1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to the field of the prevention of reverse engineering of integrated circuits and/or making such reverse engineering so difficult and time-consuming as to make reverse engineering of integrated circuits non-feasible.
More particularly, this invention relates to using, in order to prevent and/or discourage such reverse engineering, apparent metal contact lines terminating on field oxide.
2. Description of the Related Art
The design and development of semiconductor integrated circuits require thorough understanding of complex structures and processes and involve many man-hours of work requiring high skill, costing considerable sums of money.
In order to avoid these expenses, some developers stoop to the contentious practice of reverse engineering, disassembling existing devices manufactured by somebody else, and closely examining them to determine the physical structure of the integrated circuit, followed by copying the device. Thus, by obtaining a planar optical image of the circuits and by studying and copying them, typically required, product development efforts are circumvented.
Such practices harm the true developer of the product and impairs its competitiveness in the market-place, because the developer had to expend significant resources for the development, while the reverse engineer did not have to.
A number of approaches have been used in order to frustrate such reverse engineering attempts, particularly in the field of semiconductor integrated circuits.
For instance, U.S. Pat. No. 5,866,933 to Baukus, et. al. teaches how transistors in a complementary metal oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) circuit can be connected by implanted, hidden and buried lines between the transistors. This hiding is achieved by modifying the p+ and n+ source/drain masks. The implanted interconnections are further used to make a 3-input AND-circuit look substantially the same as a 3-input OR-circuit.
Furthermore, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,783,846 to Baukus, et. al. and 5,930,663 to Baukus et. al. teach a further modification in the source/drain implant masks, so that the implanted connecting lines between transistors have a gap inserted, the length of which is approximately the length of the feature size of the CMOS technology being used. These gaps are called “channel blocks.”
If the gap is “filled” with one kind of implant (depending on whether the implanted connecting line is p or n), the line conducts; if another kind of implant is used for the gap-filling, the line does not conduct. The reverse engineer must determine connectivity on the basis of resolving the “n” or “p” implant at the minimum feature size of the channel block. In addition, transistor sizes and metal connection routings are modified, in order to deprive the reverse engineer of using clues which can help him find inputs, outputs, gate lines and so on as keys to the circuit functionality.
Practicing the inventions taught in the above-mentioned patents to secure an integrated circuit causes the reverse engineer to perform steps that are not always needed. These steps include: decomposing the circuit layer by layer, careful processing of each layer (which usually must include an etching step) followed by imaging of the layer with exact registration to other layers.
When the reverse engineer is delayering the circuit, he can look also for metal lines running from drain contacts to a poly-gate contact. He does this by looking in the two lowest metal layers for dimples, indicating the presence of metal plugs beneath. Thus, the contact position can be determined, greatly simplifying the reverse engineer's task. Previous patents mentioned above do not address this problem.
Therefore, there still exists a need for an inexpensive, easy-to-implement defensive method which can help to provide the enhanced protection against the reverse engineering of semiconductor integrated circuits, in particular to make the reverse engineer's task of finding real contacts to source and drains very difficult. The present invention provides such a method.
Usual practice of reverse engineering is to try to determine a basic structure of an integrated circuit by identifying metal patterns in the higher level metal layers in the circuit. Metals on these layers route the electric signals between circuit blocks. Once a basic circuit function is determined, rather than look at each next transistor pair, the reverse engineer will utilize the similarity in the upper metal patterns and assume each circuit section showing that pattern is the same.
The main objective of this invention is to make a reverse engineer to examine every connection of every CMOS transistor pair in an integrated circuit. If the reverse engineer is forced to do such detailed examination, he would have to spend so much time and money as to make the attempt of reverse engineering prohibitive and leading to de facto protection against reverse engineering.
In order to achieve this objective, circuit techniques are used to make the pattern of a subsequent circuit section unpredictable and non-repeatable; in other words, these techniques make it incorrect to make a usual assumption that similar metal patterns encompass similar circuit functionality.
The gist of this invention is to guide the reverse engineer to an erroneous assumption by having some metal traces terminate on field oxide located close to a contact region. He will assume, erroneously, that the presence of the plug is to make a real contact to a source or drains when, in fact, there is none.
