(2-1) Origins in the Military Complex

The concepts of hardware-based cryptographic security has its roots in military based applications. One of the early and well-known examples of a cipher machine is the German Enigma machine, which was used extensively during World War II to encrypt military communications. The successful decryption of Enigma by Allied cryptographers significantly influenced the war's outcome, showcasing the vital role of dedicated hardware in securing sensitive information.

This historical use laid the groundwork for more sophisticated cryptographic devices. With the rise of computers, Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) emerged as essential tools, initially sold to governments for military applications. The high cost of key compromise in these scenarios justified the increased operational burden and associated costs of using HSMs. Today, military use remains one of the key applications for HSMs, demonstrating their enduring importance in securing sensitive information.

(2-2) The Rise in the Financial Sector

The growth of smart cards and automated teller machines (ATMs) in the 1970s marked a significant turning point for financial institutions, which recognized the need for improved security to protect the integrity and confidentiality of financial transactions. The security of Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) became a critical concern, leading to policies mandating that all PINs be encrypted and that plaintext PINs must never be accessible to unauthorized parties. These requirements spurred the development and deployment of HSMs to secure PINs and other sensitive financial data.

Secure cryptographic devices in the financial sector come in different forms, each suited to specific applications, for example:

• Smart Cards Security: Smart cards have a secured area within the card, which allows for secure storage and processing of data.
• Electronic PIN Pads (EPPs): EPPs are used in PIN entry terminals, ensuring that the PINs entered by users are immediately encrypted and never exposed in plaintext.
• Network HSMs: These are deployed to secure financial transactions across networks, providing a central point of security for distributed systems.

One of the first commercial HSMs was introduced by Mohamed Atalla's company Atalla Corporation in 1973, the so called "Atalla Box". Atalla invented a security system that encrypted PIN and ATM messages, and protected offline devices with an un-guessable PIN-generating key.

Similarly, IBM introduced its Cryptographic Unit in the 1970s, and Racal developed the RACAL Guardata to secure ATM networks and other financial services.

As monetary transactions became more international, there was a pressing need for harmonized security standards and testing methods. Major credit card companies like Europay, Mastercard, and Visa developed various security standards, which eventually converged into what is known today as the Payment Card Industry (PCI) Security Standards. These standards mandate the use of secure cryptographic devices, including HSMs, to protect some financial data.

The financial sector remains a key reference case for HSM usage, securing multiple trillions of dollars every day.

Note: Not all PCI security standards require the use of HSMs. While PCI PIN security mandates the protection of PINs using HSMs, protecting cardholder data according to PCI DSS might not necessitate HSMs. However, the Point-to-Point Encryption (P2PE) standard, as a specialized component within the broader DSS framework, can simplify DSS compliance by reducing the scope for DSS using end-to-end encryption, including HSMs.

If you are interested in the different PCI standards related to payment services, I recommend my article Beyond DSS: Expanding Horizons in PCI Compliance.

(2-3) Healthcare and Telecommunications

Over time, the use of HSMs expanded beyond the financial and governmental sectors to include other industries such as healthcare and telecommunications. This broader adoption was driven by the increasing need for robust security solutions to protect sensitive data and ensure compliance with stringent regulatory requirements.

In healthcare, HSMs are utilized to secure electronic health records (EHRs), ensuring that patient data remains confidential and is only accessible to authorized personnel. They also play a critical role in securing medical devices and ensuring the integrity of data collected from these devices.

In the telecommunications industry, HSMs are employed to secure communication channels and manage the encryption keys used in mobile and fixed-line networks. This ensures the confidentiality and integrity of voice and data communications, protecting against eavesdropping and other forms of cyber threats.

(2-4) Public Key Infrastructures (PKIs)

With the introduction of the now-deprecated SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) specifications in the 1990s, and its successor, TLS (Transport Layer Security, HSMs became integral to providing communications security over computer networks. SSL and TLS protocols were developed to ensure secure communication, primarily for web servers and certificate authorities. HSMs play a crucial role in this ecosystem as the backbone of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI).

