PUF Modeling Attacks on Simulated and Silicon Data

By U. Rührmair, Jan Sölter, Frank Sehnke, Xiaolin Xu, Ahmed Mahmoud, Vera Stoyanova, Gideon Dror, J. Urgen Schmidhuber, Wayne P. Burleson, Srini Devadas. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2013

567 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Hardware and Architecture

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/44ba38111877147c19c8c68079c811bff03e7b8d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Electrical and Electronic Engineering

1. Robert J. Young
2. Utz Roedig
3. Thomas McGrath
4. Zhiming M. Wang
5. Ibrahim Ethem Bagci

Citations in the corpus

• A PUF taxonomy (2019, background): “12 Alongside the disagreement as to what constitutes a “weak” and “strong” PUF, there is a level of disagreement as to what can be called a PUF in the first place.”
• Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA): A Comprehensive Survey (2022, background): “However, this approach has also been shown to be vulnerable to modelling attacks that can be used to infer characteristics well enough to support cloning and redistribution [53].”