Robert, a professional hacker, is attempting to execute a fault injection attack on a target IoT device. In this process, he injects faults into the power supply that can be used for remote…

Question

Options

• AFrequency/voltage tampering
• BOptical, electromagnetic fault injection (EMFI)
• CTemperature attack
• DPower/clock/reset glitching

• A
  6% (3)
• B
  2% (1)
• C
  10% (5)
• D
  82% (40)

Explanation

Option D is correct because Robert is specifically targeting both the power supply (causing instruction skipping and enabling remote execution) and the clock network (disrupting synchronized signal delivery across the chip) - these are the defining characteristics of power glitching and clock glitching, which fall squarely under the Power/Clock/Reset Glitching category of fault injection attacks.

Option A (Frequency/voltage tampering) is incorrect because while it involves voltage manipulation, it refers to broader, more sustained changes to operating conditions rather than the precise, targeted "glitches" (brief, intentional disruptions) described in the scenario. Option B (Optical/EMFI) is wrong because these attacks use light (lasers) or electromagnetic pulses directed at the chip's surface, with no mention of such methods here. Option C (Temperature attack) is incorrect because it involves manipulating the device's thermal environment to cause faults, which is not described in the scenario.

Memory Tip: Think of "glitching" as sudden, sharp spikes or drops - like a hiccup - in power, clock, or reset signals. If the attack targets the power line or clock signal with brief, targeted disruptions to skip instructions or desynchronize the chip, it's always Power/Clock/Reset Glitching (D).

No community discussion yet for this question.