Re: DES implementation problems

From: Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen_at_t-online.de)
Date: 09/24/04

  • Next message: BRG: "Re: DES implementation problems"
    Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:17:06 +0200
    
    

    BRG wrote:

    > Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
    >
    > [snip]
    >
    >>> Good tip!
    >>> But it still remain only 4 bytes available to other variables, such as
    >>> round counter, temp vars of multiplication for GF(2^8) and matrix. For
    >>> common 8-bit cpu such as 8051, R0~R7 must be carefully allocated to
    >>> these variables. It's indeed a hard job. Rijndael paper said that it
    >>> is implemented in 68hc08 assembler:
    >>>
    >>> Key/Block Length Number of Cycles Required RAM Code length
    >>>
    >>> (128,128) a) 8390 cycles 36 bytes 919 bytes
    >>>
    >>> (192,128) 10780 cycles 44 bytes 1170 bytes
    >>>
    >>> (256,128) 12490 cycles 52 bytes 1135 bytes
    >>>
    >>> I think these data are only for encryption.
    >>> Data of 8051 were also presented, but did not include RAM size.
    >>
    >>
    >> Again a point of ignorance: Given these figures, it would
    >> sound almost like magic that one could do the same with
    >> as little as 32 bytes of RAM. BTW, doesn't one have to put
    >> in at the start one block of the plaintext and one block of
    >> the key. These alone occupies that amount of storage.
    >> It's difficult to imagine that during the whole processing
    >> one wouldn't need any additional space for storing some
    >> temporary variables. But, of course, a hard and undisputable
    >> proof would be a 'concrete' implementation with only 32 bytes
    >> of RAM on some machine. Otherwise, one would be left with
    >> wild speculations, I am afraid.
    >
    >
    > Wild speculation is not necessary since those of us who are in this
    > business have a lot of real experience on which to make such judgements.
    >
    > The reason that it is not possible to give a definitive general answer
    > is that it depends on the actual processor involved. Some processors
    > have all their 'registers' in memory and in this case, as Xiangyu Yang
    > has said, it would be impossible to implement AES in a processor system
    > with only 32 bytes of RAM. But other processors do have non-memory
    > registers and if there are several of these it may be possible to
    > implement AES in 32 bytes of RAM.

    I see. But these registers have contents that are changing,
    they are in fact more efficient than what is called RAM, aren't
    they? So one would be in fact cheating with a 'superficial'
    very impressive figure of 32 bytes of RAM of implementation,
    wouldn't it? (Imagine a machine with 1K bytes of 'registers'
    and one would require 0 bytes of RAM :-) )

    M. K. Shen


  • Next message: BRG: "Re: DES implementation problems"