Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 43 references

Side Channel Analysis in Homomorphic Encryption

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This survey argues that fully homomorphic encryption implementations leak plaintexts and keys through side channels, despite the mathematical security of the underlying schemes.

desk verdict Useful survey of FHE side-channel attacks, but its cloud-applicability claim outruns the evidence and the text needs cleanup before it can be trusted as a reference. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.11058 v1 pith:JYJZZY5B submitted 2025-05-16 cs.CR

Baraq Ghaleb , William J Buchanan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CR
keywords side-channelanalysishomomorphicencryptionfullypowertimingattacksfaultinjectionlattice-basedcryptographysingle-traceattack
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out to show that fully homomorphic encryption, although built on mathematically secure lattice problems, is vulnerable in practice through side channels that leak information about plaintexts, secret keys, or intermediate values. It organizes the threat space into passive and active attacks—power, timing, electromagnetic, and fault—and reviews real case studies on major FHE libraries. The strongest reported results include a single-trace power attack that drops BFV plaintext security from $2^{128}$ to $2^{4.4}$, a neural-network attack recovering secret-key coefficients from CKKS key generation with 98.6% accuracy, a cache-timing attack needing only eight ciphertexts for full key recovery, and a malicious-server fault attack recovering full TFHE/FHEW keys with a few thousand client queries. The survey matters because FHE is being positioned for privacy-preserving cloud and machine-learning computation, where implementation leakage would undermine the confidentiality the scheme promises.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the specific implementation components of FHE where data-dependent behavior shows up: Gaussian error sampling in BFV encryption, the number theoretic transform (NTT)—a fast polynomial multiplication step used throughout lattice cryptography—Barrett modular reduction in SEAL, and bootstrapping with LWE error terms. These are the points where branch operations, Hamming-weight differences, and memory-access patterns create measurable power, timing, or electromagnetic differences. The survey's taxonomy of side-channel analysis—simple versus differential, passive versus active, and the power, timing, electromagnetic, and fault channels—organizes how those leak points can be reached, and the case studies show which component each attack targets.

What would settle it

Run the REVEAL attack procedure against a current SEAL or OpenFHE deployment on a standard cloud-server CPU at normal clock speed and check whether a single power or electromagnetic trace still recovers the plaintext's error coefficients; if the noise floor prevents recovery, the survey's strongest practical claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that every main layer of an FHE implementation—error sampling, key generation, modular multiplication, and decryption—has been shown to leak, and the leaks are exploitable in practice. It presents the REVEAL attack on SEAL's BFV encryption as the first single-trace side-channel attack on homomorphic encryption, recovering error-polynomial coefficients and reducing plaintext security from $2^{128}$ to $2^{4.4}$ on a RISC-V FPGA at 1.5 MHz. It then reports that a two-stage neural-network classifier can recover ternary secret-key coefficients from the number theoretic transform in CKKS key generation with 98.6% accuracy, and that this holds even against random delay insertion and under maximum compiler optimization. It also describes a remote cache-timing attack on Barrett modular multiplication that uniquely determines the SEAL secret key with as few as eight triggering ciphertexts, and a server-side attack that induces decryption errors to recover full TFHE and FHEW keys with 19,838 and 7,565 client queries. The survey concludes that masking, blinding, shuffling, and even constant-time implementations are each insufficient as standalone defenses, because single-trace and profiling-based attacks bypass them.

