Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with side-channel-attack
Search options not deleted
user 39274
attacks using information leaked by implementations of cryptographic algorithms to obtain information about keys or (plaintext) data, instead of (or additional to) using cryptographic weaknesses.
6
votes
2
answers
523
views
Why does side-channel security focus on “shielding” rather than “jamming”?
I have always found it weird when in a crypto discussion people stressed the importance of making algorithms runtime-deterministic, to the point of avoiding any compiler optimisations.
To me, it seems …
- 203