logo

SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 50 , Issue 8 : 1127-1147(2020) https://doi.org/10.1360/SSI-2020-0096

Trusted computing theory and technology in innovation-driven development

More info
  • ReceivedApr 20, 2020
  • AcceptedJun 2, 2020
  • PublishedAug 3, 2020

Abstract

Trusted computing is based on a hardware security mechanism establishing a trusted computing environment and comprehensively enhances the system and network trust from the architectural perspective. With the development of information technology and continuous emergence of new application scenarios, security threats in the cyberspace are becoming increasingly serious; hence, trusted computing is actively researched in both academia and industry to find solutions against such treats. This paper summarizes the development process of trusted computing theory from the perspective of innovation and development. The study centers around one of the author's research results in trusted computing over the past 20 years. It proposes a trusted computing technology architecture that covers two method foundations, three trust cores, and four key technologies. Furthermore, the paper summarizes important research problems in mobile trusted computing, quantum-resistant trusted computing, trusted Internet of Things (IoT), trusted cloud, and trusted blockchain, elaborating on the integration and development of trusted computing in these fields. In mobile trusted computing, the design and implementation of a trusted execution environment architecture with software/hardware co-design is the focus of research. Another two important research issues in mobile trusted computing are the runtime security isolation and protection of the mobile operating system's kernel and trusted execution environment-based mobile application security protection. Due to the characteristics of embedded environments and limitation of resources, the construction of lightweight trusted roots, efficient and secure software attestation, practical secure code update mechanism, and swarm device attestation are important issues for further research in trusted IoT. In new scenarios such as quantum-resistant trusted computing, trusted cloud, and trusted blockchain, trusted computing is also constantly expanding its application boundaries and playing an increasingly important role. Finally, this paper looks ahead and discusses the development trends in trusted computing.


Funded by

国家重点研发计划(2018YFB0904900,2018YFB0904903,2020YFE0200600)

国家自然科学基金(61872343,61802375)


Acknowledgment

李为、牛海行两位研究生参与了本论文部分内容的写作和讨论, 在此表示衷心的感谢.


References

[1] Common Criteria Project Sponsoring Organization. Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation. ISO/IEC International Standard 15408 version 2.1. Genevese: Common Criteria Project Sponsoring Organization, 1999. Google Scholar

[2] Avizienis A, Laprie J C, Randell B. Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE TransDependable Secure Comput, 2004, 1: 11-33 CrossRef Google Scholar

[3] Trusted Computing Group. TCG Specification Architecture Overview, version 1.2. 2003. https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org. Google Scholar

[4] State Cryptography Administration. Information security techniques- functionality and interface specification of cryptographic support platform for trusted computing. GB/T 29829-2013. Google Scholar

[5] Brickell E, Camenisch J, Chen L Q. Direct anonymous attestation. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Washington DC, 2004. 132--145. Google Scholar

[6] Brickell E, Chen L Q, Li J. A new direct anonymous attestation scheme from bilinear maps. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Trusted Computing. Berlin: Springer, 2008. 166--178. Google Scholar

[7] Chen X, Feng D. Direct Anonymous Attestation for Next Generation TPM. JCP, 2008, 3 CrossRef Google Scholar

[8] Brickell E, Li J. A pairing-based DAA scheme further reducing TPM resources. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Trust and Trustworthy Computing. Berlin: Springer, 2010. 181--195. Google Scholar

[9] Chen L Q, Page D, Smart N P. On the design and implementation of an efficient DAA scheme. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Smart Card Research and Advanced Applications. Berlin: Springer, 2010. 223--237. Google Scholar

[10] Brickell E, Chen L Q, Li J. A (corrected) DAA scheme using batch proof and verification. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Trusted Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2011. 304--337. Google Scholar

[11] Yang K, Zhang Z F, Xi L. Direct anonymous attestation with minimal TPM computational resources. In: Proceedings of China Cryptography Annual Meeting, Zhengzhou, 2014. Google Scholar

[12] Qin Y, Chu X, Feng D G, et al. DAA protocol analysis and verification. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Trusted Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2011. 338--350. Google Scholar

[13] Feng D G, Qin Y, Chu X B, et al. Trusted Computing: Principles and Applications. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2018. Google Scholar

[14] Zhang Q Y, Feng D G, Zhao S J. Design and formal analysis of TCM Key migration protocols. J Softw, 2015, 26: 2396--2417. Google Scholar

[15] Shao J X, Feng D G, Qin Y. Type-based analysis of protected storage in the TPM. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information and Communications Security. Cham: Springer, 2013. 135--150. Google Scholar

