skip to main content
10.1145/3394885.3431595acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaspdacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Automated Test Generation for Hardware Trojan Detection using Reinforcement Learning

Published:29 January 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Due to globalized semiconductor supply chain, there is an increasing risk of exposing System-on-Chip (SoC) designs to malicious implants, popularly known as hardware Trojans. Unfortunately, traditional simulation-based validation using millions of test vectors is unsuitable for detecting stealthy Trojans with extremely rare trigger conditions due to exponential input space complexity of modern SoCs. There is a critical need to develop efficient Trojan detection techniques to ensure trustworthy SoCs. While there are promising test generation approaches, they have serious limitations in terms of scalability and detection accuracy. In this paper, we propose a novel logic testing approach for Trojan detection using an effective combination of testability analysis and reinforcement learning. Specifically, this paper makes three important contributions. 1) Unlike existing approaches, we utilize both controllability and observability analysis along with rareness of signals to significantly improve the trigger coverage. 2) Utilization of reinforcement learning considerably reduces the test generation time without sacrificing the test quality. 3) Experimental results demonstrate that our approach can drastically improve both trigger coverage (14.5% on average) and test generation time (6.5 times on average) compared to state-of-the-art techniques.

References

  1. [n.d.]. ISCAS Benchmarks. https://filebox.ece.vt.edu/~mhsiao/iscas89.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [n.d.]. SCOAP. https://sourceforge.net/projects/testabilitymeasurementtool/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Alif Ahmed et al. 2018. Scalable hardware Trojan activation by interleaving concrete simulation and symbolic execution. In International Test Conference. 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Thomas Back. 1996. Evolutionary algorithms in theory and practice: evolution strategies, evolutionary programming, genetic algorithms. Oxford university press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. R. Chakraborty et al. 2009. MERO: A Statistical Approach for Hardware Trojan Detection. In CHES. 396--410.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Yuanwen Huang et al. 2018. Scalable test generation for Trojan detection using side channel analysis. IEEE TIFS 13, 11 (2018), 2746--2760.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Henry J Kelley. 1960. Gradient theory of optimal flight paths. Ars Journal 30, 10 (1960), 947--954.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Sami Khairy et al. 2019. Reinforcement-Learning-Based Variational Quantum Circuits Optimization for Combinatorial Problems. CoRR abs/1911.04574 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Yangdi Lyu and Prabhat Mishra. 2020. Automated Trigger Activation by Repeated Maximal Clique Sampling. In ASPDAC. 482--487.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yangdi Lyu and Prabhat Mishra. 2020. MaxSense: Side-Channel Sensitivity Maximization for Trojan Detection using Statistical Test Patterns. TODAES (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Yangdi Lyu and Prabhat Mishra. 2020. Scalable Activation of Rare Triggers in Hardware Trojans by Repeated Maximal Clique Sampling. IEEE TCAD (2020).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. L. Moura and N. Bjørner. 2008. Z3: An Efficient SMT Solver. In TACAS. 337--340.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. M. Nourian et al. 2018. Hardware Trojan Detection Using an Advised Genetic Algorithm Based Logic Testing. JETTA 34, 4 (2018), 461--470.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Zhixin Pan, Jennifer Sheldon, and Prabhat Mishra. 2020. Test Generation using Reinforcement Learning for Delay-based Side-Channel Analysis. ICCAD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Irith Pomeranz and Sudhakar M. Reddy. 2004. A Measure of Quality for n-Detection Test Sets. IEEE Trans. Computers 53, 11 (2004), 1497--1503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Stuart J Russell and Peter Norvig. 2016. Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Malaysia; Pearson Education Limited.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. H. Salmani. 2017. COTD: Reference-Free Hardware Trojan Detection and Recovery Based on Controllability and Observability in Gate-Level Netlist. TIFS (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ASPDAC '21: Proceedings of the 26th Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference
    January 2021
    930 pages
    ISBN:9781450379991
    DOI:10.1145/3394885

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 29 January 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    ASPDAC '21 Paper Acceptance Rate111of368submissions,30%Overall Acceptance Rate466of1,454submissions,32%

    Upcoming Conference

    ASPDAC '25

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader