| ??? 02/26/08 19:30 Read: times |
#151494 - Brute-force copying Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Jan Waclawek said:
As far as brute-force copying is concerned - I simply don't believe this does not evolve together with the evolution of the microelectronic technology. I agree that there are really good tools to extract most of the physical layout from a part, and turn that into a physical data base, and then turn that into a netlist. But they still do not detect the implanted layers, which are invisible. And you can do a lot of harm with implants. Once you have the netlist, you need to understand it to identify the gotchas. And that can take a lot of time. Months to years of time. The cost of copying this way is exponentially proportional to the area of the circuit. What we try to do is raise the cost to the level where it is easier for the thiefs to just design their own circuit. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Obtaining maximum code security | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Worth it ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Protection with Patents | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the value... again... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "OCR"ing a Design | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's a brave man | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Specialist secure micros | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| this is a different form of security | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Huge NREs? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What if you don't bond out nPSEN? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why not drop !EA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Don't Drop !EA! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Couldn\'t you do that in another way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Eliminating /EA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The value of PSEN | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not only... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Brute-force copying | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well, maybe... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Erase on tamper detect | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Make the chip hard to access | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's quite impractical... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
few thousand dollars ... Not at all | 01/01/70 00:00 |