REPOST: Re: High Bandwidth Mixing Cipher Chips
Date: 10/28/05

Date: 28 Oct 2005 12:23:25 -0700 wrote:
> >
> > So I repeat that the design is not well suited for hardware
> > implementation.
> >
> > Tom
> Have you ever taken a cypher, written it in a HDL, programmed a FPGA
> and had it working?
> yes [ ]
> no [ ]
> dunno [ ]

I worked for a firm which developed crypto accelerators in Verilog.
While I'm not an EE myself I did spend quite a bit of time working with
them on the "making things fit" side. I helped develop parts of some
upcoming [bignum ALU] projects, I've listened to customers bitch and
whine over 5k gates, etc...

Put it this way, the average customer we had for networking wanted
>10Gbps with less than a half million gates doing GCM. So not just some half-ass broken cipher but a full AES and GF multiplier. Oh and it was full-duplex.

I'm also the author of the CS^2 block cipher [search for it].
which is a fraction the size of this mixed-network stuff.

Lets throw some numbers out there shall we ...

>>From my Toorcon talk [these are public knowledge]. The Bignum ALU I
helped design at the firm could hit ~260K cycles at 200Mhz in less than
a million transistors for RSA-1024 decrypt operations. It was ~170K
gates. That's seven times more clock efficient than an AMD64 and
1/70th the size [thereabouts].

So when you say you have a 500K gate block cipher and I question it ...
it's for good reason. Gates aren't cheap and a professional would
realize that.


========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Control: cancel <>
Subject: Cancel "Re: High Bandwidth Mixing Cipher Chips"
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:51:36 GMT
Message-ID: <>
User-Agent: Xnews/M3
Lines: 2
NNTP-Posting-Host: (
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 22:17:15 +0200
X-Trace: 3d5e34362874bf5c9b97515956