Load-bearing premise

The survey's practical urgency rests on the assumption that side-channel leaks demonstrated on low-frequency, local hardware (a 1.5 MHz RISC-V FPGA and an ARM Cortex-M4F) transfer to the full-speed cloud servers where FHE is mainly deployed, and the paper notes that higher frequencies add noise.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the surveyed attacks are representative, FHE confidentiality cannot be assumed from mathematical security alone; deployments must be evaluated for implementation leakage.
  • Single-trace attacks make masking, blinding, and random delays insufficient on their own, because a single well-placed measurement can bypass the randomization.
  • A malicious cloud server that controls ciphertexts can, in principle, recover a client's TFHE or FHEW secret key by inducing decryption errors and timing the client's responses, inverting the cloud-privacy model.
  • FHE libraries need constant-time rewrites of low-level helpers such as conditional-selection macros and hardened key generation, not just constant-time modular arithmetic.
  • Because several attacks target the NTT and Gaussian sampling, the same leakage classes are likely to reappear in any lattice-based FHE stack that shares these components.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The strongest demonstrations were run on low-frequency embedded-class hardware (a 1.5 MHz RISC-V FPGA and an ARM Cortex-M4F); whether the same signal-to-noise ratios hold on full-speed cloud CPUs and virtualized instances is an open question this survey does not settle.
  • If these attacks generalize to cloud hardware, the natural next target is bootstrapping, which evaluates the decryption circuit with the secret key and is the most compute-heavy phase; the paper does not make this extension.
  • A practical consequence the authors leave implicit is that side-channel audits should become part of FHE library release criteria, with power, electromagnetic, and cache-timing tests run at the target deployment frequency before production use.
  • A testable prediction from the survey's synthesis is that a masked FHE implementation with an unmasked NTT or Gaussian sampler will remain vulnerable to single-trace key recovery; confirming it would require a new experiment beyond the cited cases.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a survey of side-channel analysis for homomorphic encryption. It introduces a taxonomy of passive and active side-channel attacks, provides background on BGV/BFV and CKKS, summarizes six published attack case studies (including REVEAL, NTT-based key-generation leakage, LWE/LWR message leakage, a cache-timing attack on SEAL, a single-trace attack on masked lattice encryption, and a key-recovery attack on TFHE/FHEW via induced decryption errors), and lists mitigation strategies such as constant-time programming, masking, shuffling, and randomized noise. The paper's central claim is that FHE's theoretical security does not ensure implementation security and that real-world deployments leak exploitable information through power, timing, electromagnetic, and fault channels, with the REVEAL attack cited as reducing the security level from 2^128 to 2^4.4.

Significance. If the survey's reporting is accurate, it is a useful consolidated reference for practitioners and researchers entering FHE side-channel analysis. Its strengths are that the case studies are drawn from peer-reviewed or widely referenced works and are mostly described faithfully, and that the paper highlights a genuinely important gap between FHE's mathematical security and its implementation security. The paper does not claim new attacks or countermeasures; its value is organizational and expository. The main weakness is that the practical-impact conclusion is broader than the experimental evidence: most of the featured power/EM attacks were demonstrated in local, low-frequency laboratory settings, while the paper's motivation emphasizes cloud deployment.

major comments (3)
  1. [1.1, 4.1, 4.2, 4.4] The paper's motivating claim that FHE deployments 'often face challenges' from side channels (Sec. 1.1) is broader than the evidence it cites. The strongest attacks use single-trace power/EM measurements on a RISC-V FPGA at 1.5 MHz (Sec. 4.1) and an ARM Cortex-M4F (Sec. 4.2), and Sec. 4.1 itself concedes that higher frequencies increase noise and may require advanced equipment. The remote cache-timing result in Sec. 4.4 covers one channel only and does not establish that power/EM attacks transfer to shared cloud hardware. The authors should either provide concrete evidence of transferability to realistic cloud or virtualized deployments, or explicitly restrict their practical-impact conclusions to physically accessible devices.
  2. [5.2] The statement that masking and blinding are 'particularly susceptible to single-trace side-channel attacks [15] [34]' is not supported by the cited case studies: REVEAL (Sec. 4.1) and the cache-timing attack (Sec. 4.4) target unmasked SEAL implementations. The relevant single-trace attack on masked lattice-based encryption is described in Sec. 4.5 as [35]. Please correct the citations or qualify the claim, since this sentence is the main evidence that masking is not a standalone defense.
  3. [4.1] The headline result that REVEAL 'reduces the security level of the plaintext encryption from 2^128 to 2^4.4' needs a precise definition of the metric being reported. Is this the post-attack complexity for recovering a complete plaintext, for a single coefficient, or after averaging over per-coefficient success rates? The original source should be quoted with its exact metric; without this context, readers cannot interpret the severity of the attack or compare it with other reported attacks.
minor comments (5)
  1. [2.6, Eq. (13)-(15)] The secret key is described as 'a random ternary polynomial (-1, 0, and 0 coefficients)', which should read coefficients in {-1, 0, 1}. In addition, the public-key encryption equation introduces 'a' without defining it after pk1 and pk2 have been defined; unify the notation with the public-key components.
  2. [3] Passive side-channel attacks are called 'tamper attacks' in the first paragraph of Section 3; this is incorrect, because tampering is an active attack. Please fix the taxonomy wording.
  3. [2.4, 2.7, 2.8] The definitions of polynomial approximation and Chebyshev polynomials are repeated nearly verbatim in three places; consolidate them into a single background subsection to avoid redundancy.
  4. [References and Section 2] Some citations are mismatched: [18] is cited for the early RSA homomorphism but points to an OpenFHE repository, and [23] is cited as a homomorphic encryption library but points to a tutorial page. Please audit the reference list.
  5. [Abstract and Section 1] The abstract and the introduction contain duplicated sentences, such as the passage about enabling secure processing of encrypted data and the PHE/FHE categorization; tighten these passages.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the survey's central vulnerability claims rest on external attack papers, not on the authors' own prior work.