PKI enables users of the Internet and other public networks to engage in secure communication and exchange data or money through public and private cryptographic key pairs provided by a certificate authority. The keys used to sign certificates must be secured to prevent unauthorized use, and since the inception of PKI, HSMs have been the best practice for storing these critical keys.

As the Internet proliferated and the demand for secure communications in data and money transfers expanded, HSMs evolved to meet these needs. The next step in their evolution was to transition into appliance form, enabling them to be shared across networks. Networked HSMs could be connected to by multiple users and applications, allowing them to leverage the trust anchor.

(2-5) Cloud Adoption

During the 2000s, enterprise software began to move to third-party data centers and later to the cloud. Protecting keys shifted from a physical computing environment to online access, making key management a critical vulnerability in modern systems.

This trend continued into the 2010s, leading to the development of SEV/SXG-based appliances offering HSM-like capabilities and the first HSMs designed for some level of multi-tenancy. However, from a product standpoint, these devices were designed similarly to their predecessors, inheriting many of their shortcomings while also introducing new issues.

To stay relevant and effective, HSMs need to adapt and innovate, evolving into computing platforms for smart contract-like controls that gate access to keys rather than solely providing cryptographic implementations that protect through physical key isolation.

While many organizations still deploy physical hardware security modules on-premises, it is increasingly common to deploy HSMs through cloud services. These cloud-based HSMs are often deployed and managed from a single web interface, which helps streamline cryptographic infrastructure overall.

(2-6) Blockchain

The increasing adoption of blockchain and cryptocurrencies presents a significant opportunity for HSMs. Blockchain technology, which underpins cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, relies heavily on cryptographic keys to ensure the integrity and security of transactions. Each transaction is verified using digital signatures, which are generated by cryptographic keys. The security of these keys is paramount, as any compromise could lead to unauthorized transactions and potential financial loss. Moreover, as blockchain technology continues to evolve, the role of HSMs is likely to expand.

(2-7) Quantum Resistance

As quantum computers become a more tangible reality, the question of how to future-proof our cryptographic infrastructure has become increasingly pressing. Quantum computers have the potential to break many of the cryptographic algorithms currently in use, such as RSA and ECC, by efficiently solving problems that are infeasible for classical computers. This impending shift has prompted the cryptographic community to explore and develop post-quantum cryptography (PQC) algorithms that can withstand the capabilities of quantum computing.

HSMs will play a critical role in implementing these new PQC algorithms. As hardware devices designed to protect cryptographic keys and perform secure cryptographic operations, HSMs will need to integrate these quantum-resistant algorithms to maintain their role as the cornerstone of digital security. This integration involves updating firmware and software within HSMs to support the new algorithms, ensuring they can generate, store, and use quantum-resistant keys effectively.

If you are further interested in the challenges of adopting cryptography for after the Q-Day, the day when existing algorithms will be vulnerable to quantum computing attacks, I recommend you my article Quantum Computing and Cryptography - The Future of Secure Communication

(2-8) Democratization

In recent years, the availability and adoption of HSMs have significantly broadened, moving beyond high-security environments like financial institutions and government agencies. This democratization has been driven by several key factors.

Advancements in technology and production processes have lowered the costs and simplified deployment, making HSMs more accessible to a wider range of organizations. Especially the introduction of portable USM HSMs has played a crucial role in this broader adoption. These devices are compact, user-friendly and available at a fraction of the cost of traditional HSMs, making them an attractive option for small to medium-sized businesses, individual professionals and even consumers.

While a single high-performance HSM in the payment industry can cost several tens of thousands of dollars, recent advancements have led to the availability of FIPS-certified HSMs for as little as around $1'000. For applications with lower security requirements, HSMs can be found for even less, sometimes under $100.

(6-1) The PKCS#11 Cryptographic Token Interface Standard

PKCS#11, also known as Cryptoki, is an API standard designed to store cryptographic information and perform cryptographic operations. It is the most widely used generic interface for accessing security modules, providing interoperability between applications and security modules.

