Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces a novel method for evaluating the indistinguishability of logic locking techniques by comparing distributions of *k*-cuts, effectively comparing against a library of sub-functions. This is motivated by the need for rigorous evaluation of logic locking defenses, which have historically been vulnerable to attacks. The evaluation demonstrates up to 92% average accuracy in identifying the locked design across several logic locking classes, indicating a lack of indistinguishability in the evaluated locks, even with resynthesis.
Logic locking, meant to protect semiconductor IP, can be broken with 92% accuracy by comparing distributions of k-cuts, even after resynthesis.
Logic locking as a solution for semiconductor intellectual property (IP) confidentiality has received considerable attention in academia, but has yet to produce a viable solution to protect against known threats. In part due to a lack of rigor, logic locking defenses have been historically short-lived, which is an unacceptable risk for hardware-based security solutions for critical systems that may be fielded for decades. Researchers have worked to map the concept of cryptographic indistinguishability to logic locking, as indistinguishability provides strong security guarantees. In an effort to bridge theory and practice, we highlight recent efforts that can be used to analyze the indistinguishability of logic locking techniques, and propose a new method of evaluation based on comparing distributions of $k$-cuts, which is akin to comparing against a library of sub-functions. We evaluate our approach on several different classes of logic locking and show up to 92% average accuracy in correctly identifying which design was locked, even in the presence of resynthesis, suggesting that the evaluated locks do not provide indistinguishability.
