2023
DOI: 10.1039/d3tc00794d
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A multicolor carbon dot doped nanofibrous membrane for unclonable anti-counterfeiting and data encryption

Abstract: For modern security, devices, individuals, and communications require unprecedentedly unique identifiers and cryptographic keys. One emerging method for guaranteeing digital security is to take advantage of a physical unclonable function...

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The total authentication error probability (TAEP), involving the false-negative rate (FNR), and false-positive rate (FPR), is widely used to estimate PUF security levels. , As illustrated in Figure e, the FNR represents the probability of incorrect rejection of a valid PUF, whereas the FPR denotes the probability of incorrect acceptance of an invalid PUF. , Authentication is accepted only if the HD between the examined and registered responses is less than the authentication threshold. To minimize the TAEP of PT–PUF, we chose an optimized threshold of 0.217 for authentication.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The total authentication error probability (TAEP), involving the false-negative rate (FNR), and false-positive rate (FPR), is widely used to estimate PUF security levels. , As illustrated in Figure e, the FNR represents the probability of incorrect rejection of a valid PUF, whereas the FPR denotes the probability of incorrect acceptance of an invalid PUF. , Authentication is accepted only if the HD between the examined and registered responses is less than the authentication threshold. To minimize the TAEP of PT–PUF, we chose an optimized threshold of 0.217 for authentication.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To minimize the TAEP of PT–PUF, we chose an optimized threshold of 0.217 for authentication. With such an authentication threshold, the TAEP is 3.6428 × 10 –24 , which is significantly lower than the TAEP of other optical PUFs (4.06214 × 10 –12 , 3.2772 × 10 –12 , and 4.54 × 10 –12 ). ,, …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The thermal stability of a PUF is crucial for the application in anticounterfeiting labels, ensuring reliability during shipping and storage. Figure (b) illustrates the comparison of thermal stability results for various PUFs. ,,,, The analysis focused on the peak temperature values to facilitate an accurate comparison. The results indicate that recent developments in PUF thermal stability have significantly extended the operational temperature range, increasing the stability threshold from 50 to 1000 °C.…”
Section: Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The total authentication error probability (TAEP) is a primary metric for assessing the security level of PUFs, consisting of two main components: false negative rate (FNR) and false positive rate (FPR). As illustrated in Figure (e), the FPR is the probability that a counterfeit TIR-PUF is incorrectly identified as authentic by the authentication system, while the FNR is the likelihood that a genuine TIR-PUF is wrongly identified as counterfeit. The authentication threshold is established based on the following criterion: the system authenticates the key only if the HD between the key and the one stored in the database is below the threshold. To minimize the TAEP, the authentication threshold for the TIR-PUF is set at 0.237, as indicated by “Auth-Threshold” in Figure (e).…”
Section: Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%