The standard enables seamless integration between different applications and security modules. However, many manufacturers have implemented "vendor defined mechanisms" in their PKCS#11 implementations, which can reduce manufacturer neutrality and complicate the standard. Additionally, vendor-specific implementations may not always support all features of PKCS#11 and the available functionality might depend on the version used.

Furthermore, the standard has developed a high level of complexity, making it susceptible to attacks that exploit sequences of commands. This complexity can lead to implementation errors and vulnerabilities if not properly managed. For example, attackers might craft specific sequences of commands to bypass security controls or extract sensitive information. Therefore, it is crucial for developers to thoroughly understand and carefully implement PKCS#11 to avoid potential security pitfalls.

(6-2) Vendor-Specific Interfaces

For context-specific HSMs, such as those used in payment services, customers often rely on vendor-specific interfaces. These interfaces cater to specific needs and requirements that are not fully addressed by standard interfaces like PKCS#11.

For example, the payShield 10K HSM offers an interface that supports the needs of payment brands and payment-related functions such as PIN verification and EMV transactions. These vendor-specific interfaces typically use atomic calls, breaking down operations into smaller, manageable tasks. This approach provides greater flexibility and fine-grained control over cryptographic operations but may increase the complexity of integration.

While the atomic approach offers detailed control, it can adversely impact performance due to the increased number of calls required for a single use case. This can lead to inefficiencies and higher latency in cryptographic operations, which might not be suitable for environments where performance is critical. For instance, issuing a payment card might require several HSM interface commands in succession, increasing complexity on the host side.

Vendor-specific interfaces have the advantage of stability, making compliance easier as delta certifications are not needed frequently and usually supplied by the vendor.

However, they might not support more exotic business-specific use cases and could rely on the vendor to implement proprietary interfaces, which can be costly.

Additionally, using vendor-specific interfaces can lead to strong vendor dependency. Changing the HSM provider and migrating to another one would involve significant changes on the host side, complicating the transition.

(6-3) Custom Interfaces

Some HSMs offering a level of flexibility for application developers to create their own firmware and execute it securely which allows to implement custom interfaces. For example, the SafeNet ProtectServer provides a toolkit for developing and deploying custom firmware. This approach allows for more business-specific solutions.

Custom interfaces can cover broader and more business granular use cases, reducing the number of interactions needed and potentially simplifying security management. This streamlines operations and improves efficiency but may require more comprehensive initial setup and configuration.

However, developing custom interfaces presents unique challenges, particularly regarding certification. Interfaces must often be certified to meet stringent security standards. Frequently changing interfaces or adopting more granular approaches can lead to higher investments in re-certifications.

Balancing the need for flexibility, security, and performance is crucial when developing custom interfaces for HSMs. Organizations must weigh the benefits of tailored functionality against the potential costs and challenges of certification and performance impacts.

(6-4) Other Related Interfaces

In addition to PKCS#11 and custom interfaces, there are other common interfaces used for interacting with HSMs:

• Microsoft CryptoAPI (CAPI): This API is used predominantly in Windows environments and provides a set of functions for cryptographic operations. It allows applications to access cryptographic services and manage keys within an HSM.

• Java Cryptography Architecture (JCA): JCA is a framework within the Java platform that provides cryptographic operations, algorithms, and key management functionalities. It allows Java applications to interact with HSMs for secure cryptographic processes.

• Public Key Cryptography Standards (PKCS)#12: This standard defines a portable format for storing and transporting cryptographic keys and certificates. While not an interface in the traditional sense, PKCS#12 is often used in conjunction with HSMs to securely manage key material.

(7) Key Management Strategies

Key management is one of the most challenging aspects of cryptographic systems. As stated by Ferguson et al. in Cryptographic Engineering: “Key management is especially difficult because it involves people instead of mathematics, and people are much harder to understand and predict” (p. 269). Effective key management involves intricate organizational strategies and policies that determine who gets access to which keys, what resources those keys protect and how keys are securely handled throughout their lifecycle.

Every organization tailors its key management practices to fit its unique needs and existing infrastructure. In this section, we will focus on strategies directly related to Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) and typical applications in environments such as financial services.

