 |
|
 |
| Parallax Forums > Public Forums > SX Microcontrollers, SX/B Compiler and SX-Key Tool > Attn: Entire SX family unsecure to light attack! | Forum Quick Jump
|
 |  Paul Baker Registered Member
        Date Joined Jul 2004 Total Posts : 6316 | Posted 5/5/2005 3:28 PM (GMT -8) |   | | This phenomenon exists with any microcontroller using a fuse to protect code where a blown state (ie protected) is represented by a depleted gate. The light causes the formation of hole-electron pairs, and one of the two moves into the silicon while the other stays near the surface (my recollection is too hazy to remember which, but I think the electrons moved into the silicon). This causes a depletion and accumulation region within the polysilicon gate and can turn on the transistor. All silicon transistors exhibit this behaviour, each acts like a weak phototransitor when exposed to light. Have PICs passed a similiar test? One problem with this is all transisotrs exposed in this way would be affected, possibly corrupting the operation of other chip functions, a well focused IR laser would produce even more predictable overrideing of the security fuse. | | Back to Top | | |
   |  SxPilot450 Registered Member
        Date Joined May 2005 Total Posts : 5 | Posted 5/5/2005 3:51 PM (GMT -8) |   | Looks like it Paul. Removal of the light returns the chip to a locked state. They would appear to latch their state (locked or unlocked) on a reset edge else I would expect to see a mix of scrambled output with good output (as almost all other chips do).
This could be the downfall of the SX because exposing the bare die is nothing unusual for persons in my line of study. This is something Sergei Skorbotov would have loved to have added to his paper he recently released. Looks like he never caught this because he rated the SX with decent security (and it has decent security since the fuses are buried under M3 and out of plain sight. It takes a wet-etch with HF to remove M3 and only then if you understnad semiconductors would you spot them. | | Back to Top | | |
  |  SxPilot450 Registered Member
        Date Joined May 2005 Total Posts : 5 | Posted 5/6/2005 3:52 PM (GMT -8) |   | I do know the PIC's very well in fact they do not have this problem (nor any other current microcontroller I know of). The problem with PIC microcontrollers is their configuration fuses are too easilly spottable. On the newest devices you can delayer the chips and spot them right away.
New or old PICs are not very secure. | | Back to Top | | |
    |  Orion Registered Member
        Date Joined Jul 2004 Total Posts : 236 | Posted 5/6/2005 6:45 PM (GMT -8) |   | | | |
   | Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, February 09, 2010 3:16 AM (GMT -8) There are a total of 415,988 posts in 57,637 threads. In the last 3 days there were 78 new threads and 885 reply posts. View Active Threads
| | Who's Online | This forum has 18517 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, try388. 48 Guest(s), 7 Registered Member(s) are currently online. Details Graham Stabler, humanoido, Bob Lawrence (VE1RLL), computer guy, Rick Brooks, JohnandElspeth, mikestefoy |
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP2.02 dotNetBB © 2000-2010 |
|
|