DOCSLIB.ORG

AES); Cryptography; Cryptanaly- the Candidates

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Volume 104, Number 5, September–October 1999 Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology [J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. 104, 435 (1999)] Status Report on the First Round of the Development of the Advanced Encryption Standard Volume 104 Number 5 September–October 1999 James Nechvatal, Elaine Barker, In 1997, the National Institute of Standards (MARS, RC6, Rijndael, Serpent and Donna Dodson, Morris Dworkin, and Technology (NIST) initiated a pro- Twofish) as finalists. The research results James Foti, and Edward Roback cess to select a symmetric-key encryption and rationale for the selection of the fi- algorithm to be used to protect sensitive nalists are documented in this report. National Institute of Standards and (unclassified) Federal information in The five finalists will be the subject of furtherance of NIST’s statutory responsi- further study before the selection of one or Technology, bilities. In 1998, NIST announced the more of these algorithms for inclusion in Gaithersburg, MD 20899-0001 acceptance of 15 candidate algorithms the Advanced Encryption Standard. and requested the assistance of the crypto- Key words: Advanced Encryption graphic research community in analyzing Standard (AES); cryptography; cryptanaly- the candidates. This analysis included an sis; cryptographic algorithms; initial examination of the security and encryption. efficiency characteristics for each al- gorithm. NIST has reviewed the results Accepted: August 11, 1999 of this research and selected five algorithms Available online: http://www.nist.gov/jres Contents 2.4.1.2 Other Architectural Issues ...........442 1. Overview of the Development Process for the Advanced 2.4.1.3 Software .........................442 Encryption Standard and Summary of Round 1 2.4.2 Measured Speed on General Platforms.........442 Evaluations ....................................... 436 2.4.3 Fair Speed ...............................443 1.1 Evaluation Criteria ..............................436 2.4.4 Memory Usage ...........................443 1.2 Results From Round 1 ...........................437 2.4.5 Encryption vs Decryption ...................443 1.3 Selection Process Prior to Round 2 .................437 2.4.6 Key Computation Options ...................443 1.4 Round 2 Finalists ...............................438 2.4.7 Other Versatility and Flexibility ..............444 1.5 Next Steps .....................................438 2.4.8 Key Agility ..............................444 2. Technical Details of the Round 1 Analysis ...............439 2.4.9 Variation of Speed with Key Length...........444 2.1 Abbreviations ..................................439 2.4.10 Potential for Parallelism/Optimal Theoretical 2.2 Organization of Sec. 2 ...........................439 Performance ..............................444 2.3 General Security................................439 2.5 Smart Card Implementations ......................445 2.3.1 Major Attacks ............................439 2.5.1 Low-End Suitability........................445 2.3.2 Lesser Attacks ............................439 2.5.2 Vulnerability of Operations to Timing and 2.3.3 Minimal Rounds and Security Margin .........440 Power Attacks ............................445 2.3.4 Provable Security Claims ...................440 2.5.3 Implicit Key Schedule Weaknesses............446 2.3.5 Design Paradigms, Ancestry, and Prior Art .....440 2.5.3.1 A Power Analysis Variant............446 2.3.6 Simplicity, Cleanness, and Confidence.........441 2.5.3.2 Another Power Analysis Variant.......447 2.4 Efficiency .....................................441 2.5.4 Some Possible Defenses ....................447 2.4.1 Platforms ................................441 2.5.5 Performance ..............................447 2.4.1.1 Machine Word Size ................441 2.5.6 Related Environments ......................448 435 Volume 104, Number 5, September–October 1999 Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 2.6 Profiles of the Candidates ........................448 published notice [18], NIST solicited public comments 2.6.1 CAST-256 ...............................448 on the candidates. A Second AES Candidate Confer- 2.6.2 CRYPTON ...............................448 2.6.3 DEAL...................................449 ence (AES2) was held in March 1999 to discuss the 2.6.4 DFC ....................................449 results of the analysis conducted by the global crypto- 2.6.5 E2 ......................................449 graphic community on the candidate algorithms. The 2.6.6 FROG ...................................449 public comment period on the initial review of the 2.6.7 HPC ....................................449 algorithms closed on April 15, 1999. 