Pantomime: Constructive Leakage Proofs via Simulation
Robin Webbers, Robert Schenck, Wind Wong, Kristina Sojakova, Klaus von Gleissenthall
Abstract
Tools for verifying leakage descriptions of hardware aim to ensure that a given hardware design doesn’t leak secrets via its microarchitecture, when executing programs with appropriate countermeasures. However, existing techniques for proving correctness of leakage descriptions are based on non-constructive proofs via non-interference. As a result, they often rely on expensive solvers that offer little help when verification fails or require handwritten invariants, which are difficult to come up with and even harder to debug. In this paper, we present a new approach to leakage verification which we call simulation-based leakage proofs . To show that a leakage description correctly captures a hardware design using a simulation-based proof, the user constructs a simulator—another hardware design that must faithfully replicate all attacker-observable behavior from explicitly leaked secrets. Simulation-based proofs therefore offer a constructive alternative to classic non-interference proofs, exposing a proof object—the simulator, witnessing the correctness claim. As simulators are just programs, we can write, execute and debug them like any other program, making them easy to use. We also show that they can be checked locally, which makes proof checking fast. We implement simulation-based leakage proofs in P ANTOMIME , a tool that supports writing processors and their leakage proofs in Haskell; we report on using Pantomime to write and verify AIM Core , a 5-stage in-order processor, its leakage description, and simulator, as well as a side-channel hardened version of the core. We show that Pantomime verifies them efficiently (it checks AIM Core in under 40s), and use AIMCore’s leakage description to check for leakages in crypto libraries which uncovered two new vulnerabilities in wolfSSL that have both been assigned CVE’s.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext fde44824-e367-40f1-b729-f67fba5c0f0dBuilds on20
- Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative ExecutionPaul Kocher, Jann Horn, Anders Fogh, Daniel Genkin et al.S&P 2019 · 2,435 citations
- RIDL: Rogue In-Flight Data LoadStephan van Schaik, Alyssa Milburn, Sebastian Österlund, Pietro Frigo et al.S&P 2019 · 408 citations
- LVI: Hijacking Transient Execution through Microarchitectural Load Value InjectionJo Van Bulck, Daniel Moghimi, Michael Schwarz, Moritz Lipp et al.S&P 2020 · 275 citations
- Verifying Constant-Time ImplementationsJosé Bacelar Almeida, Manuel Barbosa, Gilles Barthe, François Dupressoir et al.USENIX Security 2016 · 274 citations
- Constant-time foundations for the new spectre eraSunjay Cauligi, Craig Disselkoen, Klaus von Gleissenthall, Dean M. Tullsen et al.PLDI 2020 · 90 citations
Related papers
- AMuLeT: Automated Design-Time Testing of Secure Speculation CountermeasuresBo Fu, Leo Tenenbaum, David Adler, Assaf Klein et al.ASPLOS 2025 · 3 citations
- Interpretable noninterference measurement and its application to processor designsZiqiao Zhou, Michael K. ReiterOOPSLA 2021
- Architectural Mimicry: Innovative Instructions to Efficiently Address Control-Flow Leakage in Data-Oblivious ProgramsHans Winderix, Marton Bognar, Job Noorman, Lesly-Ann Daniel et al.S&P 2024 · 5 citations
- RTL2MμPATH: Multi-μPATH Synthesis with Applications to Hardware Security VerificationYao Hsiao, Nikos Nikoleris, Artem Khyzha, Dominic P. Mulligan et al.MICRO 2024 · 12 citations
- microSCALE: Static Analysis for Microarchitectural Side-channel Leakage EvaluationAkshay Kumar E, Pranav Krishna N, Annapurna Valiveti, Pallavi Borkar et al.USENIX Security 2026