The field oxide that defines and borders on the contact area is offset so that it covers a portion of the contact area. Then, the dimple and the metal plug are aligned so that the metal plug ends on the field oxide adjacent to the source of drain.
The patterns will appear identical, but these apparent connections are not real connections. The reverse engineer will be led to the wrong conclusion as to the circuit block functionality as a result.
A first aspect of the invention provides a semiconducting device adapted to prevent and/or to thwart reverse engineering, comprising field oxide layer disposed on a semiconductor substrate, a metal plug contact disposed within a contact region and above said field oxide layer, and a metal connected to said metal plug contact.
A second aspect of the invention provides a method for preventing and/or thwarting reverse engineering, comprising steps of providing a field oxide layer disposed on a semiconductor substrate, providing a metal plug contact disposed within a contact region and above said field oxide layer, and connecting a metal to said metal plug contact.
A third aspect of the invention provides a semiconducting device adapted to prevent and/or to thwart reverse engineering, comprising field oxide layer disposed on a semiconductor substrate, a metal plug contact disposed outside a contact region and above said field oxide layer, and a metal connected to said metal plug contact.
A fourth aspect of the invention provides method for preventing and/or thwarting reverse engineering, comprising steps of providing a field oxide layer disposed on a semiconductor substrate, providing a metal plug contact disposed outside a contact region and above said field oxide layer and connecting a metal to said metal plug contact.
The features and advantages of the present invention will become better understood with regard to the following description, appended claims, and accompanying drawings where
a) schematically shows how a contact plug is usually located relative to field oxide in (also prior art).
FIG 1(b) schematically shows relative locations of the metal plug and the metallization layer.
This invention can be used on any semiconducting device utilizing, preferably, CMOS integrated circuits or bipolar silicon circuits.
a) demonstrates how a contact plug 7 is positioned relative to field oxide 4 in prior art. The contact plug 7 is disposed over a layer of silicide 6 and over the active area 9. In
b) shows that the contact plug 7 is disposed orthogonally to the plane of metallization layer 10. Such relative orientation of the contact plug 7 is present both in prior art and in this invention.
Seeing metallization 10, a reverse engineer will presume that it leads to either the source or the drain 2, or the gate. He will be misled and confused when the metal leads to the field oxide 4, as shown on
The plug 7 typically has a substantially smaller area than the contact region.
L10 is the overlap area between the oxide region, the normal contact region and the placing of the plug 7. The diameter of the plug 7 is preferably not larger than the size of the minimum feature. L10 can be of any size, specified by the fabrication vendor, and is preferably 10% larger than the size of the minimum feature. A preferred contact dimension is up to about three times of the via size.
Alternatively, the plug 7 could also end on an oxide layer 4 deposited somewhere in the circuit where there would not be a contact.
Having described the invention in connection with several embodiments thereof, modification will now suggest itself to those skilled in the art. As such, the invention is not to be limited to the described embodiments except as required by the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3673471 | Klein et al. | Jun 1972 | A |
3946426 | Sanders | Mar 1976 | A |
4017888 | Christie et al. | Apr 1977 | A |
4139864 | Schulman | Feb 1979 | A |
4164461 | Schilling | Aug 1979 | A |
4196443 | Dingwall | Apr 1980 | A |
4267578 | Vetter | May 1981 | A |
4291391 | Chatterjee et al. | Sep 1981 | A |
4295897 | Tubbs et al. | Oct 1981 | A |
4314268 | Yoshioka et al. | Feb 1982 | A |
4317273 | Guterman et al. | Mar 1982 | A |
4322736 | Sasaki et al. | Mar 1982 | A |
4374454 | Jochems | Feb 1983 | A |
4409434 | Basset et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
4435895 | Parillo | Mar 1984 | A |
4471376 | Morcom et al. | Sep 1984 | A |
4581628 | Miyauchi et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
4583011 | Pechar | Apr 1986 | A |
4603381 | Guttag et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4623255 | Suszko | Nov 1986 | A |
4727493 | Taylor, Sr. | Feb 1988 | A |
4766516 | Ozdemir et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4799096 | Koeppe | Jan 1989 | A |
4821085 | Haken et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4830974 | Chang et al. | May 1989 | A |
4939567 | Kenney | Jul 1990 | A |
4958222 | Takakura et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4962484 | Takeshima et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4975756 | Haken et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