2.6.8 LOKI97 .................................450 2.6.9 MAGENTA ..............................450 Using the analyses and comments received, NIST 2.6.10 MARS ..................................450 selected 5 finalist algorithms from the 15. The selected 2.6.11 RC6 ....................................450 algorithms are MARS, RC6, Rijndael, Serpent and 2.6.12 Rijndael .................................451 Twofish. These algorithms will receive further analysis 2.6.13 SAFER+.................................451 during a second, more in-depth review period prior to 2.6.14 Serpent ..................................451 2.6.15 Twofish .................................451 the selection of the final AES algorithm(s). 2.7 Assessments of the Candidates ....................452 The remainder of Sec. 1 summarizes the evaluation 2.7.1 Candidates with Major Security Attacks .......452 process and briefly describes the selected algorithms. 2.7.2 Candidates without Major Security Attacks.....452 Section 2 of this report contains the technical details of 2.7.3 Candidates Selected for Round 2 .............453 the analyses conducted during Round 1. 2.8 Modified Versions...............................454 2.8.1 CRYPTON ...............................454 2.8.2 HPC ....................................454 1.1 Evaluation Criteria 2.8.3 MARS ..................................454 2.8.4 SAFER+.................................455 In the call for candidate algorithms [17], NIST speci- 2.9 Conclusion ....................................455 fied the evaluation criteria that would be used to com- 3. Appendix A. Tables .................................455 4. References.........................................458 pare the candidate algorithms. These criteria were developed from public comments to [16] and from the discussions at a public AES workshop held on April 15, 1. Overview of the Development Process 1997 at NIST. for the Advanced Encryption Standard The evaluation criteria are divided into three major and Summary of Round 1 Evaluations categories: 1) Security, 2) Cost, and 3) Algorithm and Implementation Characteristics. Security is the most The National Institute of Standards and Technology important factor in the evaluation, and it encompasses (NIST) has been working with industry and the crypto- features such as: resistance of the algorithm to crypt- graphic community to develop an Advanced Encryption analysis, soundness of its mathematical basis, random- Standard (AES). The overall goal is to develop a ness of the algorithm output, and relative security as Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) that compared to other candidates. specifies an encryption algorithm(s) capable of protect- Cost is a second important area of evaluation that ing sensitive (unclassified) government information encompasses licensing requirements, computational well into the next century. The algorithm(s) is expected efficiency (speed) on various platforms, and memory to be used by the U.S. Government and, on a voluntary requirements. Since one of NIST’s goals is that the final basis, by the private sector. AES algorithm(s) be available worldwide on a royalty- On January 2, 1997, NIST announced the initiation of free basis, intellectual property claims and potential an effort to develop the AES [16] and made a formal conflicts must be considered in the selection process. call for algorithms on September 12, 1997 [17]. The call The speed of the algorithms on a wide variety of plat- stipulated that the AES would specify an unclassified, forms must also be considered. During Round 1, the publicly disclosed encryption algorithm(s), available focus was primarily on the speed associated with royalty-free, worldwide. In addition, the algorithm(s) 128 bit keys. Additionally, memory requirements must implement symmetric key cryptography as a and constraints for software implementations of the block cipher and (at a minimum) support a block size candidates are important considerations. of 128 bits and key sizes of 128 bits, 192 bits, and The third area of evaluation is algorithm and imple- 256 bits. mentation characteristics such as flexibility, hardware On August 20, 1998, NIST announced its acceptance and software suitability, and algorithm simplicity. of 15 AES candidate algorithms at the First AES Candi- Flexibility includes the ability of an algorithm: 1) to date Conference (AES1). These algorithms had been handle key and block sizes beyond the minimum that submitted by members of the cryptographic community must be supported, 2) to be implemented securely and from around the world. At that conference and in a efficiently in many different types of environments, and 436 Volume 104, Number 5, September–October 1999 Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
Recommended publications
  • A Quantitative Study of Advanced Encryption Standard Performance

