Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Physical Security for Fleet Management Systems
Previous Article in Journal
Certified Randomness From Steering Using Sequential Measurements
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cryptography
Volume 3
Issue 4
10.3390/cryptography3040028
Review Report
cryptography-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

New Mathblocks-Based Feistel-Like Ciphers for Creating Clone-Resistant FPGA Devices

Cryptography 2019, 3(4), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/cryptography3040028
by Saleh Mulhem * and Wael Adi
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Cryptography 2019, 3(4), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/cryptography3040028
Submission received: 28 October 2019 / Revised: 25 November 2019 / Accepted: 26 November 2019 / Published: 17 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Hardware Security)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Check English grammar (For example, line 29, electronic devices is identify: this sentence is wrong).

Very descriptive which is good.

Very nice figures though I would make my own without copying them.

The manuscript design is nice and clear I would need more information on the conclusion sections after all this work that has been done, not very clear and round.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper investigate the digital PUF scheme, called as Secret Unknown Cipher.  The idea is to develop unknow cipher functions for generating randomness. The structure of the scheme and FPGA implementation are clearly described.  In addition, the mappping strategy for creating  SUCs is also introduced. The overall idea is interesting and the description of FPGA implementation are reasonable.

However, the manuscript needs a substantial improvement. The reviewer’s
comments and suggestions are as follows:
General comments:

In the SUC creation step, a larger class of ciphers need to be created. Does the number of cipher have the influence on the performance? How many ciphers are used in the paper, 600? Do we need to save these ciphers? In page 6, the authors wrote "A Trusted Authority (TA) injects into a System on Chip (SoC) device in a single event the software package “GENIE”, for a short time." What does a short time mean? Will it has risk to be attacked during the time of using GENIE? What is the kind of software package “GENIE”? It should be a public or private part in the scheme? The authors claim that the proposed scheme is a possible zero-cost scheme in conclusion. Could you please give more details about the complexity, memory requirement for this scheme?

Minor comments:

Secret Unknown Ciphers SUCs should be changed to Secret Unknown Ciphers or SUCs. They are the same words. For exmaple, in page 2, line 59 and page 1, line 19. Fig. 19 should be explained with more details. What do the different markers and the bigger blue circles mean?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop