in things we have limited resources to
>validate. turtles all the way down.

One thing that's needed is a way to determine if said device has been tampered 
with or replaced.  I suggest that such devices contain a pc board with a few 
(16 or so?) solder-bumps in a bare area (easily made using surface-mount 
soldering techniques) onto which would be pressed a carbon-fiber weave of 
cloth, itself impregnated with epoxy adhesive and held in place (over the 
solder bumps) until the epoxy is cured.   Each connection between a bump and 
the carbon-fiber weave would have an impossible (?) to replicate resistance.   
Each solder bump would connect to a lead of a chip, said chip containing analog 
switches
 and an A/D convertor.  In operation, the resistance between these solder-bumps 
would be measured by the chip; also, perhaps two or more different solder bumps 
could be driven by the chip to different voltages (Vcc and Gnd), and the 
voltages of the rest of the solder bumps would be measured.  These as-measured 
values could be transmitted through the USB (possibly in encrypted or hashed 
form) and stored by a connected computer.    The entire device would be potted 
in a clear potting material, probably clear epoxy.  Any tampering would be 
automatically detectable electronically, and it would be exceedingly difficult 
to replicate the results of the large number of possible separate measurements 
which could be made.
There would be (16x15/2)= 120 two-terminal resistance values; Each such 
measured value could be accompanied by measuring the voltage of the other 14 
terminals, or 120 x 14 = 1680
 values.
       Jim Bell

Reply via email to