(7-1) Local Master Keys and Key Hierarchies

In many systems, cryptographic keys are organized into hierarchies, where a few highly secure keys at the top encrypt other keys lower in the hierarchy. Within an HSM, often only one or very few keys reside directly, while it manages or interacts with a broader array of keys indirectly. This hierarchical approach simplifies key management and improves security by limiting direct access to the most critical keys.

At the top of this hierarchy is typically the Local Master Key (LMK). The LMK is a critical asset as it encrypts other keys, which in turn may encrypt additional keys - forming a secure, layered structure. This "keys encrypting keys" strategy ensures that sensitive operations, such as verifying encrypted Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) or Message Authentication Codes (MACs), can be securely handled with keys encrypted under the LMK.

LMKs are among the highest secrets within financial institutions. Their storage and handling involve rigorous security procedures with multiple key custodians and security officers. Today’s LMKs are often generated directly on a key management HSM.

Accidental resetting of an HSM to its default LMK values can have disastrous consequences, potentially disrupting all operations dependent on the secure keys encrypted under the LMK. Therefore, careful management and secure procedures are essential to maintain the integrity of these keys.

While an LMK should never leave an HSM in plaintext, there are often operational requirements to physically back up these keys and distribute them across different production HSMs. This is typically achieved through a process known as "key splitting" or "secret sharing," where the LMK is divided into multiple parts and stored securely on smart cards as split secrets. These parts are then distributed to different production HSMs without ever exposing the key in plaintext as a whole.

This process usually involves key ceremonies, which are formal procedures ensuring the secure management and distribution of cryptographic keys. During these ceremonies, each part of the shared secret is entrusted to a designated key custodian. To reassemble and use the LMK, a predefined number of custodians (n out of m) must collaborate, ensuring that no single person has complete control over the key. This practice adheres to the principle of dual control or "four-eyes" principle, providing a security measure that prevents unauthorized access and ensures that critical actions require oversight by multiple trusted individuals.

(Credit: istockphoto.com/ArtemisDiana)

(8-1) Interface Security

The interfaces of HSMs are critical components that require careful design and management to ensure robust security. Misconfigurations or implementation errors can create vulnerabilities that attackers may exploit through combinations of different command structures.

The interface for communication with HSMs is often considered an Achilles heel in deployment due to its complexity.

This challenge is closely related to API security in general. For those interested in diving deeper into these topics, I recommend my blog series on the OWASP Top Ten list of API security vulnerabilities. You can start with the article Hacking APIs (1) - Broken Object-Level Authorization to understand common pitfalls and best practices in securing APIs.

(8-2) Memory Safety

Since HSM code is often written in the C programming language, ensuring memory safety is paramount. C is known for its performance efficiency but also for its susceptibility to memory-related issues such as buffer overflows and memory leaks. These vulnerabilities can be particularly dangerous in the context of HSMs, as they can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive cryptographic keys and operations. Implementing rigorous memory safety practices, such as bounds checking, proper memory allocation and deallocation, and the use of memory-safe programming techniques, is essential to mitigate these risks.

The US National Cybersecurity Strategy highlights the critical importance of addressing memory safety vulnerabilities, which constitute up to 70% of all security flaws in software developed using traditional, unsafe languages. This strategy underscores the shift towards memory-safe programming languages. For more detailed insights, I recommend my article Memory Safety: A Key to Robust Cybersecurity Strategies?.

In light of the nuanced challenges facing cybersecurity today, my work, such as the creation of the paysec library written in Rust, underscores a proactive approach to improving memory safety across essential sectors like retail payment systems. The future will reveal more about integrating Rust into HSM development, which promises enhanced security through the use of memory-safe programming practices.

(8-3) Protocol Level Flaws

It is important to note that while ensuring the security of HSMs is crucial, it is equally important to focus on the cryptographic protocols they support or implement through interactions with an HSM. Even the best-implemented HSM can become ineffective if the cryptographic protocols are flawed.

