Hardware Protection

From Texas Instruments Embedded Processors Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Translate this page to   

Which hw protection features are available on the platform?

The DM644x, along with the other DaVinci and C6000 family of devices, does not support in hardware any kind of code protection features, nor supports encryption, burning or storing a private encryption key inside the device (in order to use it for decrypting application code / data stored externally).

Additionally, there are no specific security features to protect DSP code or to disable the JTAG.

What could I do to add some hardware protection features on the platform?

being saved locally on the board. In such a case you might further need to consider some counter measures for any sort of listener like a sniffer program on the network media.

What else does impact on such a protection?

Since the device is a dual core and further offers several boot scenarios so the basic system complexity is not that low on its own. On the one side it might impose a barrier for some approaches, on the other side it widens the attacking options and thus the counter measures to think of. Consider this aspect of the hardware design level of the system and see at which extent the protection might be needed.

The fact of having the ARM side running Linux, might provide some sophisticated application level features in respect to encryption and system self checking in terms of system integrity. But having Linux as a general purpose OS like many other running there will mean having several connectivity services running there and thus exposing some more or less critical long term software modules for functional reasons that might be abused for breaking up protection in the life system.

On the DaVinci and OMAP specific software side, instantiation and run of the DSP algorithms is supported by means of the codec engine framework, which means that the ARM application will be in full control of the DSP. However this framework does not consider having encryption features so this is something you will have to consider at the application level. It will not be possible to modify the codec engine framework to include encryption features, since it is provided for free but not as source, only as a library.

Third party comercials digging such subjects are:

The final truth:

Be aware that there are rather special but legal companies on public markets that are even in state of really opening a chip case, operating your system on their likes and getting hands on any sort of semi conductor element including one-time fuses thus altering their states, and up to even the removal of any self-destructive alike add-on, e.g. some acid enclosure.

This means no chip based can ever be really protected regardless of how much efforts you have spent. When physical control on your device can be achieved by a skilled or educated party then it wont keep any of its secrets for too long. Spending more efforts on your side will just force any attacker to grow his efforts as well so you are only relatively reasonably protected from people that cant play on par with you.

But there is always the chance that you have overseen some aspect and there is a specific gap in your design that might enable many others to relatively simply break protection. So be advised for doing intense peer reviews on your whole design and for even planning forward applying more advanced means for the case that a compromising situation does happen, gets more likely, or just less unlikely by the general advance of times.

Leave a Comment
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Print/export
Toolbox