Lattice Mcu Reverse Engineering

Lattice Semiconductor Corporation is a United States based manufacturer of high-performance programmable logic devices (FPGAs, CPLDs, & SPLDs). Founded in 1983, the company employs about 700 people and has annual revenues of around $300 million, with Darin Billerbeck as the chief executive officer. The Oregon-based company is the number three ranked company in world market share for field programmable gate array (FPGA) devices, and number two for CPLDs & SPLDs. The company went public in 1989 and is traded on the NASDAQ stock exchange.

 

History

Lattice was founded on April 3, 1983, by C. Norman Winningstad, Rahul Sud, and Ray Capece.[7] Winningstad, Harry Merlo, Tom Moyer, and John Piacentini were the early investors in the company.[7] Co-founder Sud left as president in December 1986, and Winningstad left in 1991 as chairman of the board.[7] Lattice was incorporated in Oregon in 1983 and reincorporated in Delaware in 1985. Early struggles led to chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in July 1987.[7] The company emerged from bankruptcy after 62 days and moved into a smaller headquarters in Hillsboro, Oregon, from what was then an unincorporated area near Beaverton.

The next year the company posted then record revenues while shrinking from 140 employees to 75 employees after the bankruptcy.[9] Cyrus Tsui became the company's chief executive officer in 1988.[10] On November 9, 1989, Lattice became a publicly traded company when its shares were listed on the NASDAQ after in initial public offering.[11] The initial share price was $6, and raised almost $14 million in capital for the company.[11] In July 1990, Lattice raised an FIB metal line deposit additional $22.6 million from a second stock offering, selling nearly 1.5 million new shares at $16.25 per share.

In 1995, the company attempted to assert trademark rights in the term Silicon Forest beyond the use of its trademark for the use in semiconductor devices.[13] They had registered the mark in 1985, but later conceded they could not prevent the usage of the term as a noun.[13] Forbes ranked the company as their 162nd best small company in the United States in 1996.

In 1996, Lattice began expansions at its Hillsboro, Oregon, headquarters to double the size of the facility.[10] The company grew to annual revenues of more than $560 million and profits in excess of $160 million in 2000.[15] Its stock price reached an all-time high that year of $41.34 per share, as adjusted for stock splits.[15] Lattice purchased Agere Corporation's FPGA division in 2002.[16] Steve Skaggs was hired as CEO in 2005, replacing Cyrus Tsui.[16] That year, Lattice had layoffs for the first time in company history.[16] For fiscal year 2006 Lattice posted a profit of $3.1 million on revenues of $245.5 million, this was the first annual profit for the company since 2000.

In 2004 the company settled charges with the United States government that it had illegally exported certain technologies to China, paying a fine of $560,000.[18] In June 2008, Bruno Guilmart was named as chief executive officer of the company, replacing Steve Skaggs.[19] For fiscal year 2008, Lattice had a loss of $32 million on annual revenues of $222.3 million.[20] In 2009, the company began moving all of its warehouse operations for parts from Oregon to Singapore.[21 pcb clone] Through July 2009, the company had lost money for ten straight quarters,[22] and had its first profitable quarter in three years during the fourth quarter of 2009.[23] Bruno Guilmart left the company in August 2010, and Darin Billerbeck who just sold Zilog in last year, was named the new CEO in October of that year, starting in November.[24] The company reported 2011 revenue of $318 million.[25] For the first quarter of 2012 Lattice reported revenue of $71.7 million.[26] Lattice reported revenue of $70.8 million for the second quarter of 2012.[27] Lattice started a stock buy-back program in 2010 that continued into 2012 that would total about $35 million if fully implemented.[28]
On December 9, 2011, Lattice announced it was acquiring SiliconBlue for $63.2 million in cash.Lattice announced in July 2012 a foundry agreement with United Microelectronics Corporation. In October 2012, the company announced third quarter revenue of $70.9 million and restructuring that included job lay-offs.