For instance, using outdated or weak cipher suites can make the entire encryption process vulnerable, despite using an HSM to manage cryptographic keys. Another example is the use of random nonces as interface input for HSMs from external sources. If these nonces are not properly generated and managed, as in the case of AES counter mode, they can compromise the encryption process.

In financial applications, business logic flaws can also be exploited. For example, if the business logic does not properly verify transaction details before signing, attackers could manipulate transaction data. An attacker might change the recipient's account details before the transaction is signed by the HSM.

(8-4) Denial-of-Service Protections

HSMs are designed with a range of security strategies to protect against various forms of attacks, including brute force attempts to access or decrypt data and unauthorized physical access. These protections are crucial in ensuring that the cryptographic keys and sensitive operations managed by HSMs remain secure.

Typically, HSMs employ mechanisms that can detect and respond to suspicious activities, such as repeated failed access attempts. For instance, an HSM might automatically delete its locally stored keys or lock down administrative access after a set number of failed login attempts. This ensures that if someone tries to brute force their way into the HSM, they are thwarted by these protective measures.

However, while these strategies effectively protect against unauthorized access, they can inadvertently expose the HSM to Denial-of-Service (DoS) attacks. An attacker might intentionally trigger these security responses to render the HSM inoperable by causing it to delete critical keys or lock down access, effectively taking it offline. This vulnerability highlights the need for additional countermeasures within the secure network zone where the HSM operates.

To mitigate the risk of DoS attacks, organizations should implement robust network security measures around their HSMs. These could include:

• Network Traffic Monitoring: Deploy tools to monitor and analyze network traffic for signs of unusual or suspicious activity that could indicate the onset of a DDoS attack. This helps in early detection and response.

• Rate Limiting: Implement rate limiting to control the number of requests made to the HSM, reducing the risk of overwhelming the device with excessive traffic.

• Firewall Protection: Use firewalls to filter and block potentially harmful traffic before it reaches the HSM. This adds a layer of defense against external threats.

• Redundant HSMs: Maintain redundant HSMs in separate secure zones to ensure availability even if one HSM is compromised or taken offline by a DoS attack.

• Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS): Employ IDS to detect and respond to potential intrusion attempts in real-time, helping to safeguard the HSM against unauthorized access and attacks.

(8-5) Network Protocols

At the network level, Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) often use various management protocols to facilitate secure and efficient monitoring, configuration, and operation. A commonly utilized protocol is the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). SNMP is essential for collecting and organizing information about managed devices on IP networks and enabling remote configuration changes.

While SNMP and other network protocols offer valuable capabilities for network management, it also presents potential security vulnerabilities. If not properly secured, SNMP can be susceptible to attacks such as unauthorized access, eavesdropping, and data tampering. Notably, SNMP versions 1 and 2c transmit data, including sensitive configuration commands, in plaintext, making them particularly vulnerable to interception and exploitation.

To mitigate these risks, it's crucial to avoid misconfigurations and implement strict access control policies. Using SNMP version 3, which provides enhanced security features like encryption and authentication, can significantly reduce these vulnerabilities. Additionally, maintaining robust network security practices and monitoring can help protect HSMs from threats associated with network protocols.

(8-6) Vendor Trust (feat. The Crypto AG Scandal)

Ultimately, the security of Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) is not solely dependent on the robustness of the technology but also heavily relies on the trustworthiness of the vendors who manufacture and supply these devices. A notable example highlighting the importance of vendor trust is the infamous Crypto AG case:

Crypto AG, a Swiss company, was renowned for producing encryption devices used by governments and organizations worldwide. However, in 2020 it was revealed that Crypto AG had been covertly controlled by the CIA and the BND, Germany’s intelligence agency. For decades, these intelligence agencies manipulated Crypto AG's devices to spy on over half the world's countries. This espionage operation, known as Operation Rubikon, allowed the CIA and BND to decrypt sensitive communications from about 130 nations (Sources: swissinfo, Wikipedia (German)).

The Crypto AG scandal serves as a stark reminder that the integrity of cryptographic security solutions extends beyond technological capabilities. It underscores the necessity for rigorous scrutiny of vendors and their practices. Even the most advanced cryptographic hardware can be rendered vulnerable if the vendor is untrustworthy or engages in malicious activities.

