Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Robert Primas
dblp:203/4230
· DBLP profile ↗
13ranked-venue papers
1as first author
9since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-9569-8477ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 12 · 1 first-author · 8 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Network and information security
7 papers |
Hardware security and side channels · 84% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 16% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Processor architecture and microarchitecture · 50% Integrated circuit design · 50% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Hardware security and side channels › side-channel countermeasures
masking |
1.1 | 2 | 2022 | Power Contracts: Provably Complete Power Leakage Models for Processors · CCS 2022 Coco: Co-Design and Co-Verification of Masked Software Implementations on CPUs · USENIX Security Symposium 2021 |
Hardware security and side channels
side-channel countermeasures |
1.0 | 2 | 2021 | Coco: Co-Design and Co-Verification of Masked Software Implementations on CPUs · USENIX Security Symposium 2021 Secure and Efficient Software Masking on Superscalar Pipelined Processors · ASIACRYPT (2) 2021 |
Hardware security and side channels
fault attacks |
0.9 | 2 | 2022 | Statistical Effective Fault Attacks: The Other Side of the Coin · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2022 Statistical Ineffective Fault Attacks on Masked AES with Fault Countermeasures · ASIACRYPT (2) 2018 |
Hardware security and side channels › fault attacks
statistical ineffective fault attacks |
0.9 | 2 | 2022 | Statistical Effective Fault Attacks: The Other Side of the Coin · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2022 Statistical Ineffective Fault Attacks on Masked AES with Fault Countermeasures · ASIACRYPT (2) 2018 |
Hardware security and side channels
side-channel attack |
0.9 | 2 | 2022 | Power Contracts: Provably Complete Power Leakage Models for Processors · CCS 2022 Single-Trace Side-Channel Attacks on Masked Lattice-Based Encryption · CHES 2017 |
Hardware security and side channels › microarchitectural side channel
microarchitectural leakage modeling |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Power Contracts: Provably Complete Power Leakage Models for Processors · CCS 2022 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › symmetric cryptography
permutation-based cryptography |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Leakage and Tamper Resilient Permutation-Based Cryptography · CCS 2022 |
Hardware security and side channels › side-channel attack
power analysis |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Power Contracts: Provably Complete Power Leakage Models for Processors · CCS 2022 |
Hardware security and side channels › hardware attacks
side-channel and fault attacks |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Leakage and Tamper Resilient Permutation-Based Cryptography · CCS 2022 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › block cipher
AES |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Statistical Effective Fault Attacks: The Other Side of the Coin · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2022 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
block cipher cryptanalysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Statistical Effective Fault Attacks: The Other Side of the Coin · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2022 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › cryptographic implementation
AES masking |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Statistical Ineffective Fault Attacks on Masked AES with Fault Countermeasures · ASIACRYPT (2) 2018 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
symmetric cryptography |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Statistical Ineffective Fault Attacks on Masked AES with Fault Countermeasures · ASIACRYPT (2) 2018 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › public-key encryption
lattice-based encryption |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | Single-Trace Side-Channel Attacks on Masked Lattice-Based Encryption · CHES 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
formal verification · 1.6statistical fault analysis · 0.6netlist correspondence proof · 0.6masking · 0.6fault tolerance · 0.6biased distribution exploitation · 0.6statistical analysis · 0.3fault injection · 0.3side-channel analysis · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Efficient SPA Countermeasures Using Redundant Number Representation with Application to ML-KEM
Rishub Nagpal, Vedad Hadzic, Robert Primas, Stefan Mangard |
SAC | 3 |
| 2023 | Formal Verification of Arithmetic Masking in Hardware and Software
Barbara Gigerl, Robert Primas, Stefan Mangard |
ACNS (1) | 2 |
| 2023 | Secure Context Switching of Masked Software ImplementationsabstractCryptographic software running on embedded devices requires protection against physical side-channel attacks such as power analysis. Masking is a widely deployed countermeasure against these attacks and is directly implemented on algorithmic level. Many works study the security of masked cryptographic software on CPUs, pointing out potential problems on algorithmic/microarchitecture-level, as well as corresponding solutions, and even show masked software can be implemented efficiently and with strong (formal) security guarantees. However, these works also make the implicit assumption that software is executed directly on the CPU without any abstraction layers in-between, i.e., they focus exclusively on the bare-metal case. Many practical applications, including IoT and automotive/industrial environments, require multitasking embedded OSs on which masked software runs as one out of many concurrent tasks. For such applications, the potential impact of events like context switches on the secure execution of masked software has not been studied so far at all. Barbara Gigerl, Robert Primas, Stefan Mangard |
