Analyzing the Efficiency of Biased-Fault Based Attacks

In this letter, we analyze a class of recently proposed fault analysis techniques, which adopt a biased fault model. The purpose of our analysis is to evaluate the relative efficiency of several recently proposed biased-fault attacks. We compare the relative performance of each technique in a common framework, using a common circuit and a common fault injection method. We show that, for an identical circuit and fault injection method (setup time violation through clock glitching), the number of faults per attack greatly varies according to the analysis technique. In particular, DFIA is more efficient than FSA, and FSA is more efficient than both NUEVA and NUFVA. In terms of number of fault injections until full key disclosure, for a typical case, FSA uses 8x more faults than DFIA, and NUEVA uses 33x more faults than DFIA. Hence, the postprocessing technique selected in a biased-fault attack has a significant impact on the success of the attack.