    A Quantitative Study of Advanced Encryption Standard Performance

    United States Military Academy USMA Digital Commons West Point ETD 12-2018 A Quantitative Study of Advanced Encryption Standard Performance as it Relates to Cryptographic Attack Feasibility Daniel Hawthorne United States Military Academy, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usmalibrary.org/faculty_etd Part of the Information Security Commons Recommended Citation Hawthorne, Daniel, "A Quantitative Study of Advanced Encryption Standard Performance as it Relates to Cryptographic Attack Feasibility" (2018). West Point ETD. 9. https://digitalcommons.usmalibrary.org/faculty_etd/9 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by USMA Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in West Point ETD by an authorized administrator of USMA Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF ADVANCED ENCRYPTION STANDARD PERFORMANCE AS IT RELATES TO CRYPTOGRAPHIC ATTACK FEASIBILITY A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Computer Science By Daniel Stephen Hawthorne Colorado Technical University December, 2018 Committee Dr. Richard Livingood, Ph.D., Chair Dr. Kelly Hughes, DCS, Committee Member Dr. James O. Webb, Ph.D., Committee Member December 17, 2018 © Daniel Stephen Hawthorne, 2018 1 Abstract The advanced encryption standard (AES) is the premier symmetric key cryptosystem in use today. Given its prevalence, the security provided by AES is of utmost importance. Technology is advancing at an incredible rate, in both capability and popularity, much faster than its rate of advancement in the late 1990s when AES was selected as the replacement standard for DES. Although the literature surrounding AES is robust, most studies fall into either theoretical or practical yet infeasible.
  • Investigating Profiled Side-Channel Attacks Against the DES Key

    Investigating Profiled Side-Channel Attacks Against the DES Key

    IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems ISSN 2569-2925, Vol. 2020, No. 3, pp. 22–72. DOI:10.13154/tches.v2020.i3.22-72 Investigating Profiled Side-Channel Attacks Against the DES Key Schedule Johann Heyszl1[0000−0002−8425−3114], Katja Miller1, Florian Unterstein1[0000−0002−8384−2021], Marc Schink1, Alexander Wagner1, Horst Gieser2, Sven Freud3, Tobias Damm3[0000−0003−3221−7207], Dominik Klein3[0000−0001−8174−7445] and Dennis Kügler3 1 Fraunhofer Institute for Applied and Integrated Security (AISEC), Germany, [email protected] 2 Fraunhofer Research Institution for Microsystems and Solid State Technologies (EMFT), Germany, [email protected] 3 Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik (BSI), Germany, [email protected] Abstract. Recent publications describe profiled single trace side-channel attacks (SCAs) against the DES key-schedule of a “commercially available security controller”. They report a significant reduction of the average remaining entropy of cryptographic keys after the attack, with surprisingly large, key-dependent variations of attack results, and individual cases with remaining key entropies as low as a few bits. Unfortunately, they leave important questions unanswered: Are the reported wide distributions of results plausible - can this be explained? Are the results device- specific or more generally applicable to other devices? What is the actual impact on the security of 3-key triple DES? We systematically answer those and several other questions by analyzing two commercial security controllers and a general purpose microcontroller. We observe a significant overall reduction and, importantly, also observe a large key-dependent variation in single DES key security levels, i.e.
  • Rc-6 Cryptosystem in Vhdl

    Rc-6 Cryptosystem in Vhdl

    RC-6 CRYPTOSYSTEM IN VHDL BY:- Deepak Singh Samant OBJECTIVE: TO IMPLEMENT A CRYPTOSYSTEM USING RIVEST CIPHER-6 (RC6) ALGORITHM IN VHDL(FPGA) What is CRYPTOLOGY? CRYPTOGRAPHY is the art and science of achieving security by encoding message to make them non-readable . CRYPTANALYSIS is the technique of decoding messages from a non-readable format back to readable format without knowing how they were initially converted from readable format to non-readable format. CRYPTOGRAPHY + = CRYPTOLOGY CRYPTANALYSIS Cryptography Overview: Comm. E(k) N/W D(k) Key Set K Key Set K Types Of Attacks: . General View: 1.Criminal Attack 2.Publicity Attack 3.Legal Attack .Technical View: oPassive Attacks oActive Attacks Release of message Interruption Traffic Attacks Modification Fabrication Symmetric key cryptography If same key is used for encryption and decryption,we call the mechanism as symmetric key cryptography. It has the key distribution problem. Symmetric key cryptography Algorithm DES IDEA RC4 RC5 BLOW AES FISH AES: US government wanted to standardize a cryptographic algorithm,which was to be used universally by them.It was to be called as the Advanced Encryption Standard(AES). Among various proposal submitted,only 5 were short listed: 1.Rijndael 3.Serpent 5.MARS 2.Twofish 4.RC6 LITERATURE SURVEY • Comparison: (1) MARS: Its throughput in the studies was generally low. Therefore, its efficiency (throughput/area) was uniformly less than the other finalists. (2) RC6 throughput is generally average. RC6 seems to perform relatively better in pipelined implementations, non-feedback mode (3) Rijndael: good performance in fully pipelined implementations. Efficiency is generally very good. 4) Serpent: feedback mode encryption.
  • Seed Maturity in White Fir and Red Fir. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Exp

    Seed Maturity in White Fir and Red Fir. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Exp