full rationale

This is a survey, not a derivation, so the main circularity patterns do not apply. It fits no parameters, defines no quantity in terms of another, and invokes no uniqueness theorem. The central claim, that FHE implementations can leak key material or plaintext via side channels, is supported by independent external studies: REVEAL on SEAL BFV encryption (Aydin et al., DATE 2022), the NTT single-trace attack on SEAL CKKS key generation (Aydin and Aysu, J. Cryptogr. Eng. 2024), the cache-timing attack on SEAL's Barrett reduction (Cheng et al., PROOFS 2022), and the full-key recovery on TFHE/FHEW (Chaturvedi et al., ePrint 2022/1563). The BGV/BFV equations in Sec. 2.6 are standard background and are not used to infer leakage. The only self-referential element is a handful of background references to the second author's Asecuritysite pages for library descriptions and Chebyshev approximation ([18], [23], [24], [28]); these are not load-bearing for the side-channel conclusion, so they do not create circularity. The paper also explicitly records the REVEAL attack's 1.5 MHz limitation in Sec. 4.1, which is a transferability caveat about higher-frequency noise, not a circular step. Score is 1 rather than 0 only to acknowledge the presence of these minor non-load-bearing self-citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper is a review and does not fit parameters, postulate mechanisms, or introduce new entities. Its central claim depends on the standard hardness of lattice problems, the correctness of the textbook schemes it sketches, and the fidelity of its summaries of prior attacks.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption RLWE and related lattice problems are computationally hard (the standard security assumption for BGV/BFV/CKKS schemes).
    The paper's threat model inherits the standard lattice hardness assumptions from the cited scheme papers without proving them; this is normal and standard in cryptography.
  • standard math The simplified BGV/BFV encryption, decryption, and key generation equations in Section 2.6 are correct and representative.
    The paper presents these formulas as background, and the equations are broadly self-consistent, but the exposition contains typos and nonstandard notation, so the reader must rely on prior knowledge of the schemes.
  • domain assumption The six cited case studies ([15], [32]-[36]) are accurately summarized and representative of the current state of HE side-channel research.
    The survey's conclusions rest entirely on its secondary reporting of these attacks; the paper does not independently replicate them or systematically justify why these six were chosen.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Side Channel Analysis in Homomorphic Encryption." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JYJZZY5B

@misc{pith2026250511058,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Side Channel Analysis in Homomorphic Encryption},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JYJZZY5B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.11058}
}
read the original abstract

Homomorphic encryption provides many opportunities for privacy-aware processing, including with methods related to machine learning. Many of our existing cryptographic methods have been shown in the past to be susceptible to side channel attacks. With these, the implementation of the cryptographic methods can reveal information about the private keys used, the result, or even the original plaintext. An example of this includes the processing of the RSA exponent using the Montgomery method, and where 0's and 1's differ in their processing time for modular exponentiation. With FHE, we typically use lattice methods, and which can have particular problems in their implementation in relation to side channel leakage. This paper aims to outline a range of weaknesses within FHE implementations as related to side channel analysis. It outlines a categorization for side-channel analysis, some case studies, and mitigation strategies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.11058 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Possible side channels of a cryptographic device during an encryption [13]. – Computational Intensity: HE operations are highly computationally in￾tensive, increasing exposure to side-channel analysis due to longer processing time [15]. – Complex Operations: HE schemes often involve complex mathematical operations with varying execution patterns that depending on the encrypted data or key material. These variations … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Observing RSA key bits using power analysis: The left peak shows the power consumption during the squaring-only step, the right (broader) peak shows the multi￾plication step, allowing exponent bits 0 and 1 to be distinguished [14]. (RLWE) aproach [21]. These methods are similar to each other, and there is only a minor difference between them. They are generally used in applica￾tions with small integer values. – 3rd … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Asymmetric encryption (public key) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Symmetric encryption [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Bootstrapping 2.4 Arbitrary smooth functions With approximation theory, it is possible to determine an approximate poly￾nomial p(x) that is an approximation to a function f(x). A polynomial takes the form of p(x) = an.xn + an−1.xn−1 + ... + a1.x + a0, and where a0... a…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Slots for plaintext m = an−1an−2...a0 (2) This is converted into a polynomial form: m = an−1x n−1 + an−2x n−2 + ... + a1x + a0 (mod q) (3) The polynomials coefficients form a vector representation of the plaintext. For improved efficiency, messages can also be encoded …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [15]

