The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Flipping bits in memory without accessing them: an experimental study of DRAM disturbance errors
Abstract
Memory isolation is a key property of a reliable and secure computing system--an access to one memory address should not have unintended side effects on data stored in other addresses. However, as DRAM process technology scales down to smaller dimensions, it becomes more difficult to prevent DRAM cells from electrically interacting with each other. In this paper, we expose the vulnerability of commodity DRAM chips to disturbance errors. By reading from the same address in DRAM, we show that it is possible to corrupt data in nearby addresses. More specifically, activating the same row in DRAM corrupts data in nearby rows. We demonstrate this phenomenon on Intel and AMD systems using a malicious program that generates many DRAM accesses. We induce errors in most DRAM modules (110 out of 129) from three major DRAM manufacturers. From this we conclude that many deployed systems are likely to be at risk. We identify the root cause of disturbance errors as the repeated toggling of a DRAM row's wordline, which stresses inter-cell coupling effects that accelerate charge leakage from nearby rows. We provide an extensive characterization study of disturbance errors and their behavior using an FPGA-based testing platform. Among our key findings, we show that (i) it takes as few as 139K accesses to induce an error and (ii) up to one in every 1.7K cells is susceptible to errors. After examining various potential ways of addressing the problem, we propose a low-overhead solution to prevent the errors
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
Cited by
(2016) · IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive · Cited by 1,288
Rowhammer.js: A Remote Software-Induced Fault Attack in JavaScript
Gruss, D., Maurice, C., & Mangard, S. (2016) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40667-1_15 · Cited by 373
Spectre attacks: exploiting speculative execution
Kocher, P., Horn, J., Fogh, A., Genkin, D., Gruss, D., Haas, W., Hamburg, M., Lipp, M., Mangard, S., Prescher, T., et al. (2020) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3399742 · Cited by 281
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
SoK: Understanding the Prevailing Security Vulnerabilities in TrustZone-assisted TEE Systems
Cerdeira, D., Santos, N., Fonseca, P., & Pinto, S. (2020) · 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) · doi:10.1109/sp40000.2020.00061 · Cited by 208
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, Y., Daly, R., Kim, J., Fallin, C., Lee, J. H., Lee, D., Wilkerson, C., Lai, K., & Mutlu, O.
- Venue
- ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News
- Published
- 2014-06-14
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 361-372
- ISSN
- 0163-5964 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2157116240
- Cited by
- 921
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 46.21
- 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: Flipping bits in memory without accessing them: an experimental study of DRAM disturbance errors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/2678373.2665726
- The paper
- Kim, Y., Daly, R., Kim, J., Fallin, C., Lee, J. H., Lee, D., Wilkerson, C., Lai, K., & Mutlu, O. (2014). Flipping bits in memory without accessing them: an experimental study of DRAM disturbance errors. ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News. https://doi.org/10.1145/2678373.2665726
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.