Re: [Suit] Fwd: Firmware Update Paper

Szymon Słupik <simon@silvair.com> Sat, 07 December 2019 00:39 UTC

Return-Path: <simon@silvair.com>
X-Original-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE8011200F6 for <suit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 16:39:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=silvair-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 URaFe2d8oYUG for <suit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 16:39:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D47C120089 for <suit@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 16:39:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id a13so9500859ljm.10 for <suit@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 16:39:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=silvair-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=6Bpnu935sO7qhAdw4dEqwiFI7gA8uXheB4IsasErwQM=; b=j4qpetwdpJ4+I4jA7Mi2jmQxQjNF5SocjBWDQnKHu2ozzWFsMjVQ9EShEpb4mfIWBA pM3Jg+UfWS8T+841rEPz2dZiNBo3ICKQaN4IuFybj/EGyQ6EAo7pZ1IEmMiTNjgr/MGb dg0adg6lhqrb4ekemMp344RnwLyBVIh+cjuRS1hsWO66ZHvN4wr8cd3+gHg2oIqAtbys HR3H6PtsCv8KmiVBtR/1AiVbFl37kEKUJ6npgaA1Llra46OelSQ8GdibDYVXK6KwcTMW 7JzP5LRS5BRwpI/E2MZVK1xws40Xt6DbaEx/3Z5TDNNF3omudl/Q/woBNjoSA2lA8JOL Ix0Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=6Bpnu935sO7qhAdw4dEqwiFI7gA8uXheB4IsasErwQM=; b=UrZPd1sH/pjZfX15wMRLvNQQcffozJNh3/NRcDBQRjS8pGG1W3fcocOP97z693siaI Ur1b92iChOfb0RjfMLyqKPaVwWtY6YIPSxazaWR+BmylGaaCTaM5b7WM64iT7L+W3H3/ KeaRqe7IY3bbtTlcAoD5vrJxa6nCj4DkCxVaM61e+7ni3KGJ6yn3XEXLoPBUH7vaqbL9 X+SH3Z6/y303TSmDR/R3FNc7DyVontNv77eUOTWjNihn/5mFxRDjHzZa+F3rP/hhssPg IDKsRDZK/AOlSHwN3ChIN4zqIMLKBPr8Iho5zQMWKELLdbbB2PsZgs5zrRfqZ1SfBYHH vsiQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUw8kqKvZ9dyypgMEnFrE2UwI+B+pLK1SRTIA+Nw39Upn3JThjP P36CjSgAl6I8Djc+/zBqCPDwpx1s/AcwSXRtWTWftfF5r63IYQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzuYTxDJ3ulVnY5/erTf1LTGYPZ4sm/v1nz477g/br/7bMNr8k2C+9mO42GUD32SBvXLq0VcfzvvcL7ykORB6I=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9716:: with SMTP id r22mr10290077lji.224.1575679150695; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 16:39:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <VI1PR08MB53600B1D1A194F49B67B90DFFAC60@VI1PR08MB5360.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <20191127203651.GA117656@davidb.org> <CANK0pbaWkn7w2swRgkOqsTubE1os=rDo2BLjrTZ5eW6ePv3WnA@mail.gmail.com> <20191129183627.GA16289@davidb.org> <DB6PR0801MB1879D9742622EA0AE08A8B72EA430@DB6PR0801MB1879.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CABNHR1yEFvgEzHjBhpqTW-FX+LQTVYuSJE_9SP9OMwzjWsdORQ@mail.gmail.com> <CANK0pbaf8TTtMOSKHD0D-73+MCzSdjk7p+6hVO0WzpSxhF2fVg@mail.gmail.com> <CABNHR1z4N=uH9d5DvyYi17DCULqu3T6Ve9k-_EJr-37zUjF-uw@mail.gmail.com> <CANK0pbYGbzu8VAr7ZuzUOY1yQ75qkMKQ6PAncZCfkH2=RZWNUQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNHR1wOXx6QRYMMFgnNs12qtc5Ofs8MdR-Oe=d4KRCzXtaiQA@mail.gmail.com> <CANK0pbagZtjzE4vsW6ez76aT2sFeNj_vMr=fKP8Xo6kvCcSF9A@mail.gmail.com> <VI1PR08MB5360CF7EFDF7C550D0D7E755FA5D0@VI1PR08MB5360.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5719.1575486149@localhost> <0d577e33-0708-1b7b-a98b-de97559348db@bergzand.net>
In-Reply-To: <0d577e33-0708-1b7b-a98b-de97559348db@bergzand.net>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Szymon_S=C5=82upik?= <simon@silvair.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 09:38:31 +0900
Message-ID: <CABNHR1xMq23BSuh=winUAJeL4PygLZaSFO8gO29Jg7nUhz1doQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: suit@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000ebe150599126425"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/suit/3n9iu0vwYIDNX22u_rsuLrOlLUM>
Subject: Re: [Suit] Fwd: Firmware Update Paper
X-BeenThere: suit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Software Updates for Internet of Things <suit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/suit/>
List-Post: <mailto:suit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 00:39:16 -0000

>
> The time we measured spent on hashing (SHA256)is comparatively small for
> the typical firmware sizes.It takes ~4ms per kB to hashon the platform
> used in the paper. Even with a 200kB binary,it takes just a fraction
> (~10%) of the time needed for signature verification and a tinier
> fraction if the binary is smaller.


Yes, that was actually my point, that with larger file sizes and in real
mesh network scenario (multi-hop, not saturating the links) and more
realistic file sizes (say 200kB), the transfer will be taking significantly
more than the other operations.

Thanks!

--Simon

On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 5:20 AM Koen <koen@bergzand.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> >     > [SS] Does that scale linearly with image size? Do memory
> requirements (RAM
> >     > usage) increase with the image size?
> >
> > I guess what we want to know is how much of that 7s time was the ED25519
> operation, and
> > how much time was the hash calculation.  Only the hash calculation would
> > scale with the image size.
>
> The time we measured spent on hashing (SHA256)is comparatively small for
> the typical firmware sizes.It takes ~4ms per kB to hashon the platform
> used in the paper. Even with a 200kB binary,it takes just a fraction
> (~10%) of the time needed for signature verification and a tinier
> fraction if the binary is smaller.
>
> Best regards,
> Koen Zandberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Suit mailing list
> Suit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit
>