| ??? 06/04/12 19:54 Read: times |
#187613 - Don't think so much about modification as in extraction Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Andy Peters said:
What's the intent? It's not like the hacker can remotely reprogram the FPGA to have to do some evil thing (like bring down a plane or focus a laser beam on the White House). You are thinking about changing the logic in an existing chip for use in a specific unit installed at a specific place. But if the FPGA have memory, that memory can contain encryption keys that are stored unencrypted - and extraction of these keys can allow someone to do a lot of interesting thing remotely. The hacker needs to have access to the JTAG port in order to do anything malicious. Even if the hacker wanted to clone the device, he needs access to it. And the JTAG port is normally available as a connector or test pads on the PCB - so someone who steals/loans such a box and opens it will have access to the JTAG port. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| have you seen this? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Backdoor access | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What's the big deal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Crypto keys | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| High security chips | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| IP theft | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| as far as IP theft is concerned ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Its really | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Biggest problems is still processor copy-protection | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| so Mr Evil Hacker gets his keys | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Mr Evil Hacker is most definitely busy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Who writes that crap? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Don't think so much about modification as in extraction | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The people who write that crap... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
c'mon, Jez! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Never mind who writes it .... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Right on! | 01/01/70 00:00 |