[16] Zhao S, Xi L, Zhang Q. Security analysis of SM2 key exchange protocol in TPM2.0. Security Comm Networks, 2015, 8: 383-395 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Wang W J, Qin Y, Feng D G. Automated proof for authorization protocols of TPM 2.0 in computational model. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information Security Practice and Experience. Cham: Springer, 2014. 144--158. Google Scholar

[18] Shao J X, Qin Y, Feng D G, et al. Formal analysis of enhanced authorization in the TPM 2.0. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security, Singapore, 2015. 273--284. Google Scholar

[19] Xi L, Yang K, Zhang Z F, et al. DAA-related APIs in TPM 2.0 revisited. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Trust and Trustworthy Computing. Cham: Springer, 2014. 1--18. Google Scholar

[20] Francois D, Nada E K, Liqun C, et al. First Report on the Security of the TPM. DS-LEIT-779391/D3.2/v1.1. 2019. Google Scholar

[21] Sun H, Sun K, Wang Y, et al. TrustOTP: transforming smartphones into secure one-time password tokens. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Denver, 2015. 976--988. Google Scholar

[22] Zhang Y J, Zhao S J, Qin Y, et al. Trusttokenf: a generic security framework for mobile two-factor authentication using trustzone. In: Proceedings of 2015 IEEE Trustcom/BigDataSE/ISPA, Helsinki, 2015. 1: 41--48. Google Scholar

[23] Liu H, Saroiu S, Wolman A, et al. Software abstractions for trusted sensors. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, Low Wood Bay Lake District, 2012. 365--378. Google Scholar

[24] Ahmad Z, Francis L, Ahmed T, et al. Enhancing the security of mobile applications by using TEE and (U) SIM. In: Proceedings of 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing and 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing, Vietri sul Mere, 2013. 575--582. Google Scholar

[25] Santos N, Raj H, Saroiu S, et al. Using ARM TrustZone to build a trusted language runtime for mobile applications. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Salt Lake City, 2014. 67--80. Google Scholar

[26] Liu D, Cox L P. Veriui: attested login for mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the 15th Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, Santa Barbara, 2014. 1--6. Google Scholar

[27] Li W, Li H, Chen H, et al. Adattester: secure online mobile advertisement attestation using trustzone. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, Florence, 2015. 75--88. Google Scholar

[28] McCune J M, Parno B J, Perrig A. Flicker. SIGOPS Oper Syst Rev, 2008, 42: 315-328 CrossRef Google Scholar

[29] Winter J. Trusted computing building blocks for embedded linux-based ARM TrustZone platforms. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Scalable Trusted Computing. New York: ACM, 2008. 21--30. Google Scholar

[30] Sierraware. SierraTEE Virtualization for ARM TrustZone and MIPS. 2020. https://www.sierraware.com/open-source-ARM-TrustZone.html. Google Scholar

[31] Costan V, Lebedev I, Devadas S. Sanctum: minimal hardware extensions for strong software isolation. In: Proceedings of 25th USENIX Security Symposium, Austin, 2016. 857--874. Google Scholar

[32] Lee D, Kohlbrenner D, Shinde S, et al. Keystone: an open framework for architecting trusted execution environments. In: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Computer Systems. Heraklion: ACM, 2020. 1--16. Google Scholar

[33] Zhao S J, Zhang Q Y, Qin Y, et al. SecTEE: a software-based approach to secure enclave architecture using TEE. In: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, 2019. 1723--1740. Google Scholar

[34] Sun H, Sun K, Wang Y, et al. TrustICE: hardware-assisted isolated computing environments on mobile devices. In: Proceedings of 2015 45th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, Rio de Janeiro, 2015. 367--378. Google Scholar

[35] Jang J, Choi C, Lee J. PrivateZone: Providing a Private Execution Environment Using ARM TrustZone. IEEE Trans Dependable Secure Comput, 2018, 15: 797-810 CrossRef Google Scholar

[36] Zhang N, Sun K, Lou W, et al. Case: cache-assisted secure execution on ARM processors. In: Proceedings of 2016 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, San Jose, 2016. 72--90. Google Scholar

[37] Yun M H, Zhong L. Ginseng: keeping secrets in registers when you distrust the operating System. In: Proceedings of Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, San Diego, 2019. Google Scholar

[38] Zhang Y J, Qin Y, Feng D G, et al. An efficient TrustZone-based in-application isolation schema for mobile authenticators. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Security and Privacy in Communication Systems. Cham: Springer, 2017. 585--605. Google Scholar

