Structured literature review analyzes security vulnerabilities and countermeasures in memristive computing.
Memristors as a fourth fundamental circuit element has emerged as a promisingsolution for energy efficient neural network interface and hardware cryptographywhich exploits variability, non-volatility, analog granularity, and crossbar densityof memristive devices. These same physical properties introduce an underexploredattack surface that is different from the conventional CMOS-based systems. Thispaper presents a structured literature review of security trade-offs in memristivein-memory computing architectures. We review the usage of memristors in PhysicalUnclonable Functions (PUFs) and True Random Number Generators (TRNGs),analog encryption schemes, and logic-in-memory (LIM) cryptographic circuits. Wefurther analyze the vulnerability studies including side-channel attacks on MAGIC-based LIM, fault injection (FI) attacks, power-based reverse engineering attacks onspiking neural networks and model theft in NN accelerators architecture such asPRIME. We also discuss the trade-offs of countermeasures such as power-balancedhiding, weight transformation, model encryption, and fingerprint embedding. Thereare 2 key findings across the reviewed works: (i) the absence of a unified defenceframework capable of addressing side channel leakage, fault injection, white-boxextraction, and learning attacks without incurring prohibitive hardware, energy, orendurance overheads; (ii) an identified open research challenge regarding the lack offabricated hardware validation for the countermeasures proposed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kushana et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: