IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] SHA-x performance

NIIBE Yutaka <gniibe@fsij.org> Wed, 12 August 2015 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <gniibe@fsij.org>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33E31B2A01 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:15:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uXlE5ZGMza5E for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:15:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from akagi.fsij.org (akagi.fsij.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe1a:6542]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EF2A1B2A09 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:15:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fsij.org; s=main; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=b90yIU3j3GRnbKry02ppDSdObdoOUERUGTxHDKci2Q4=; b=LXg1qjOw+d0Q+YKfI/2uBydnxJw+sB+YF9GhsOB27jcE8WdHbIAJ8g/BRopgQiyYI4S9BEkLzhPBwRqfDy1aRyzbeHdfkKcPICTZDUsma8lgyrPiJlnUXLKFlibnX9p1ekIg6Drwe2Olw8MD4x/koe3pwOWvemg0v1LqA8oWWI6Y/1873el9thxKN6GHLOdpYfydDEbRZhEUoGwai/Mt0sOQUaEV5pylFGA/W0KjmQYnW1tqX9c15n+YBWTT9IYVKYZV5temCvfFjJulasLfLStZroLKc+H21GxHeJd2lCs7I60c2QoKaUmAplSQHsXrR9yfwnRz3voNQBCpOnOcSg==;
Received: from e139117.dynamic.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp ([211.13.139.117] helo=[192.168.23.212]) by akagi.fsij.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gniibe@fsij.org>) id 1ZPfDg-0000nq-TI; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:14:05 +0900
Message-ID: <55CBD398.5010905@fsij.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:15:36 +0900
From: NIIBE Yutaka <gniibe@fsij.org>
Organization: Free Software Initiative of Japan
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: wk@gnupg.org
References: <87y4hmi19i.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <7540C7A9-2830-4A63-8310-B684796DA279@nohats.ca> <55C681FC.9010100@iang.org> <sjma8tztbgo.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <CAMm+Lwj7SxXTn+KD-eQSeZHwJB36tCgD1t0bodVsp3ovOaZ8mw@mail.gmail.com> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4AD7C72@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <87io8lpzu4.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4AD7F8E@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <87mvxxenss.fsf_-_@vigenere.g10code.de> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4AD8086@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <878u9hefcs.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
In-Reply-To: <878u9hefcs.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/q6FLfF2q-tnDX4q0tvniSIwb5Ag>
Cc: IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>, Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, ianG <iang@iang.org>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] SHA-x performance
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 23:15:55 -0000

On 08/12/2015 05:32 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
> Do you have a suggestion on what CPUs from low to high end to do
> benchmarks so to check which SHA variant is suitable?

FWIW, here is some fact.

My RSA-2048 private key is on FST-01, which uses STM32F103 @ 72MHz.
This device is used to sign GnuPG source code release.  And it's daily
use to my access to Git repositories by OpenSSH.  With no crypto
accelerator, it takes about 1.4 second to sign.

Yesterday, I created a new key of ed25519/cv25519 and installed on
another FST-01.  It's faster.

If a user can wait for EdDSA computation as long as computation of
RSA-2048, STM32F030 @ 48MHz would be a candidate (no, I haven't tested
yet, just a possibility).

Please note that the firmware (Gnuk) doesn't implement OpenPGP, but
only OpenPGPcard specification.  It only computes with private key.
Since EdDSA requires SHA2-512, we have SHA2-512.

It scales to low end, when/if a user can wait.
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email