    Reveal: Single-trace side-channel leakage of the seal homomorphic encryption library,

    F. Aydin, E. Karabulut, S. Potluri, E. Alkim, and A. Aysu, “Reveal: Single-trace side-channel leakage of the seal homomorphic encryption library,” in2022 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE), Antwerp, Bel- gium, 2022, pp. 1527–1532

    work page 2022

  2. [34]

    On exploiting message leakage in (few) nist pqc candidates for practical message recovery attacks,

    P. Ravi, S. Bhasin, S. S. Roy, and A. Chattopadhyay, “On exploiting message leakage in (few) nist pqc candidates for practical message recovery attacks,”IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, vol. 17, pp. 684–699, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [35]

    Cache-timing attack on the seal homomorphic encryption library,

    W. Cheng, J.-L. Danger, S. Guilley, F. Huang, A. B. Korchiet al., “Cache-timing attack on the seal homomorphic encryption library,” in 22 Baraq Ghaleb and William J Buchanan 11th International Workshop on Security Proofs for Embedded Systems (PROOFS 2022), Leuven, Belgium, Sep 2022. [Online]. Available: https: //hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03780506

    work page 2022

  4. [1]

    Public-key cryptosystems based on composite degree residuosity classes,

    P. Paillier, “Public-key cryptosystems based on composite degree residuosity classes,” inInternational conference on the theory and applications of cryptographic techniques. Springer, 1999, pp. 223–238

    work page 1999

  5. [2]

    A public key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms,

    T. ElGamal, “A public key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms,”IEEE transactions on information theory, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 469–472, 1985

    work page 1985

  6. [3]

    A generalization of pailliers public-key system with applications to electronic voting,

    I. Damg˚ ard, M. Jurik, and J. B. Nielsen, “A generalization of pailliers public-key system with applications to electronic voting,”International Journal of Informa- tion Security, vol. 9, pp. 371–385, 2010. 20 Baraq Ghaleb and William J Buchanan

    work page 2010

  7. [4]

    A new public-key cryptosystem as secure as factor- ing,

    T. Okamoto and S. Uchiyama, “A new public-key cryptosystem as secure as factor- ing,” inAdvances in CryptologyEUROCRYPT’98: International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques Espoo, Finland, May 31–June 4, 1998 Proceedings 17. Springer, 1998, pp. 308–318

    work page 1998

  8. [5]

    J. D. Cohen and M. J. Fischer,A robust and verifiable cryptographically secure election scheme. Yale University. Department of Computer Science, 1985

    work page 1985

Show all 43 references
  1. [6]

    A new public-key cryptosystem,

    D. Naccache and J. Stern, “A new public-key cryptosystem,” inAdvances in Cryp- tologyEUROCRYPT97: International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques Konstanz, Germany, May 11–15, 1997 Proceedings

    1997

  2. [7]

    Probabilistic encryption & how to play mental poker keeping secret all partial information,

    S. Goldwasser and S. Micali, “Probabilistic encryption & how to play mental poker keeping secret all partial information,” inProviding sound foundations for cryp- tography: on the work of Shafi Goldwasser and Silvio Micali, 2019, pp. 173–201

    2019

  3. [8]

    Microsoft seal (simple encrypted arithmetic library),

    M. S. Team, “Microsoft seal (simple encrypted arithmetic library),” 2022, available at https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/microsoft-seal/

    2022

  4. [9]

    Openfhe: Open-source fully homomorphic encryption library,

    O. D. Team, “Openfhe: Open-source fully homomorphic encryption library,” GitHub Repository, 2023, https://github.com/openfheorg/openfhe-development

    2023

  5. [10]

    Mangard, E

    S. Mangard, E. Oswald, and T. Popp,Power Analysis Attacks: Revealing the Se- crets of Smart Cards, 1st ed. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2010

    2010

  6. [11]