    PACIFIC SOUTHWEST Forest and Range FOREST SERVICE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE P.O. BOX 245, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94701 Experiment Station USDA FOREST SERVICE RESEARCH PAPER PSW-99 /1974 CONTENTS Page Summary ................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................. 3 Methods .................................................... 3 Testing Fresh Seeds ....................................... 3 Testing Stratified Seeds .................................... 3 Seedling Vigor Tests ...................................... 4 Artificial Ripening Trial ................................... 4 Other Observations ........................................ 4 Results and Discussion ....................................... 5 Cone Specific Gravity ..................................... 5 Seed Germination, byCollection Date ....................... 5 Seed GerminationandCone Specific Gravity ................ 7 Red Fir Seedling Vigor .................................... 9 ArtificialRipening of White Fir Seeds ....................... 9 OtherMaturity Indices ..................................... 9 Application ................................................. 10 Literature Cited.............................................. 12 THE AUTHOR WILLIAM W. OLIVER is doing silvicultural research on Sierra Nevada conifer types with headquarters at Redding, California. He earned a B.S. degree (1956) in forestry from the University of New Hampshire, and an M.F. degree (1960) from the University of Michigan. A native of
  • KLEIN: a New Family of Lightweight Block Ciphers

    KLEIN: a New Family of Lightweight Block Ciphers

    KLEIN: A New Family of Lightweight Block Ciphers Zheng Gong1, Svetla Nikova1;2 and Yee Wei Law3 1Faculty of EWI, University of Twente, The Netherlands fz.gong, [email protected] 2 Dept. ESAT/SCD-COSIC, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium 3 Department of EEE, The University of Melbourne, Australia [email protected] Abstract Resource-efficient cryptographic primitives become fundamental for realizing both security and efficiency in embedded systems like RFID tags and sensor nodes. Among those primitives, lightweight block cipher plays a major role as a building block for security protocols. In this paper, we describe a new family of lightweight block ciphers named KLEIN, which is designed for resource-constrained devices such as wireless sensors and RFID tags. Compared to the related proposals, KLEIN has ad- vantage in the software performance on legacy sensor platforms, while its hardware implementation can be compact as well. Key words. Block cipher, Wireless sensor network, Low-resource implementation. 1 Introduction With the development of wireless communication and embedded systems, we become increasingly de- pendent on the so called pervasive computing; examples are smart cards, RFID tags, and sensor nodes that are used for public transport, pay TV systems, smart electricity meters, anti-counterfeiting, etc. Among those applications, wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have attracted more and more attention since their promising applications, such as environment monitoring, military scouting and healthcare. On resource-limited devices the choice of security algorithms should be very careful by consideration of the implementation costs. Symmetric-key algorithms, especially block ciphers, still play an important role for the security of the embedded systems.
  • Known and Chosen Key Differential Distinguishers for Block Ciphers

    Known and Chosen Key Differential Distinguishers for Block Ciphers

    Known and Chosen Key Differential Distinguishers for Block Ciphers Ivica Nikoli´c1?, Josef Pieprzyk2, Przemys law Soko lowski2;3, Ron Steinfeld2 1 University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg 2 Macquarie University, Australia 3 Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. In this paper we investigate the differential properties of block ciphers in hash function modes of operation. First we show the impact of differential trails for block ciphers on collision attacks for various hash function constructions based on block ciphers. Further, we prove the lower bound for finding a pair that follows some truncated differential in case of a random permutation. Then we present open-key differential distinguishers for some well known round-reduced block ciphers. Keywords: Block cipher, differential attack, open-key distinguisher, Crypton, Hierocrypt, SAFER++, Square. 1 Introduction Block ciphers play an important role in symmetric cryptography providing the basic tool for encryp- tion. They are the oldest and most scrutinized cryptographic tool. Consequently, they are the most trusted cryptographic algorithms that are often used as the underlying tool to construct other cryp- tographic algorithms. One such application of block ciphers is for building compression functions for the hash functions. There are many constructions (also called hash function modes) for turning a block cipher into a compression function. Probably the most popular is the well-known Davies-Meyer mode. Preneel et al. in [27] have considered all possible modes that can be defined for a single application of n-bit block cipher in order to produce an n-bit compression function.
  • Performance and Energy Efficiency of Block Ciphers in Personal Digital Assistants

    Performance and Energy Efficiency of Block Ciphers in Personal Digital Assistants