Operations

Company headquarters in Hillsboro, Oregon
In addition to CPLDs & SPLDs, Lattice also manufactures field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), programmable mixed-signal and interconnect products, related software and intellectual property (IP).[33] Lattice's main products are the ECP and XP series of FPGAs (field-programmable gate arrays), the Mach series of CPLDs (complex programmable logic devices), the ispPAC POWR series of programmable power management products (programmable mixed signal FPAA) and Lattice Diamond snaileye design software.[34] At the 90 nm node, Lattice offers a variety of FPGA devices. Products are used in a variety of end uses, such as flat-panel televisions and laptops.

The company is headquartered in Hillsboro, Oregon, in the high-tech area known as the Silicon Forest.[35] The company employs 700 people worldwide, with approximately 250 of those at company headquarters. Darin Billerbeck is Lattice's chief executive officer and president.[2focused ion beam ][36] maker Among its chief competitors are Xilinx, Altera, Actel and QuickLogic.

GAL16V8 20-Pin 8-Macrocell Devices

GAL16V8, GAL16V8A, GAL16V8B, GAL16V8D, GAL16V8NB, GAL16VP8, GAL16V8Z, GAL16V8ZD

GAL20V8 24-Pin 8-Macrocell Devices

GAL20V8, GAL20V8A, GAL20V8B, GAL20VP8, GAL20V8Z, GAL20V8ZD, GAL20LV8, GAL20LV8ZD

GAL22V10 Flagship Variable-Term SPLD

GAL22V10, GAL22V10B

Specialized GAL Variants

GAL18V10, GAL20RA10, GAL20XV10, GAL26CV12, GAL6001

2. ATF Series Low-Voltage Turbo Flash SPLDs (PALCE Drop-In Replacements)

ATF16V8 20-Pin Family

ATF16V8, ATF16V8B, ATF16V8C, ATF16V8Z, ATF16LV8

ATF20V8 24-Pin Family

ATF20V8, ATF20V8B, ATF20V8Z, ATF20LV8

ATF22V10 Flagship 24-Pin Family

ATF22V10, ATF22V10B, ATF22V10C, ATF22V10Z, ATF22LV10

High-Density ATF SPLDs

ATF28V12, ATF29M16

3. MACH & ispMACH Series In-System Programmable CPLDs

Legacy Original AMD Vantis MACH Discontinued CPLDs

MACH110, MACH120, MACH130, MACH140

MACH210, MACH220, MACH230, MACH240, MACH250, MACH260, MACH270, MACH280

MACH335, MACH345, MACH355, MACH365, MACH375, MACH385

MACH435, MACH445, MACH455, MACH465

MACH510, MACH520, MACH530, MACH540, MACH550, MACH560

MACH110LV, MACH120LV, MACH210LV, MACH220LV, MACH230LV, MACH240LV, MACH250LV, MACH260LV, MACH270LV, MACH280LV

MACH335LV, MACH345LV, MACH355LV, MACH365LV, MACH375LV, MACH385LV

MACH435LV, MACH445LV, MACH455LV, MACH465LV

MACH510LV, MACH520LV, MACH530LV, MACH540LV, MACH550LV, MACH560LV

ispMACH 4000 Mainstream ISP CPLDs

LC4032V, LC4064V, LC4128V, LC4256V

LC4032ZE, LC4064ZE, LC4128ZE, LC4256ZE

LC4032C, LC4064C, LC4128C, LC4256C

ispMACH 5000 High-Density Industrial CPLDs

LC5032MV, LC5064MV, LC5128MV, LC5256MV

ispMACH 6000 Automotive AEC-Q100 CPLDs

LC6032A, LC6064A, LC6128A, LC6256A

4. MachXO Instant-On Non-Volatile Control PLDs

MachXO 1st Generation

LCMXO256, LCMXO640, LCMXO1200, LCMXO2280, LCMXO2700

MachXO2 Low-Power Generation

LCMXO2-640, LCMXO2-1200, LCMXO2-2000, LCMXO2-4000, LCMXO2-7000

MachXO3 / MachXO3LF Automotive Extended Temp Series

LCMXO3LF-640, LCMXO3LF-1300, LCMXO3LF-2700, LCMXO3LF-4300, LCMXO3LF-6900, LCMXO3LF-9400

MachXO4 Next-Generation Low-Density Control PLDs

LCMXO4-256, LCMXO4-640, LCMXO4-1300, LCMXO4-2700, LCMXO4-4300

MachXO5-NX Secure Nexus Process Control PLDs

LCMXO5N-10K, LCMXO5N-20K, LCMXO5N-40K, LCMXO5N-100K

General Questions About Microcontroller Firmware Extraction

---

• Is it safe to send payment to MikaTech ?

