Gap between Prediction and Truth: A Case Study of False-Positives in Leakage Detection

Pengbo Wang, Ming Tang, Shoukun Xiang, Yaru Wang, Botao Liu
{"title":"Gap between Prediction and Truth: A Case Study of False-Positives in Leakage Detection","authors":"Pengbo Wang, Ming Tang, Shoukun Xiang, Yaru Wang, Botao Liu","doi":"10.1155/2022/6904232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since leakage detection was introduced as a popular side-channel security assessment, it has been plagued by false-positives (a.k.a. type I errors). To fix this error, the previous solutions set detection thresholds based on an assumption-based prediction of false-positive rate (FPR). However, this study points out that such a prediction (of FPR) may be inaccurate. We notice that the prediction in EuroCrypt2016 is much smaller than (approximately \n \n 1\n /\n \n 779\n \n \n times) the true FPR. The gap between prediction and truth, called underpredicted false-positives (UFP), leads to severe false-positives in leakage detection. Then, we check the statistical distribution of test statistics to analyze the cause of UFP. Our analysis indicates that the overlap between cross-validation (CV) blocks gives rise to an assumption error in the distribution of the CV-based estimates of \n \n ρ\n \n -statistics, which is the root cause of UFP. Therefore, we tackle the UFP by eliminating the overlap between blocks. Specifically, we propose a profiling-shared validation (PSV) and utilize this validation to improve the detection of any-variate any-order leakages. Our experiments show that the PSV solves the UFP and saves more than 75% of the test time costs. In summary, this article reports a potential flaw in leakage detection and provides a complete analysis of the flaw for the first time.","PeriodicalId":167643,"journal":{"name":"Secur. Commun. Networks","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Secur. Commun. Networks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6904232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since leakage detection was introduced as a popular side-channel security assessment, it has been plagued by false-positives (a.k.a. type I errors). To fix this error, the previous solutions set detection thresholds based on an assumption-based prediction of false-positive rate (FPR). However, this study points out that such a prediction (of FPR) may be inaccurate. We notice that the prediction in EuroCrypt2016 is much smaller than (approximately 1 / 779 times) the true FPR. The gap between prediction and truth, called underpredicted false-positives (UFP), leads to severe false-positives in leakage detection. Then, we check the statistical distribution of test statistics to analyze the cause of UFP. Our analysis indicates that the overlap between cross-validation (CV) blocks gives rise to an assumption error in the distribution of the CV-based estimates of ρ -statistics, which is the root cause of UFP. Therefore, we tackle the UFP by eliminating the overlap between blocks. Specifically, we propose a profiling-shared validation (PSV) and utilize this validation to improve the detection of any-variate any-order leakages. Our experiments show that the PSV solves the UFP and saves more than 75% of the test time costs. In summary, this article reports a potential flaw in leakage detection and provides a complete analysis of the flaw for the first time.
预测与真实之间的差距:泄漏检测中误报的案例研究
自从泄漏检测作为一种流行的侧信道安全评估引入以来,它一直受到误报(又名I型错误)的困扰。为了修正这个错误,前面的解决方案基于假阳性率(FPR)的假设预测来设置检测阈值。然而,这项研究指出,这样的预测(FPR)可能是不准确的。我们注意到EuroCrypt2016中的预测比真实的FPR要小得多(大约1 / 779倍)。预测和真实之间的差距被称为预测不足的假阳性(UFP),导致泄漏检测中出现严重的假阳性。然后,通过检验统计量的统计分布来分析UFP产生的原因。我们的分析表明,交叉验证(CV)块之间的重叠导致基于CV的ρ -统计量估计分布的假设误差,这是UFP的根本原因。因此,我们通过消除块之间的重叠来处理UFP。具体来说,我们提出了一种分析共享验证(PSV),并利用这种验证来改进对任意变量任意顺序泄漏的检测。我们的实验表明,PSV解决了UFP问题,节省了75%以上的测试时间成本。综上所述,本文报道了泄漏检测中的一个潜在缺陷,并首次对该缺陷进行了完整的分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信