[39] Azab A M, Ning P, Shah J, et al. Hypervision across worlds: real-time kernel protection from the ARM Trustzone secure world. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, 2014. 90--102. Google Scholar

[40] Ge X, Vijayakumar H, Jaeger T. Sprobes: enforcing kernel code integrity on the trustzone architecture. 2014,. arXiv Google Scholar

[41] Sun H, Sun K, Wang Y, et al. Trustdump: reliable memory acquisition on smartphones. In: Proceedings of European Symposium on Research in Computer Security. Cham: Springer, 2014. 202--218. Google Scholar

[42] Brasser F, Kim D, Liebchen C, et al. Regulating smart personal devices in restricted spaces. 2015. https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/58513/. Google Scholar

[43] Fitzek A, Achleitner F, Winter J, et al. The ANDIX research OS---ARM TrustZone meets industrial control systems security. In: Proceedings of 2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Industrial Informatics, Cambridge, 2015. 88--93. Google Scholar

[44] Pinto S, Oliveira D, Pereira J, et al. FreeTEE: when real-time and security meet. In: Proceedings of 2015 IEEE 20th Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation, Luxembourg, 2015. 1--4. Google Scholar

[45] Zhang Y J, Feng D G, Qin Y, et al. A Trustzone-based trusted code execution with strong security requirements. J Comput Res Develop, 2015, 52: 2224--2238. Google Scholar

[46] Shor P W. Polynomial-Time Algorithms for Prime Factorization and Discrete Logarithms on a Quantum Computer. SIAM Rev, 1999, 41: 303-332 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[47] Kassem N E L, Chen L Q, El Bansarkhani R, et al. L-DAA: lattice-based direct anonymous attestation. IACR Cryptol ePrint Arch, 2018, 2018: 401. Google Scholar

[48] Eldefrawy K, Tsudik G, Francillon A, et al. SMART: secure and minimal architecture for (establishing dynamic) Root of Trust. In: Proceedings of Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, San Diego, 2012. 1--15. Google Scholar

[49] Noorman J, Agten P, Daniels W, et al. Sancus: low-cost trustworthy extensible networked devices with a zero-software Trusted Computing Base. In: Proceedings of USENIX Security, Washington, 2013. 479--494. Google Scholar

[50] Strackx R, Piessens F, Preneel B. Efficient isolation of trusted subsystems in embedded systems. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Security and Privacy in Communication Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2010. 344--361. Google Scholar

[51] Schulz P K S, Sadeghi A R, Varadharajan V. Trustlite: a security architecture for tiny embedded devices. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Computer Systems, Amsterdam, 2014. 1--14. Google Scholar

[52] Brasser F, El Mahjoub B, Sadeghi A R, et al. TyTAN: tiny trust anchor for tiny devices. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Design Automation Conference, San Francisco, 2015. 1--6. Google Scholar

[53] Zhao S J, Zhang Q Y, Hu G Y, et al. Providing root of trust for ARM TrustZone using on-chip SRAM. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Trustworthy Embedded Devices, New York, 2014. 25--36. Google Scholar

[54] Wurster G, Van Oorschot P C, Somayaji A. A generic attack on checksumming-based software tamper resistance. In: Proceedings of Security and Privacy, Oakland, 2005. 127--138. Google Scholar

[55] Seshadri A, Perrig A, van Doorn L, et al. Swatt: software-based attestation for embedded devices. In: Proceedings of Security and Privacy, Berkeley, 2004. 272--282. Google Scholar

[56] Li Y, McCune J M, Perrig A. SBAP: software-based attestation for peripherals. In: Trust and Trustworthy Computing. Berlin: Springer, 2010. 16--29. Google Scholar

[57] Li Y, McCune J M, Perrig A. VIPER: verifying the integrity of PERipherals' firmware. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, 2011. 3--16. Google Scholar

[58] Yang Y, Wang X, Zhu S, et al. Distributed software-based attestation for node compromise detection in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of 2007 26th IEEE International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, Beijing, 2007. 219--230. Google Scholar

[59] Jakobsson M, Johansson K A. Practical and secure software-based attestation. In: Proceedings of Lightweight Security & Privacy: Devices, Protocols and Applications, Istanbul, 2011. 1--9. Google Scholar

[60] Taejoon Park , Shin K G. Soft tamper-proofing via program integrity verification in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput, 2005, 4: 297-309 CrossRef Google Scholar

[61] Abera T, Asokan N, Davi L, et al. C-FLAT: control-flow attestation for embedded systems software. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, New York, 2016. 743--754. Google Scholar

[62] Dessouky G, Zeitouni S, Nyman T, et al. Lo-fat: Low-overhead control flow attestation in hardware. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Design Automation Conference, New York, 2017. 1--6. Google Scholar

