Re: [Ace] on signature verification times for sec192r1

This data sheet from NXP gives many figures for coprocessor processing
 performances (including ECC 192 bits)

http://www.nxp.com/documents/line_card/75016728.pdf

Rgs


2016-07-25 20:45 GMT+02:00 Pascal Urien <pascal.urien@gmail.com>:

> Hi Hannes
>
>
> 2016-07-25 19:16 GMT+02:00 Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>:
>
>> Hi Pascal,
>>
>> I guess you are saying that the performance of the verify operation is
>> 60ms + the hash needed over the actual message (which is 3.5 msec for a
>> 64 byte block).
>>
>>
> That 's right. A few ms per bloc is a common figure
>
>
>> In another paper I have seen that some hardware crypto chips have a
>> fairly slow interface and that has to be taken into account as well. Is
>> this an issue with this smart card? What is your experience there?
>>
>
> I have not a lot of data for ECC processing in smartcards, because of the
> difficulty in finding this type of component with ECC support.
>
> Neverless ECC is usually faster than RSA
>
> An other issue is to estimate the cost of countermeasures; computing
> performance is not always the first cobjective of crypto processors
> according to the EAL evaluation needed
>
> Let's say there is a balance between the sign/verify cost and the function
> computing
>
> Rgs
>
>
>> Ciao
>> Hannes
>>
>> On 07/25/2016 12:28 PM, Pascal Urien wrote:
>> > Hi Abhinav
>> >
>> > The extra time (2ms/bloc)  comes from the hash procedure (sha1 in the
>> > example) that works with 64 bytes blocs
>> >
>> > Rgs
>> >
>> > Pascal
>> >
>> > 2016-07-25 12:04 GMT+02:00 Somaraju Abhinav
>> > <abhinav.somaraju@tridonic.com <mailto:abhinav.somaraju@tridonic.com>>:
>> >
>> >     Hi Pascal,____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     Thanks for the information. Could you please explain what is
>> >     nb_bloc_512bits?____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     Regards,____
>> >
>> >     Abhinav____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     *From:*Ace [mailto:ace-bounces@ietf.org
>> >     <mailto:ace-bounces@ietf.org>] *On Behalf Of *Pascal Urien
>> >     *Sent:* Sonntag, 24. Juli 2016 11:51
>> >     *To:* Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net
>> >     <mailto:mstjohns@comcast.net>>
>> >     *Cc:* ace@ietf.org <mailto:ace@ietf.org>
>> >     *Subject:* Re: [Ace] on signature verification times for
>> sec192r1____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     I fully agree...____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     J3A081M  can be found at 10$ over the WEB____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     Futhermore this class of cheap device can process TLS or DTLS as
>> >     illustrated in____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-urien-uta-tls-dtls-security-module-00____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     They could be used for numerous applications in the IoT____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     Rgs____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     Pascal____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     2016-07-23 23:59 GMT+02:00 Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net
>> >     <mailto:mstjohns@comcast.net>>:____
>> >
>> >         On 7/23/2016 11:10 AM, Pascal Urien wrote:____
>> >
>> >             Hi All____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             J3A081M is a javacard device from NXP____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             The micocontroller should be the P5CD081V1A, which comprises
>> >             a crypto processor____
>> >
>> >
>> >         There's a number of these from a number of vendors.  I'd
>> >         actually look at the A7xxx series of chips as they're designed
>> >         to be embeddable.  I've become a big fan of javacard style
>> >         solutions over the years.
>> >
>> >         In any event, the number of relatively inexpensive public key
>> >         crypto accelerator chips (e.g. googl for "secure authentication
>> >         chips") is greater than zero and continues to climb.  And for
>> >         not a lot of money.  Estimating what from prices on Digikey, I'd
>> >         think something less than $.50 for Quantity large as of today
>> >         and half that or less in 1-2 years as its gets bundled into the
>> >         "Swiss Army Knife" style of process (e.g. support for wireless
>> >         900mhz plus ... plus ... plus ... plus security...) (google for
>> >         iot module secure element 900mhz for example).
>> >
>> >         Later, Mike
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >         ____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             The performances with the curve secp192r1 are the following
>> >             (for ECDSA + SHA1)____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             Sign    = 40ms +  nb_bloc_512bits x 3.5 ms____
>> >
>> >             Verify  = 60ms  + nb_bloc_512bits x 3,5 ms____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             By the way this chip has enough crypto ressouces for
>> >             processing TLS or DTLS____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             Rgs____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             Pascal____
>> >
>> >             __ __
>> >
>> >             ___________________________________________________
>> >
>> >             Ace mailing list____
>> >
>> >             Ace@ietf.org <mailto:Ace@ietf.org>____
>> >
>> >             https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace____
>> >
>> >         __ __
>> >
>> >
>> >         _______________________________________________
>> >         Ace mailing list
>> >         Ace@ietf.org <mailto:Ace@ietf.org>
>> >         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace____
>> >
>> >     __ __
>> >
>> >     ________________________________________________________ The
>> >     contents of this e-mail and any attachments are confidential to the
>> >     intended recipient. They may not be disclosed to or used by or
>> >     copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If
>> >     this e-mail is received in error, please immediately notify the
>> >     sender and delete the e-mail and attached documents. Please note
>> >     that neither the sender nor the sender's company accept any
>> >     responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or
>> >     otherwise check this e-mail and any attachments.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Ace mailing list
>> > Ace@ietf.org
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
>> >
>>
>>
>