  If MikaTech was a bad company, you could find tons of bad reputations about its service on the internet over the 28 years history

  So, the answer is YES! We are good people.

  Why choose Mikatech, please click here to find out
  

  
  
• Can Mikatech break ics not listed on this site ?

  Different chip manufacturers have different part numbers, but the inner core of the chip can be make with same technology, it would be quite impossible to list all the part numbers where our technology can apply such as MYSON, STK, FEELING, ANALOG, FUJITSU, NOVATEK, LG/HYNDAI.
  
  Also by the advancing of the technology, everyday we gain more and more experience and develope new methods for reverse engineering for different Intergated Circuit parts. Full list of Integrated Circuit part numbers which is within our scope of capability is always getting bigger, please contact us to find out.

• Will my privacy be protected ?

  Mikatech Innovative Limited understands the importance of its clients' privacy. At the moment you contact Mikatech, the personal information from you will be put under protection by our management regulations which was developed by our years of practice, Mikatech uses these information to customize its service to you, it will never disclose these information to third party out of any reason.
  Every project we did, we will delete all the data, materials, and codes 60days after deliverig the files, it iwll protect us and protect your privacy.

• Is it legal to get service from Mikatech ?

  Yes, it is totally legal.
  Mikatech deliver its reverse engineering services for educational purposes only, it can be illegal to use above mentioned services in some coutries or regions, please check your local laws. Mikatech does not take any responsibility in relation to the use of above mentioned services that may be considered illegal.

  
  
• I sent you an email, why there is no answer ?

  • A. Our mail server is temperally broke down, your message has not been delivered to our mailbox even the mail sent successfully message is showed on the screen, please contact us again.
  • B. Our email is recognised as junk mail email by your mail server, so our reply has been rejected by your mail server or it is diverted to your junk mailbox, please remove our account from junkmail list or check your junk mailbox, or use another email account to contact such as gmail.
  • C. Your email is recognised as junk mail email by our mail server, so your email was put to our junk mailbox, please use another email account to contact us again.

