phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] multiply-hardening (Re: NoelKDF ready for submission)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <52F71DAC.5060706@dei.uc.pt>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 06:18:20 +0000
From: Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] multiply-hardening (Re: NoelKDF ready for submission)

On 09-02-2014 04:26, Bill Cox wrote:
> By the way, if you're familiar with results from skilled hand layout
> of such circuits in advanced IC processes, I'd love to hear your
> thoughts on Salsa20/8 latency with a custom hand-optimized layout in
> the fastest processes.

Sorry, can't help you there; my knowledge is limited to the software
side of things. That said, your estimate does look reasonable: [1]
reports 4 cycles (one cycle per double-round) for the highest-area
implementation, 8 cycles at roughly half the area, or 32 cycles at 1/4th
of the area. The most efficient (in throughput/gates) is the second choice.

[1] http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4746906