AsiaCCS | 2 |
| 2022 | Power Contracts: Provably Complete Power Leakage Models for ProcessorsabstractThe protection of cryptographic software implementations against power-analysis attacks is critical for applications in embedded systems. A commonly used algorithmic countermeasure against these attacks is masking, a secret-sharing scheme that splits a sensitive computation into computations on multiple random shares. In practice, the security of masking schemes relies on several assumptions that are often violated by microarchitectural side-effects of CPUs. Many past works address this problem by studying these leakage effects and building corresponding leakage models that can then be integrated into a software verification workflow. However, these models have only been derived empirically, putting in question the otherwise rigorous security statements made with verification. We solve this problem in two steps. First, we introduce a contract layer between the (CPU) hardware and the software that allows the specification of microarchitectural side-effects on masked software in an intuitive language. Second, we present a method for proving the correspondence between contracts and CPU netlists to ensure the completeness of the specified leakage models. Then, any further security proofs only need to happen between software and contract, which brings benefits such as reduced verification runtime, improved user experience, and the possibility of working with vendor-supplied contracts of CPUs whose design is not available on netlist-level due to IP restrictions. We apply our approach to the popular RISC-V IBEX core, provide a corresponding formally verified contract, and describe how this contract could be used to verify masked software implementations. Roderick Bloem, Barbara Gigerl, Marc Gourjon, Vedad Hadzic, Stefan Mangard, Robert Primas |
CCS | 6 |
| 2022 | Leakage and Tamper Resilient Permutation-Based CryptographyabstractImplementation attacks such as power analysis and fault attacks have shown that, if potential attackers have physical access to a cryptographic device, achieving practical security requires more considerations apart from just cryptanalytic security. In recent years, and with the advent of micro-architectural or hardware-oriented attacks, it became more and more clear that similar attack vectors can also be exploited on larger computing platforms and without the requirement of physical proximity of an attacker. While newly discovered attacks typically come with implementation recommendations that help counteract a specific attack vector, the process of constantly patching cryptographic code is quite time consuming in some cases, and simply not possible in other cases. Christoph Dobraunig, Bart Mennink, Robert Primas |
CCS | 3 |
| 2022 | Statistical Effective Fault Attacks: The Other Side of the CoinabstractThe introduction of Statistical Ineffective Fault Attacks (SIFA) has led to a renewed interest in fault attacks. SIFA requires minimal knowledge of the concrete implementation and is effective even in the presence of common fault or power analysis countermeasures. However, further investigations reveal that undesired and frequent ineffective events, which we refer to as the noise phenomenon, are the bottleneck of SIFA that can considerably diminish its strength. This includes noise associated with the attack’s setup and caused by the countermeasures utilized in the implementation. This research aims to address this significant drawback. We present two novel statistical fault attack variants that are far more successful in dealing with these noisy conditions. The first variant is the Statistical Effective Fault Attack (SEFA), which exploits the non-uniform distribution of intermediate variables in circumstances when the induced faults are effective. The idea behind the second proposed method, dubbed Statistical Hybrid Fault Attacks (SHFA), is to take advantage of the biased distributions of both effective and ineffective cases simultaneously. Our experimental results in various case studies, including noise-free and noisy setups, back up our reasoning that SEFA surpasses SIFA in several instances and that SHFA outperforms both or is at least as efficient as the best of them. For example, in the case of a 4-bits random-AND fault injected into the AES with a 35% missed fault rate, utilizing SEFA reduces the number of needed ciphertexts by 50%. In the same case study, SHFA can yield 10% and 55% reductions compared to SEFA and SIFA. Navid Vafaei, Sara Zarei 0001, Nasour Bagheri, Maria Eichlseder, Robert Primas, Hadi Soleimany |
IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. | 5 |
| 2021 | Secure and Efficient Software Masking on Superscalar Pipelined Processors
Barbara Gigerl, Robert Primas, Stefan Mangard |
ASIACRYPT (2) | 2 |
| 2021 | Proving SIFA Protection of Masked Redundant Circuits
Vedad Hadzic, Robert Primas, Roderick Bloem |
ATVA | 2 |
| 2021 | Coco: Co-Design and Co-Verification of Masked Software Implementations on CPUs
Barbara Gigerl, Vedad Hadzic, Robert Primas, Stefan Mangard, Roderick Bloem |
USENIX Security Symposium | 3 |
| 2020 | A Fast and Compact RISC-V Accelerator for Ascon and Friends
Stefan Steinegger, Robert Primas |
CARDIS | 2 |
| 2018 | Statistical Ineffective Fault Attacks on Masked AES with Fault Countermeasures
Christoph Dobraunig, Maria Eichlseder, Hannes Groß, Stefan Mangard, Florian Mendel, Robert Primas |
ASIACRYPT (2) | 6 |
| 2018 | Fault Attacks on Nonce-Based Authenticated Encryption: Application to Keyak and Ketje
Christoph Dobraunig, Stefan Mangard, Florian Mendel, Robert Primas |
SAC | 4 |
| 2017 | Single-Trace Side-Channel Attacks on Masked Lattice-Based Encryption
Robert Primas, Peter Pessl, Stefan Mangard |
CHES | 1 |