(8-7) Other Security Challenges

• Physical Security: Ensuring that HSMs are physically secure to prevent tampering, theft, and unauthorized physical access. This involves using tamper-evident and tamper-resistant designs, secure facility access controls, and regular physical inspections.
• Key Management: Implementing robust key management practices to ensure the secure generation, storage, distribution, backup and destruction of cryptographic keys. This includes using strong, random key generation mechanisms, secure key storage solutions, and rigorous key rotation policies.
• User and Role Management: Defining and enforcing strict user and role management policies to ensure that only authorized personnel have access to HSM functions. This involves implementing multi-factor authentication, role-based access controls, and regular reviews of user permissions.
• Compliance and Certification: Ensuring that HSMs comply with relevant security standards and certifications, such as FIPS 140-2/3, Common Criteria, and PCI. This helps guarantee that the HSM meets industry-recognized security requirements and best practices.
• Incident Response: Developing and implementing an incident response plan to quickly detect, contain, and remediate security incidents involving HSMs. This includes regular security assessments, penetration testing, and continuous monitoring for potential threats.
• Shipping and Delivery Integrity: Ensuring the integrity of HSMs during shipping and delivery to prevent tampering or damage. This involves using tamper-evident packaging, verifying the HSM's integrity upon receipt, and confirming that no unauthorized modifications have been made during transit.

(10-1) Key Market Trends

• Rising Demand for Data Security: The increase in digital transactions, cloud services, and stringent regulatory standards have heightened the demand for secure cryptographic solutions provided by HSMs across various sectors, including BFSI, healthcare, and government.
• Shift to Cloud-Based HSMs: Cloud-based HSM solutions are becoming more prevalent as organizations move their workloads to the cloud. These solutions offer scalable, flexible, and cost-effective cryptographic services without the need for managing physical hardware. Cloud HSMs also enable dynamic scaling and typically follow a pay-as-you-go model, which is particularly beneficial for organizations with fluctuating workloads.
• Integration with Emerging Technologies: The integration of HSMs with emerging technologies like IoT and AI is driving innovation in the market. HSMs provide the necessary security infrastructure for these technologies by ensuring the integrity and confidentiality of data and transactions.

(10-2) Key Players

The HSM market is diverse and highly competitive, featuring various forms of hardware security modules designed to meet different use cases and security requirements. The following list highlights some of the prominent players in the industry, offering a range of products from traditional HSMs to innovative, compact devices.

It's important to note that this list is provided based on publicly available information and has not been evaluated for the specific criteria or stringent standards that may apply to HSMs. Some products may not fully meet all security features typically expected of an HSM, and factors such as shipping, usage context, and specific security features may vary. This list is provided without any warranty for completeness or accuracy, and it is advised to conduct thorough research and evaluation when considering an HSM for your specific needs.

Here are some of the key players in the HSM market:

