The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fault Injection Attacks on Cryptographic Devices: Theory, Practice, and Countermeasures
Abstract
Implementations of cryptographic algorithms continue to proliferate in consumer products due to the increasing demand for secure transmission of confidential information. Although the current standard cryptographic algorithms proved to withstand exhaustive attacks, their hardware and software implementations have exhibited vulnerabilities to side channel attacks, e.g., power analysis and fault injection attacks. This paper focuses on fault injection attacks that have been shown to require inexpensive equipment and a short amount of time. The paper provides a comprehensive description of these attacks on cryptographic devices and the countermeasures that have been developed against them. After a brief review of the widely used cryptographic algorithms, we classify the currently known fault injection attacks into low-cost ones (which a single attacker with a modest budget can mount) and high-cost ones (requiring highly skilled attackers with a large budget). We then list the attacks that have been developed for the important and commonly used ciphers and indicate which ones have been successfully used in practice. The known countermeasures against the previously described fault injection attacks are then presented, including intrusion detection and fault detection. We conclude the survey with a discussion on the interaction between fault injection attacks (and the corresponding countermeasures) and power analysis attacks.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems
Rivest, R. L., Shamir, A., & Adleman, L. (1978) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/359340.359342 · Cited by 13,462
Handbook of applied cryptography
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-4512 · Cited by 10,357
Cited by
Anonymous Two-Factor Authentication in Distributed Systems: Certain Goals Are Beyond Attainment
Wang, D., He, D., Wang, P., & Chu, C.-H. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2014.2355850 · Cited by 451
Bit-Flip Attack: Crushing Neural Network With Progressive Bit Search
Rakin, A. S., He, Z., & Fan, D. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00130 · Cited by 268
Stream cipher designs: a review
Jiao, L., Hao, Y., & Feng, D. (2020) · Science China Information Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11432-018-9929-x · Cited by 67
(2015) · IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive · Cited by 28
LASP: LLM Assisted Security Property Generation for SoC Verification
Ayalasomayajula, A., Guo, R., Zhou, J., Saha, S. K., & Farahmandi, F. (2024) · 2024 ACM/IEEE 6th Symposium on Machine Learning for CAD (MLCAD) · doi:10.1109/mlcad62225.2024.10740198 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Barenghi, A., Breveglieri, L., Koren, I., & Naccache, D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the IEEE
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3056-3076
- ISSN
- 0018-9219 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2256
- OpenAlex
- W2085992264
- Cited by
- 609
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 30.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fault Injection Attacks on Cryptographic Devices: Theory, Practice, and Countermeasures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/jproc.2012.2188769
- The paper
- Barenghi, A., Breveglieri, L., Koren, I., & Naccache, D. (2012). Fault Injection Attacks on Cryptographic Devices: Theory, Practice, and Countermeasures. Proceedings of the IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/jproc.2012.2188769
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.