International Association
for Cryptologic Research

In this paper, we provide the first masking scheme for floating-point number multiplication and addition to defend against recent side-channel attacks on Falcon’s pre-image vector computation. Our approach involves a masked nonzero check gadget that securely identifies whether a shared value is zero. This gadget can be utilized for various computations such as rounding the mantissa, computing the sticky bit, checking the equality of two values, and normalizing a number. To support the masked floating-point number addition, we also developed a masked shift and a masked normalization gadget. Our masking design provides both first- and higherorder mask protection, and we demonstrate the theoretical security by proving the (Strong)-Non-Interference properties in the probing model. To evaluate the performance of our approach, we implemented unmasked, first-order, and second-order algorithms on an Arm Cortex-M4 processor, providing cycle counts and the number of random bytes used. We also report the time for one complete signing process with our countermeasure on an Intel-Core CPU. In addition, we assessed the practical security of our approach by conducting the test vector leakage assessment (TVLA) to validate the effectiveness of our protection. Specifically, our TVLA experiment results for second-order masking passed the test in 100,000 measured traces.

The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has designated ARM microcontrollers as an important benchmarking platform for its Post-Quantum Cryptography standardization process (NISTPQC). In view of this, we explore the design space of the NISTPQC finalist Saber on the Cortex-M4 and its close relation, the Cortex-M3. In the process, we investigate various optimization strategies and memory-time tradeoffs for number-theoretic transforms (NTTs).Recent work by [Chung et al., TCHES 2021 (2)] has shown that NTT multiplication is superior compared to Toom–Cook multiplication for unprotected Saber implementations on the Cortex-M4 in terms of speed. However, it remains unclear if NTT multiplication can outperform Toom–Cook in masked implementations of Saber. Additionally, it is an open question if Saber with NTTs can outperform Toom–Cook in terms of stack usage. We answer both questions in the affirmative. Additionally, we present a Cortex-M3 implementation of Saber using NTTs outperforming an existing Toom–Cook implementation. Our stack-optimized unprotected M4 implementation uses around the same amount of stack as the most stack-optimized Toom–Cook implementation while being 33%-41% faster. Our speed-optimized masked M4 implementation is 16% faster than the fastest masked implementation using Toom–Cook. For the Cortex-M3, we outperform existing implementations by 29%-35% in speed. We conclude that for both stack- and speed-optimization purposes, one should base polynomial multiplications in Saber on the NTT rather than Toom–Cook for the Cortex-M4 and Cortex-M3. In particular, in many cases, multi-moduli NTTs perform best.

This paper applies a variety of power analysis techniques to several implementations of NTRU Prime, a Round 2 submission to the NIST PQC Standardization Project. The techniques include vertical correlation power analysis, horizontal indepth correlation power analysis, online template attacks, and chosen-input simple power analysis. The implementations include the reference one, the one optimized using smladx, and three protected ones. Adversaries in this study can fully recover private keys with one single trace of short observation span, with few template traces from a fully controlled device similar to the target and no a priori power model, or sometimes even with the naked eye. The techniques target the constant-time generic polynomial multiplications in the product scanning method. Though in this work they focus on the decapsulation, they also work on the key generation and encapsulation of NTRU Prime. Moreover, they apply to the ideal-lattice-based cryptosystems where each private-key coefficient comes from a small set of possibilities.