    Sok: Deep learning-based physical side-channel analysis,

    S. Picek, G. Perin, L. Mariot, L. Wu, and L. Batina, “Sok: Deep learning-based physical side-channel analysis,”ACM Computing Surveys (ACM Comput. Surv.), vol. 55, no. 11, pp. Article 227, 35 pages, November 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3569577

    2023 doi

  7. [12]

    Side-channel attack in internet of things: A survey,

    M. Devi and A. Majumder, “Side-channel attack in internet of things: A survey,” inApplications of Internet of Things, ser. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, J. Mandal, S. Mukhopadhyay, and A. Roy, Eds. Springer, Singapore, 2021, vol. 137, pp. 257–270. [Online]. Available:...

    2021 doi

  8. [13]

    Side channel analysis attacks on stream ciphers,

    D. Strobel, I. C. Paar, and M. Kasper, “Side channel analysis attacks on stream ciphers,”Masterarbeit Ruhr-Universit¨ at Bochum, Lehrstuhl Embedded Security, 2009

    2009

  9. [14]

    Oscilloscope reading showing power consump- tion variations,

    Audriusa (Wikimedia Commons), “Oscilloscope reading showing power consump- tion variations,” 2024, licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Image.png

    2024

  10. [16]

    Springer, 1997, pp. 27–36

    1997

  11. [17]

    Security and performance- aware cloud computing with homomorphic encryption and trusted execution environment,

    R. Onishi, T. Suzuki, S. Sakai, and H. Yamana, “Security and performance- aware cloud computing with homomorphic encryption and trusted execution environment,” inProceedings of the 12th Workshop on Encrypted Computing & Applied Homomorphic Cryptography (WAHC ’24). New York, NY...

    2024

  12. [18]

    On data banks and privacy homomorphisms,

    R. L. Rivest, L. Adleman, M. L. Dertouzoset al., “On data banks and privacy homomorphisms,”Foundations of secure computation, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 169–180, 1978

    1978

  13. [19]

    Openfhe,

    W. J. Buchanan, “Openfhe,” https://github.com/openfheorg/ openfhe-development, OpenFHE, 2024, accessed: Feb 20, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/openfheorg/openfhe-development Side Channel Analysis in Homomorphic Encryption 21

    2024

  14. [20]

    A fully homomorphic encryption scheme,

    C. Gentry, “A fully homomorphic encryption scheme,” 2009, crypto.stanford.edu/ craig

    2009

  15. [21]

    Fully homomorphic encryption over the integers,

    M. Van Dijk, C. Gentry, S. Halevi, and V. Vaikuntanathan, “Fully homomorphic encryption over the integers,” inAdvances in Cryptology–EUROCRYPT 2010: 29th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, French Riviera, May 30–June 3, ...

    2010

  16. [22]

    Efficient fully homomorphic encryption from (standard) lwe,

    Z. Brakerski and V. Vaikuntanathan, “Efficient fully homomorphic encryption from (standard) lwe,”SIAM Journal on computing, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 831–871, 2014

    2014

  17. [23]

    Homomorphic encryption for arith- metic of approximate numbers,

    J. H. Cheon, A. Kim, M. Kim, and Y. Song, “Homomorphic encryption for arith- metic of approximate numbers,” inAdvances in Cryptology–ASIACRYPT 2017: 23rd International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptology and Information Security, Hong Kong, China, December ...

    2017

  18. [24]

    Homomorphic encryption (seal),

    W. J. Buchanan, “Homomorphic encryption (seal),” https://asecuritysite.com/ seal, Asecuritysite.com, 2024, accessed: September 04, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://asecuritysite.com/seal

    2024

  19. [25]

    Homomorphic encryption with bfv using node.js,

    ——, “Homomorphic encryption with bfv using node.js,” https://asecuritysite. com/seal/js homomorphic, Asecuritysite.com, 2025, accessed: February 28, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://asecuritysite.com/seal/js homomorphic

    2025

  20. [26]

    Homomorphic encryption for ma- chine learning in medicine and bioinformatics,

    A. Wood, K. Najarian, and D. Kahrobaei, “Homomorphic encryption for ma- chine learning in medicine and bioinformatics,”ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1–35, 2020

    2020

  21. [27]

    Fhew: bootstrapping homomorphic encryption in less than a second,

    L. Ducas and D. Micciancio, “Fhew: bootstrapping homomorphic encryption in less than a second,” inAnnual international conference on the theory and applications of cryptographic techniques. Springer, 2015, pp. 617–640

