{"id":103,"date":"2008-02-23T15:23:36","date_gmt":"2008-02-23T20:23:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scripts.mit.edu\/~zong\/wpress\/?p=103"},"modified":"2008-02-25T19:06:35","modified_gmt":"2008-02-26T00:06:35","slug":"research","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/?p=103","title":{"rendered":"IT security policy &#8220;research&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>&#8220;Researchers find way to steal encrypted data,&#8221; screams <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2008\/02\/22\/technology\/22chip.html\">this article<\/a> in the New York Times.<\/p>\n<p>Oh <em>do<\/em> they? But <em>come&#8230; on&#8230;<\/em>, what is <a href=\"http:\/\/citp.princeton.edu\/memory\/\">this ridiculous demonstration<\/a>? Okay, okay, it&#8217;s the IT Policy School over there, let&#8217;s cut them some slack. What they&#8217;ve come up with is a way to read seated DRAM under OS lock without specialized hardware, and if they said that, it would be fine.<br \/>\n<!--more--><br \/>\nWhile I don&#8217;t care for their pseudo-slick presentation and shameless self-promotion (with a &#8220;blog&#8221;?), it is still a curious piece of work. Its unfortunate and regurgitated untechnicality leaves questions, though. DRAM is refreshed in tens of milliseconds, and since DRAM manufacturers are always trying to cut power consumption, I&#8217;m going to assume this rate is necessary to ensure reliable read out. There is a 3-order magnitude difference between that and the seconds to minutes reported that DRAM can be without power and still be read, during which time <em>exponential<\/em> charge decay takes place. Something else has to be going on, no? It just isn&#8217;t entirely clear that when the computer is turned off momentarily, on-board capacitors or even on-module capacitors aren&#8217;t discharging for long enough to residually power the refresh circuitry [*]. On the other hand, they claim they can remove the RAM completely and (with the help of liquid nitrogen) halt for an hour without power. I have some doubts as they dance around this issue.<\/p>\n<p>As for real implication for security, there isn&#8217;t much, if only because this kind of breach isn&#8217;t fundamental. We already know that once indefinite hardware access to a running machine is first obtained (a practical requirement for this attack), there are always ways to compromise it. That&#8217;s how <a href=\"http:\/\/www.xenatera.com\/bunnie\/proj\/anatak\/xboxmod.html\">the Xbox was cracked<\/a> &#8212; I&#8217;m talking about in-parallel probes on pins and traces, which can be just as well applied to the scenario here. Unless there are self-destructive mechanisms or other <em>fundamental<\/em> barriers to hardware access, we are just dealing with a matter of how high is the effort threshold. To fix it, encryption keys should not be stored in RAM in a detectable way, and any TPM modules that are currently being designed should have additional hardware security measures. That&#8217;s not hard to do, but in the meantime, let&#8217;s sit back and watch an uptick in the cracking of existing software and DRM protection schemes, as protected areas of RAM are opened up to easy hacking &#8212; a far more likely and practical fallout.<\/p>\n<hr size=1>\n<p>[*] I just read their full technical documentation, and they seem a little sloppy. They measure (and plot) total module read out error rate, but then fit a curve to it that they justify with MOSFET charge decay characteristics. Isn&#8217;t that right? Well, no: error rate should exhibit the typical digitizing water-fall effect of the comparator circuit.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&#8220;Researchers find way to steal encrypted data,&#8221; screams this article in the New York Times. Oh do they? But come&#8230; on&#8230;, what is this ridiculous demonstration? Okay, okay, it&#8217;s the IT Policy School over there, let&#8217;s cut them some slack. What they&#8217;ve come up with is a way to read seated DRAM under OS lock [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[1319,1323,1325,1320,467,145,1322,1321,1324,1808],"class_list":["post-103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-charge-decay","tag-curious-piece","tag-dram","tag-dram-manufacturers","tag-error","tag-hardware","tag-liquid-nitrogen","tag-magnitude-difference","tag-ram","tag-security"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=103"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/103\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=103"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=103"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.yhuang.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}