[63] Asokan N, Brasser F, Ibrahim A, et al. SEDA: scalable embedded device attestation. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, 2015. 964--975. Google Scholar

[64] Ambrosin M, Conti M, Ibrahim A, et al. SANA: secure and scalable aggregate network attestation. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, 2016. 731--742. Google Scholar

[65] Feng W, Qin Y, Zhao S. AAoT: Lightweight attestation and authentication of low-resource things in IoT and CPS. Comput Networks, 2018, 134: 167-182 CrossRef Google Scholar

[66] Liu J B, Yu Q, Liu W, et al. Log-based control flow attestation for embedded devices. In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Cyberspace Safety and Security. Cham: Springer, 2019. 117--132. Google Scholar

[67] Seshadri A, Luk M, Perrig A, et al. SCUBA: secure code update by attestation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM workshop on Wireless security, Los Angeles, 2006. 85--94. Google Scholar

[68] Perito D, Tsudik G. Secure code update for embedded devices via proofs of secure erasure. In: Proceedings of European Symposium on Research in Computer Security. Berlin: Springer, 2010. 643--662. Google Scholar

[69] Kohnhauser F, Katzenbeisser S. Secure code updates for mesh networked commodity low-end embedded devices. In: Proceedings of European Symposium on Research in Computer Security. Cham: Springer, 2016. 320--338. Google Scholar

[70] Feng W, Qin Y, Zhao S J, et al. Secure code updates for smart embedded devices based on PUFs. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Cryptology and Network Security. Cham: Springer, 2017. 325--346. Google Scholar

[71] Perez R, Sailer R, van Doorn L. vTPM: virtualizing the trusted platform module. In: Proceedings of 15th USENIX Security Symposium, Boston, 2006. 305--320. Google Scholar

[72] Petroni Jr N L, Hicks M. Automated detection of persistent kernel control-flow attacks. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, 2007. 103--115. Google Scholar

[73] Seshadri A, Luk M, Qu N, et al. SecVisor: a tiny hypervisor to provide lifetime kernel code integrity for commodity OSes. In: Proceedings of 21st ACM SIGOPS Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Stevenson, Washington, 2007. 335--350. Google Scholar

[74] Garfinkel T, Rosenblum M. A virtual machine introspection based architecture for intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, San Diego, 2003. 191--206. Google Scholar

[75] Garfinkel T, Pfaff B, Chow J, et al. Terra: a virtual machine-based platform for trusted computing. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Bolton Landing, 2003. 193--206. Google Scholar

[76] Azab A M, Ning P, Sezer E C, et al. HIMA: a hypervisor-based integrity measurement agent. In: Proceedings of 2009 Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, Honolulu, 2009. 461--470. Google Scholar

[77] Schuster F, Costa M, Fournet C, et al. VC3: trustworthy data analytics in the cloud using SGX. In: Proceedings of 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, San Jose, 2015. 38--54. Google Scholar

[78] Kelbert F, Gregor F, Pires R, et al. SecureCloud: secure big data processing in untrusted clouds. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Design, Automation & Test in Europe, Lausanne, 2017. 282--285. Google Scholar

[79] Tramer F, Boneh D. Slalom: fast, verifiable and private execution of neural networks in trusted hardware. https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.03287. Google Scholar

[80] The MesaTEE Team. MesaTEE: a framework for universal secure computing. 2020. https://mesatee.org/. Google Scholar

[81] Zhang C. Truxen: a trusted computing enhanced blockchain. 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.08335. Google Scholar

[82] Milutinovic M, He W, Wu H, et al. Proof of luck: an efficient blockchain consensus protocol. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on System Software for Trusted Execution, Trento, 2016. 1--6. Google Scholar

[83] Zhang F, Cecchetti E, Croman K, et al. Town crier: an authenticated data feed for smart contracts. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Vienna, 2016. 270--282. Google Scholar

[84] Cheng R, Zhang F, Kos J, et al. Ekiden: a platform for confidentiality-preserving, trustworthy, and performant smart contracts. In: Proceedings of 2019 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy, Stockholm, 2019. 185--200. Google Scholar

[85] Brandenburger M, Cachin C, Kapitza R, et al. Blockchain and trusted computing: problems, pitfalls, and a solution for hyperledger fabric. 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.08541. Google Scholar

Copyright 2020  CHINA SCIENCE PUBLISHING & MEDIA LTD.  中国科技出版传媒股份有限公司  版权所有

京ICP备14028887号-23       京公网安备11010102003388号