Paper detail

Statistical Analysis Based Feature Selection Enhanced RF-PUF with >99.8% Accuracy on Unmodified Commodity Transmitters for IoT Physical Security

Due to the diverse and mobile nature of the deployment environment, smart commodity devices are vulnerable to various attacks which can grant unauthorized access to a rogue device in a large, connected network. Traditional digital signature-based authentication methods are vulnerable to key recovery attacks, CSRF, etc. To circumvent this, RF-PUF had been proposed as a promising alternative that utilizes the inherent nonidealities of the devices as physical signatures. RF-PUF offers a robust authentication method that is resilient to key-hacking methods due to the absence of secret key requirements and does not require any additional circuitry on the transmitter end, eliminating additional power, area, and computational burden. In this work, for the first time, we analyze the effectiveness of RF-PUF on commodity devices, purchased off-the-shelf, without any modifications whatsoever. Data were collected from 30 Xbee S2C modules and released as a public dataset. A new feature has been engineered through statistical property analysis. With a new and robust feature set, it has been shown that 95% accuracy can be achieved using only ~1.8 ms of test data, reaching >99.8% accuracy with more data and a network of higher model capacity, without any assisting digital preamble. The design space has been explored in detail and the effect of the wireless channel has been determined. The performance of some popular ML algorithms has been compared with the NN approach. A thorough investigation on various PUF properties has been done and both intra and inter-PUF distances have been calculated. With extensive testing of 41238000 cases, the detection probability for RF-PUF for our data is found to be 0.9987, which, for the first time, experimentally establishes RF-PUF as a strong authentication method. Finally, the potential attack models and the robustness of RF-PUF against them have been discussed.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.