• Side-Channel Power Analysis and the Fragile MCU Lock

  The modern microcontroller (MCU) hides its secrets behind a complex lock of hardware and firmware barriers. Yet, this lock is not impervious to physical observation. Side-channel power analysis attacks monitor the current drawn by the MCU during cryptographic operations. These fluctuations reveal subtle correlations with the processed key bits. An adversary does not need to break the lock mechanically; they merely measure its behavior. The MCU lockbit lock, as ransomware groups like LockBit have shown, can be bypassed via non-invasive means. Power analysis enables the read-out of an EEPROM processor’s internal state without triggering any alarm. The attacker first records thousands of power traces while the MCU executes AES encryption. Each trace contains voltage variations that correspond to specific Hamming weights. By statistically processing these traces, the secret key emerges from the noise. This method completely sidesteps the need to dump flash and eeprom directly. However, more aggressive attackers combine power analysis with decapsulation and code recovery. Decapsulation removes the epoxy package, exposing the silicon die. Once exposed, the attacker can probe internal nodes with micro-probes. They can also copy contents of crypto memory by reading the charge on floating gates. Microcontroller reverse engineering often starts with decapsulation to identify sensitive regions. Firmware extraction becomes trivial if the read-out of an EEPROM processor is unencrypted. But modern MCUs employ memory encryption to frustrate such efforts. Nevertheless, power analysis does not require physical tampering. It works on sealed chips, making it insidious. The lockbit lock of the MCU’s secure key storage is vulnerable to differential power analysis (DPA). DPA uses correlation coefficients to amplify tiny signal differences. The attacker can target the first round of AES, where key-dependent data appears. They measure power consumption for many random plaintexts. Then they hypothesize key bytes and compute predicted power values. The correct hypothesis yields the highest correlation. This attack has broken many commercial MCUs. To defend, designers add noise generators and random clock jitter. But these countermeasures increase cost and complexity. Another defense is to limit the number of encryption operations per key. Yet, that reduces functionality. The read-out of an EEPROM processor can be protected by physical shielding, but shielding adds weight. Dump flash and eeprom via power analysis is possible if the memory bus is not masked. Decapsulation and code recovery become unnecessary when power leakage is sufficient. Copy contents of crypto memory through side-channels is a well-known academic exercise. Microcontroller reverse engineering often employs power traces to reconstruct control flow. Firmware extraction via power side-channels is less common but feasible. The MCU lockbit lock must also resist electromagnetic (EM) emanations. EM analysis is a close cousin of power analysis. It captures near-field radiation from the chip. The same statistical processing applies. Attackers can use EM probes without electrical contact. This non-invasive nature makes it dangerous. Manufacturers now integrate on-chip voltage regulators to smooth power consumption. But regulators have their own switching noise. Attackers can filter that noise digitally. The cat-and-mouse game continues. Each new countermeasure inspires a new attack variant. The MCU security community actively researches low-cost countermeasures. For instance, masking schemes randomize intermediate values. Masking makes DPA require exponentially more traces. However, masking consumes extra logic gates and power. It also impacts timing. Some MCUs implement threshold implementations that are provably secure. But these are rare in low-end devices. The average industrial MCU remains vulnerable. Ransomware groups like LockBit have not widely adopted power analysis, but state actors have. The lockbit lock metaphor highlights the duality: a lock can be picked, but also observed. Physical observation is quieter than brute-force. The read-out of an EEPROM processor via side-channels is a growing threat. Dump flash and eeprom using power analysis has been demonstrated on ARM Cortex-M devices. Decapsulation and code recovery are destructive, but power analysis is not. Copy contents of crypto memory without leaving traces is the holy grail. Microcontroller reverse engineering now includes side-channel as a primary tool. Firmware extraction can be achieved with a cheap oscilloscope and a PC. Therefore, MCU designers must consider side-channel resistance from the start. They must also educate users about operational limits. For example, limiting the number of decryption attempts per session. Or erasing keys after a certain number of operations. These policies reduce the attack surface. Ultimately, the MCU lockbit lock is only as strong as its physical implementation. Power analysis demonstrates that the lock's internal mechanics are exposed through its power draw. This exposure is fundamental to CMOS technology. Until true energy-hiding circuits emerge, side-channels will remain a critical vulnerability. The industry must adopt standardized evaluation methodologies. Common criteria and FIPS 140-3 provide some guidance. But they are often too slow to adapt. Researchers publish new attacks every year. The read-out of an EEPROM processor using machine learning has recently improved success rates. Dump flash and eeprom with AI-enhanced classification reduces trace count. Decapsulation and code recovery are now complemented by algorithmic attacks. Copy contents of crypto memory via EM side-channels works even through potting compound. Microcontroller reverse engineering is evolving into a data science discipline. Firmware extraction no longer requires direct memory access. The lockbit lock is a moving target. Security engineers must continuously update their threat models. They must assume that every MCU is under surveillance. Power analysis is just one window into the lock's inner workings. Others include timing, sound, and thermal emissions. The comprehensive security approach combines multiple layers. Physical shielding, algorithmic masking, and policy controls. But no single layer is perfect. The MCU lockbit lock will always have some leakage. The goal is to make the cost of attack exceed the value of the protected asset. That is the economic essence of security. For low-value assets, basic countermeasures suffice. For high-value assets, dedicated secure elements are necessary. These elements have hardened power rails and randomized timing. They also incorporate active shielding that detects probing. However, they are expensive. Most IoT devices cannot afford them. So we must live with imperfect locks. And we must continuously monitor for new side-channel exploits. The research community must also develop open-source testbeds. These allow vendors to validate their designs. In conclusion, power analysis attacks undermine the MCU lockbit lock by exploiting unavoidable physical phenomena. They enable read-out of an EEPROM processor, dump flash and eeprom, decapsulation and code recovery (though not needed), copy contents of crypto memory, and overall microcontroller reverse engineering and firmware extraction. The threat is real and pervasive. Vigilance and innovation are the only defenses.