4998151 | Korman et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5030796 | Swanson et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5050123 | Castro | Sep 1991 | A |
5061978 | Mizutani et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5065208 | Shah et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5068697 | Noda et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5070378 | Yamagata | Dec 1991 | A |
5101121 | Sourgen | Mar 1992 | A |
5117276 | Thomas et al. | May 1992 | A |
5121089 | Larson et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5121186 | Wong et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5132571 | McCollum et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5138197 | Kuwana | Aug 1992 | A |
5146117 | Larson | Sep 1992 | A |
5168340 | Nishimura | Dec 1992 | A |
5177589 | Kobayashi et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5202591 | Walden | Apr 1993 | A |
5225699 | Nakamura | Jul 1993 | A |
5227649 | Chapman | Jul 1993 | A |
5231299 | Ning et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5302539 | Haken et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5308682 | Morikawa | May 1994 | A |
5309015 | Kuwata et al. | May 1994 | A |
5317197 | Roberts | May 1994 | A |
5336624 | Walden | Aug 1994 | A |
5341013 | Koyanagi et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5345105 | Sun et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5354704 | Yang et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5369299 | Byrne et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5371390 | Mohsen | Dec 1994 | A |
5376577 | Roberts et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5384472 | Yin | Jan 1995 | A |
5399441 | Bearinger et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5404040 | Hshieh et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5412237 | Komori et al. | May 1995 | A |
5441902 | Hsieh et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5468990 | Daum | Nov 1995 | A |
5475251 | Kuo et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5506806 | Fukushima | Apr 1996 | A |
5531018 | Saia et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5539224 | Ema | Jul 1996 | A |
5541614 | Lam et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5571735 | Mogami et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5576988 | Kuo et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5611940 | Zettler | Mar 1997 | A |
5638946 | Zavracky | Jun 1997 | A |
5677557 | Wuu et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5679595 | Chen et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5719422 | Burr et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5719430 | Goto | Feb 1998 | A |
5721150 | Pasch | Feb 1998 | A |
5783846 | Baukus et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5821590 | Lee et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5838047 | Yamauchi et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5854510 | Sur, Jr. et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5866933 | Baukus et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5880503 | Matsumoto et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5888887 | Li et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5895241 | Lu et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5920097 | Horne | Jul 1999 | A |
5930663 | Baukus et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5930667 | Oda | Jul 1999 | A |
5973375 | Baukus et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5977593 | Hara | Nov 1999 | A |
5998257 | Lane et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6037627 | Kitamura et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6046659 | Loo et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6054659 | Lee et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6057520 | Goodwin-Johansson | May 2000 | A |
6093609 | Chuang | Jul 2000 | A |
6117762 | Baukus et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6137318 | Takaaki | Oct 2000 | A |
6154388 | Oh | Nov 2000 | A |
6165861 | Liu et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6215158 | Choi | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6255155 | Lee et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6294816 | Baukus et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6326675 | Scott et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6365453 | Deboer et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 186 855 | Jul 1986 | EP |
0 364 769 | Apr 1990 | EP |
0 463 373 | Jan 1992 | EP |
0 528 302 | Feb 1993 | EP |
0 585 601 | Mar 1994 | EP |
0 764 985 | Mar 1997 | EP |
0 883 184 | Dec 1998 | EP |
0 920 057 | Jun 1999 | EP |
1 193 758 | Apr 2002 | EP |
1 202 353 | May 2002 | EP |
2486717 | Jan 1982 | FR |
58-190064 | Nov 1983 | JP |
61-147551 | Jul 1986 | JP |
63 129647 | Jun 1988 | JP |
02-046762 | Feb 1990 | JP |
02-237038 | Sep 1990 | JP |
10-256398 | Sep 1998 | JP |
9821734 | May 1998 | WO |
9857373 | Dec 1998 | WO |
0044012 | Jul 2000 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020096776 A1 | Jul 2002 | US |