    Performance and Energy Efficiency of Block Ciphers in Personal Digital Assistants Creighton T. R. Hager, Scott F. Midkiff, Jung-Min Park, Thomas L. Martin Bradley Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia 24061 USA {chager, midkiff, jungmin, tlmartin} @ vt.edu Abstract algorithms may consume more energy and drain the PDA battery faster than using less secure algorithms. Due to Encryption algorithms can be used to help secure the processing requirements and the limited computing wireless communications, but securing data also power in many PDAs, using strong cryptographic consumes resources. The goal of this research is to algorithms may also significantly increase the delay provide users or system developers of personal digital between data transmissions. Thus, users and, perhaps assistants and applications with the associated time and more importantly, software and system designers need to energy costs of using specific encryption algorithms. be aware of the benefits and costs of using various Four block ciphers (RC2, Blowfish, XTEA, and AES) were encryption algorithms. considered. The experiments included encryption and This research answers questions regarding energy decryption tasks with different cipher and file size consumption and execution time for various encryption combinations. The resource impact of the block ciphers algorithms executing on a PDA platform with the goal of were evaluated using the latency, throughput, energy- helping software and system developers design more latency product, and throughput/energy ratio metrics. effective applications and systems and of allowing end We found that RC2 encrypts faster and uses less users to better utilize the capabilities of PDA devices.
  • Report on the AES Candidates

    Report on the AES Candidates

    Rep ort on the AES Candidates 1 2 1 3 Olivier Baudron , Henri Gilb ert , Louis Granb oulan , Helena Handschuh , 4 1 5 1 Antoine Joux , Phong Nguyen ,Fabrice Noilhan ,David Pointcheval , 1 1 1 1 Thomas Pornin , Guillaume Poupard , Jacques Stern , and Serge Vaudenay 1 Ecole Normale Sup erieure { CNRS 2 France Telecom 3 Gemplus { ENST 4 SCSSI 5 Universit e d'Orsay { LRI Contact e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This do cument rep orts the activities of the AES working group organized at the Ecole Normale Sup erieure. Several candidates are evaluated. In particular we outline some weaknesses in the designs of some candidates. We mainly discuss selection criteria b etween the can- didates, and make case-by-case comments. We nally recommend the selection of Mars, RC6, Serp ent, ... and DFC. As the rep ort is b eing nalized, we also added some new preliminary cryptanalysis on RC6 and Crypton in the App endix which are not considered in the main b o dy of the rep ort. Designing the encryption standard of the rst twentyyears of the twenty rst century is a challenging task: we need to predict p ossible future technologies, and wehavetotake unknown future attacks in account. Following the AES pro cess initiated by NIST, we organized an op en working group at the Ecole Normale Sup erieure. This group met two hours a week to review the AES candidates. The present do cument rep orts its results. Another task of this group was to up date the DFC candidate submitted by CNRS [16, 17] and to answer questions which had b een omitted in previous 1 rep orts on DFC.
  • Development of the Advanced Encryption Standard

    Development of the Advanced Encryption Standard

    Volume 126, Article No. 126024 (2021) https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.126.024 Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Development of the Advanced Encryption Standard Miles E. Smid Formerly: Computer Security Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA [email protected] Strong cryptographic algorithms are essential for the protection of stored and transmitted data throughout the world. This publication discusses the development of Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS) 197, which specifies a cryptographic algorithm known as the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). The AES was the result of a cooperative multiyear effort involving the U.S. government, industry, and the academic community. Several difficult problems that had to be resolved during the standard’s development are discussed, and the eventual solutions are presented. The author writes from his viewpoint as former leader of the Security Technology Group and later as acting director of the Computer Security Division at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, where he was responsible for the AES development. Key words: Advanced Encryption Standard (AES); consensus process; cryptography; Data Encryption Standard (DES); security requirements, SKIPJACK. Accepted: June 18, 2021 Published: August 16, 2021; Current Version: August 23, 2021 This article was sponsored by James Foti, Computer Security Division, Information Technology Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The views expressed represent those of the author and not necessarily those of NIST. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.126.024 1. Introduction In the late 1990s, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was about to decide if it was going to specify a new cryptographic algorithm standard for the protection of U.S.
  • Key Schedule Algorithm Using 3-Dimensional Hybrid Cubes for Block Cipher