• Thales Group: Thales is a leading provider of HSM solutions with a broad portfolio that includes the Luna General Purpose HSM series, the network attached ProtectServer HSMs, and the payShield Family for transaction security. Thales HSMs are widely used in financial services, government, and enterprise environments for securing transactions and protecting sensitive data. Furthermore, Gemalto, now part of Thales, provides the SafeNet HSM solution used by enterprises and financial institutions.
• Utimaco: Known for its Atalla and CryptoServer product lines, Utimaco offers robust HSM solutions for a variety of industries. Their HSMs are designed to meet stringent security standards and provide comprehensive key management capabilities.
• Entrust: Entrust offers a range of HSM solutions that cater to various security needs, including financial transactions, identity verification, and data encryption. Their nShield HSM series is known for its high security and performance.
• Envieta QFlex HSM: The Envieta QFlex HSM is a high-performance PCIe card designed, engineered, and manufactured in the USA. It is available in a 1U server form factor, offering top-of-the-market speeds to handle the most demanding enterprise security infrastructure needs. QFlex's high performance means fewer cards and servers are required, simplifying the management of the backend infrastructure.
• SmartCard-HSM by CardContact: The SmartCard-HSM is a lightweight hardware security module available in Smart Card, MicroSD, and USB form factors. It provides a remotely manageable secure key store designed to protect RSA and ECC keys. This versatile HSM solution is ideal for secure applications requiring a portable and convenient form factor.
• AWS CloudHSM: Amazon Web Services (AWS) offers a cloud-based HSM service called AWS CloudHSM. It provides fully managed hardware security modules in the cloud, allowing customers to generate and use their own encryption keys on the AWS platform.
• Microsoft Azure Dedicated HSM: Microsoft Azure provides a dedicated HSM service that helps organizations meet regulatory and compliance requirements while securing their cryptographic keys in the cloud. Azure Dedicated HSM offers high availability and integration with other Azure services.
• IBM Cloud HSM: IBM offers cloud-based HSM solutions that provide secure key management and cryptographic processing for enterprise applications. IBM Cloud HSM is designed to help businesses protect sensitive data and comply with regulatory requirements.
• Fortanix: Fortanix provides innovative HSM solutions with their Self-Defending Key Management Service (SDKMS). Fortanix HSMs are known for their advanced security features and support for multi-cloud environments.
• Securosys: Securosys offers a range of HSM solutions, including products that provide post-quantum security. Their Cyber Vault solution is designed to secure sensitive data against quantum computing threats, ensuring future-proof protection for critical assets.
• Yubico: Yubico provides small, portable HSM solutions known for their robust security and ease of use. Their HSMs come in compact form factors, including nano versions, making them ideal for applications requiring portable and convenient cryptographic security.
• Atos: Atos provides a range of HSM products including a trustway HSM for IoT.
• NitroKey: NitroKey provides open-source HSM solutions, known for their affordability and security. Their product lineup includes both USB-based and network-attached (NetHSM) devices, offering secure storage for cryptographic keys. These keys can be used for various applications such as web servers' TLS, DNSSEC, PKI, CA, and blockchain.
• Swissbit: The iShield HSM by Swissbit is a plug-and-play USB security anchor designed for easy integration. It enables system integrators to upgrade existing AWS IoT Greengrass devices with a hardware security module, making it an ideal retrofit solution for both finished hardware designs and in-field devices. The iShield HSM securely stores the device’s private key and certificate, ensuring they remain protected and are not exposed or duplicated in software, enhancing the overall security of the system.
• Pico HSM: The Pico HSM is a compact hardware security module, designed for personal key management. It securely stores and manages a multitude of secret and private keys. Pico Keys offers a range of firmware options ready to run on any Raspberry Pico controller with the RP2040 chip. Each firmware—Pico HSM, Pico Fido, and Pico OpenPGP—complies with different standardized specifications, serving various security needs but all sharing a common goal: providing a personal key device that is both versatile and portable.

Further Reading

• Mayes, Markantonakis: Smart Cards, Tokens, Security and Applications
• van Woudenberg, O'Flynn: The Hardware Hacking Handbook: Breaking Embedded Security with Hardware Attacks
• Philipp: Hardware Security Modules (HSM) for Dummies
• SecureIDNews: Hardware security modules: The gold standard for encryption key security
• UNMITIGATED RISK: The Evolution and Limitations of Hardware Security Modules
• Ferguson, Schneier, Kohno: Cryptography Engineering
• Crypto Museum
• GlobalPlatform: Root of Trust Definitions and Requirements
• wolfSSL: What Is the Difference Between HSM, TPM, Secure Enclave, and Secure Element or Hardware Root of Trust
• PCI Security Standards Council
• EFTlab: HSMs in a Payment Industry

Comments

Leave a Comment

Name:

Email:

Comment:

Please preserve the rules of respect and avoid any shadow that might fall upon the realm. Keep your discourse pure and use simple characters. Your scroll shall contain no more than a thousand characters.

Captcha:

Only the worthy may share their wisdom beneath the sacred tree of insight. To prove yourself a true hero and not a shadowy automation, solve this puzzle:

Submit Comment