Re: [TLS] [Cfrg] 3DES diediedie

"Hilarie Orman" <hilarie@purplestreak.com> Thu, 01 September 2016 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C1E412D09C; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Q3DbLw0BAw_g; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com (out02.mta.xmission.com [166.70.13.232]) (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 2B7DE12B01E; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out02.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <hilarie@purplestreak.com>) id 1bfUhZ-0002g0-Nk; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 10:18:53 -0600
Received: from [72.250.219.84] (helo=rumpleteazer.rhmr.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <hilarie@purplestreak.com>) id 1bfUh4-0006aM-0H; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 10:18:52 -0600
Received: from rumpleteazer.rhmr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rumpleteazer.rhmr.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id u81GHxMk016404; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:17:59 -0600
Received: (from hilarie@localhost) by rumpleteazer.rhmr.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id u81GHx1a016378; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:17:59 -0600
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:17:59 -0600
Message-Id: <201609011617.u81GHx1a016378@rumpleteazer.rhmr.com>
From: "Hilarie Orman" <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
To: tls@ietf.org, cfrg@irtf.org
In-reply-to: Yourmessage <57C7DDB7.9010606@secworks.se>
X-XM-SPF: eid=1bfUh4-0006aM-0H; ; ; mid=<201609011617.u81GHx1a016378@rumpleteazer.rhmr.com>; ; ; hst=in01.mta.xmission.com; ; ; ip=72.250.219.84; ; ; frm=hilarie@purplestreak.com; ; ; spf=none
X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+ecafoTjIhmL724MaQkNpG
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 72.250.219.84
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: hilarie@purplestreak.com
X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa06 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
X-Spam-Combo: *;tls@ietf.org, cfrg@irtf.org
X-Spam-Relay-Country:
X-Spam-Timing: total 7004 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.04 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 3.0 (0.0%), b_tie_ro: 2.1 (0.0%), parse: 2.2 (0.0%), extract_message_metadata: 19 (0.3%), get_uri_detail_list: 1.50 (0.0%), tests_pri_-1000: 3.1 (0.0%), tests_pri_-950: 1.39 (0.0%), tests_pri_-900: 1.10 (0.0%), tests_pri_-400: 23 (0.3%), check_bayes: 22 (0.3%), b_tokenize: 5 (0.1%), b_tok_get_all: 8 (0.1%), b_comp_prob: 1.92 (0.0%), b_tok_touch_all: 3.2 (0.0%), b_finish: 0.79 (0.0%), tests_pri_0: 1358 (19.4%), check_dkim_signature: 0.51 (0.0%), check_dkim_adsp: 1055 (15.1%), tests_pri_500: 5590 (79.8%), poll_dns_idle: 5579 (79.7%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%)
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/nLoFC8pSbgJ5gxDkHPT-BNw91g8>
Subject: Re: [TLS] [Cfrg] 3DES diediedie
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Hilarie Orman <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 16:19:04 -0000

joachim@secworks.se writes:

>  Aloha!

Aloha auinala.

>  Hilarie Orman wrote:
>  > An ARM is far too much hardware to throw at "read sensor/munge
>  > data/send data".

>  No, they are not. The Cortex M0+ is aimed at these kinds of very simple
>  systems that runs for many years on a single battery.

>  Look at the STM32L0 series from ST for example. These devices can run on
>  energy harvesting and very tiny physically and very, very cheap (ten-ish
>  cents in high volume):

>  http://www.st.com/content/st_com/en/products/microcontrollers/stm32-32-bit-arm-cortex-mcus/stm32l0-series.html?querycriteria=productId=SS1817

>  The STM32L021 has an AES-128 core. Not very fast (200+ cycles), but
>  several times faster than SW. You can also run the AES core wile the CPU
>  core is in power save mode.

>  Another example is the Zero Gecko from Silicon Labs. Same price range, a
>  huge number of power modes. And an AES core that is really fast. 50+
>  cycles for AES-128, which basically means 4 cycles/round (which implies
>  4 S-boxes)

>  https://www.silabs.com/products/mcu/32-bit/efm32-zero-gecko/pages/efm32-zero-gecko.aspx

For devices you refer to, how many AES blocks can they encrypt on a AA
battery, assuming that the usage is to encrypt one block every 10 minutes?

Hilarie