    Key Schedule Algorithm Using 3-Dimensional Hybrid Cubes for Block Cipher

    (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 10, No. 8, 2019 Key Schedule Algorithm using 3-Dimensional Hybrid Cubes for Block Cipher Muhammad Faheem Mushtaq1, Sapiee Jamel2, Siti Radhiah B. Megat3, Urooj Akram4, Mustafa Mat Deris5 Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), Parit Raja, 86400 Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysia1, 2, 3, 5 Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, 64200 Rahim Yar Khan, Pakistan1, 4 Abstract—A key scheduling algorithm is the mechanism that difficulty for a cryptanalyst to recover the secret key [8]. All generates and schedules all session-keys for the encryption and cryptographic algorithms are recommended to follow 128, 192 decryption process. The key space of conventional key schedule and 256-bits key lengths proposed by Advanced Encryption algorithm using the 2D hybrid cubes is not enough to resist Standard (AES) [9]. attacks and could easily be exploited. In this regard, this research proposed a new Key Schedule Algorithm based on Permutation plays an important role in the development of coordinate geometry of a Hybrid Cube (KSAHC) using cryptographic algorithms and it contains the finite set of Triangular Coordinate Extraction (TCE) technique and 3- numbers or symbols that are used to mix up a readable message Dimensional (3D) rotation of Hybrid Cube surface (HCs) for the into ciphertext as shown in transposition cipher [10]. The logic block cipher to achieve large key space that are more applicable behind any cryptographic algorithm is the number of possible to resist any attack on the secret key.
  • The Long Road to the Advanced Encryption Standard

    The Long Road to the Advanced Encryption Standard

    The Long Road to the Advanced Encryption Standard Jean-Luc Cooke CertainKey Inc. [email protected], http://www.certainkey.com/˜jlcooke Abstract 1 Introduction This paper will start with a brief background of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) process, lessons learned from the Data Encryp- tion Standard (DES), other U.S. government Two decades ago the state-of-the-art in cryptographic publications and the fifteen first the private sector cryptography was—we round candidate algorithms. The focus of the know now—far behind the public sector. presentation will lie in presenting the general Don Coppersmith’s knowledge of the Data design of the five final candidate algorithms, Encryption Standard’s (DES) resilience to and the specifics of the AES and how it dif- the then unknown Differential Cryptanaly- fers from the Rijndael design. A presentation sis (DC), the design principles used in the on the AES modes of operation and Secure Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA) in Digital Hash Algorithm (SHA) family of algorithms Signature Standard (DSS) being case and will follow and will include discussion about point[NISTDSS][NISTDES][DC][NISTSHA1]. how it is directly implicated by AES develop- ments. The selection and design of the DES was shrouded in controversy and suspicion. This very controversy has lead to a fantastic acceler- Intended Audience ation in private sector cryptographic advance- ment. So intrigued by the NSA’s modifica- tions to the Lucifer algorithm, researchers— This paper was written as a supplement to a academic and industry alike—powerful tools presentation at the Ottawa International Linux in assessing block cipher strength were devel- Symposium.
  • Optimization of Core Components of Block Ciphers Baptiste Lambin

    Optimization of Core Components of Block Ciphers Baptiste Lambin

    Optimization of core components of block ciphers Baptiste Lambin To cite this version: Baptiste Lambin. Optimization of core components of block ciphers. Cryptography and Security [cs.CR]. Université Rennes 1, 2019. English. NNT : 2019REN1S036. tel-02380098 HAL Id: tel-02380098 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02380098 Submitted on 26 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. THÈSE DE DOCTORAT DE L’UNIVERSITE DE RENNES 1 COMUE UNIVERSITE BRETAGNE LOIRE Ecole Doctorale N°601 Mathématique et Sciences et Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication Spécialité : Informatique Par Baptiste LAMBIN Optimization of Core Components of Block Ciphers Thèse présentée et soutenue à RENNES, le 22/10/2019 Unité de recherche : IRISA Rapporteurs avant soutenance : Marine Minier, Professeur, LORIA, Université de Lorraine Jacques Patarin, Professeur, PRiSM, Université de Versailles Composition du jury : Examinateurs : Marine Minier, Professeur, LORIA, Université de Lorraine Jacques Patarin, Professeur, PRiSM, Université de Versailles Jean-Louis Lanet, INRIA Rennes Virginie Lallemand, Chargée de Recherche, LORIA, CNRS Jérémy Jean, ANSSI Dir. de thèse : Pierre-Alain Fouque, IRISA, Université de Rennes 1 Co-dir. de thèse : Patrick Derbez, IRISA, Université de Rennes 1 Remerciements Je tiens à remercier en premier lieu mes directeurs de thèse, Pierre-Alain et Patrick.