    2015

  22. [28]

    Demystifying bootstrapping in fully homomorphic encryption,

    A. Al Badawi and Y. Polyakov, “Demystifying bootstrapping in fully homomorphic encryption,”Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2023

    2023

  23. [29]

    Chebyshev approximations using openfhe and c++ (logarithm methods),

    W. J. Buchanan, “Chebyshev approximations using openfhe and c++ (logarithm methods),” https://asecuritysite.com/openfhe/openfhe 18cpp, Asecuritysite.com, 2024, accessed: September 04, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://asecuritysite. com/openfhe/openfhe 18cpp

    2024

  24. [30]

    Systematic classification of side-channel attacks: A case study for mobile devices,

    R. Spreitzer, V. Moonsamy, T. Korak, and S. Mangard, “Systematic classification of side-channel attacks: A case study for mobile devices,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 465–488, Firstquarter 2018

    2018

  25. [31]

    Standaert,Introduction to Side-Channel Attacks

    F.-X. Standaert,Introduction to Side-Channel Attacks. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2010, pp. 27–42. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71829-3 2

    2010 doi

  26. [32]

    Using second-order power analysis to attack dpa resistant software,

    T. Messerges, “Using second-order power analysis to attack dpa resistant software,” inCryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems – CHES 2000, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2000, vol. 1965, pp. 238–251. [Online]. Available: https://doi.o...

    doi

  27. [33]

    Leaking secrets in homomorphic encryption with side-channel attacks,

    F. Aydin and A. Aysu, “Leaking secrets in homomorphic encryption with side-channel attacks,”Journal of Cryptographic Engineering (J Cryptogr Eng), vol. 14, pp. 241–251, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13389-023-00340-2

    2024

  28. [36]

    Single-trace side-channel attacks on masked lattice-based encryption,

    R. Primas, P. Pessl, and S. Mangard, “Single-trace side-channel attacks on masked lattice-based encryption,” inCryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems – CHES 2017, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, W. Fischer and N. Homma, Eds., vol. 10529. Springer, Cham, 2017, pp. ...

    2017 doi

  29. [37]

    A practical full key recovery attack on tfhe and fhew by inducing decryption errors,

    B. Chaturvedi, A. Chakraborty, A. Chatterjee, and D. Mukhopadhyay, “A practical full key recovery attack on tfhe and fhew by inducing decryption errors,”Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/1563

    2022

  30. [38]

    A survey of side-channel attacks on caches and countermeasures,

    Y. Lyu and P. Mishra, “A survey of side-channel attacks on caches and countermeasures,”Journal of Hardware and Systems Security (J Hardw Syst Secur), vol. 2, pp. 33–50, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41635-017-0025-y

    2018

  31. [39]

    The last mile: An empirical study of timing channels on sel4,

    D. Cock, Q. Ge, T. Murray, and G. Heiser, “The last mile: An empirical study of timing channels on sel4,” inProceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS ’14). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2014, pp. 570–58...

    2014

  32. [40]

    Side-channel analysis attacks and countermeasures,

    X. Hou and J. Breier, “Side-channel analysis attacks and countermeasures,” in Cryptography and Embedded Systems Security. Springer, Cham, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-62205-2 4

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    Shuf- fling across rounds: A lightweight strategy to counter side-channel attacks,

    S. Patranabis, D. B. Roy, P. K. Vadnala, D. Mukhopadhyay, and S. Ghosh, “Shuf- fling across rounds: A lightweight strategy to counter side-channel attacks,” in 2016 IEEE 34th International Conference on Computer Design (ICCD), 2016, pp. 440–443

    2016

  34. [42]

    Power analysis side channel attacks and countermeasures for the internet of things,

    C. Liptak, S. Mal-Sarkar, and S. A. P. Kumar, “Power analysis side channel attacks and countermeasures for the internet of things,” in2022 IEEE Physical Assurance and Inspection of Electronics (PAINE). IEEE, 2022, pp. 1–7. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/PAINE5603...

    2022

  35. [43]

    Mempoline: Mitigating memory- based side-channel attacks through memory access obfuscation,

    Z. H. Jiang, Y. Fei, A. A. Ding, and T. Wahl, “Mempoline: Mitigating memory- based side-channel attacks through memory access obfuscation,”Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://eprint.iacr.org/2020/760.pdf

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.