Paper detail

Systematically Evaluation of Challenge Obfuscated APUFs

As a well-known physical unclonable function that can provide huge number of challenge response pairs (CRP) with a compact design and fully compatibility with current electronic fabrication process, the arbiter PUF (APUF) has attracted great attention. To improve its resilience against modeling attacks, many APUF variants have been proposed so far. Though the modeling resilience of response obfuscated APUF variants such as XOR-APUF and lightweight secure APUF (LSPUF) have been well studied, the challenge obfuscated APUFs (CO-APUFs) such as feed-forward APUF (FF-APUF), and XOR-FF-APUF are less elucidated, especially, with the deep learning (DL) methods. This work systematically evaluates five CO-APUFs including three influential designs of FF-APUF, XOR-FF-APUF, iPUF, one very recently design and our newly optimized design (dubbed as OAX-FF-APUF), in terms of their reliability, uniformity (related to uniqueness), and modeling resilience. Three DL techniques of GRU, TCN and MLP are employed to examine these CO-APUFs' modeling resilience -- the first two are newly explored. With computation resource of a common personal computer, we show that all five CO-APUFs with relatively large scale can be successfully modeled -- attacking accuracy higher or close to its reliability. The hyper-parameter tuning of DL technique is crucial for implementing efficient attacks. Increasing the scale of the CO-APUF is validated to be able to improve the resilience but should be done with minimizing the reliability degradation. As the powerful capability of DL technique affirmed by us, we recommend the DL, specifically the MLP technique always demonstrating best efficacy, to be always considered for examining the modeling resilience when newly composited APUFs are devised or to a large extent, other strong PUFs are constructed.

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.