2019 Chinese Control Conference (CCC) 2019
DOI: 10.23919/chicc.2019.8865908
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High Performance SM2 Elliptic Curve Cryptographic Processor over GF(p)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mapping occurs when the encoded message is assigned to the parameter x i and there exists a corresponding y i , such that (x i , y i ) ∈ E p (a, b). If there is no corresponding y i , then x i is incremented by 1 until a corresponding y i is identified [53]- [55]. Thus, many schemes append certain bits to the message to avoid changing x i , attempting to find the corresponding y i .…”
Section: ) Mapping the Message To An Elliptic Curvementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mapping occurs when the encoded message is assigned to the parameter x i and there exists a corresponding y i , such that (x i , y i ) ∈ E p (a, b). If there is no corresponding y i , then x i is incremented by 1 until a corresponding y i is identified [53]- [55]. Thus, many schemes append certain bits to the message to avoid changing x i , attempting to find the corresponding y i .…”
Section: ) Mapping the Message To An Elliptic Curvementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides high-speed, our method also supports multi-curve domain parameters. For instance, different standards (e.g., P-256 from NIST [ 8 ], secp256k1 from SECG [ 37 ], SCA-256 from SM2 [ 38 ], and Brainpool256 from the German Brainpool standard [ 39 ]) would be able to be implemented with just a single ECC processor. Moreover, our processor does not incur any additional costs besides BRAMs when adding support for different curves.…”
Section: Hardware Implementation Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…s3 � (c14, 0, 0, c14, c14, 0, c14, c14); s4 � (c13, 0, 0, 0, c13, 0, c13, c13); s5 � (c12, 0, c15, 0, 0, 0, c15, c15); s6 � (c11, c11, c13, c13, c11, 0, c11, c11); s7 � (c10, c15, c10, 0, 0, 0, c10, c10); s8 � (c9, c14, c14, c15, c15, 0, c9, c9); s9 � (c8, 0, 0, c9, c8, 0, 0, 0); s10 � (0, 0, 0, c12, c12, 0, c12, c12); s11 � (0, 0, 0, 0, c14, c14, 0, 0); s12 � (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, c9, 0, c8); s13 � (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, c13, c13, 0); s14 � (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, c8, 0, c8); subtraction and two extra half-word additions. While the KO algorithm presented in [11] requires six cycles, the KO algorithm presented in [27] requires only five cycles, shown in Algorithm 4.…”
Section: Integer Multiplicationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A series of ECADD and ECDBL operations make up PM. For no-idle cycles, a good ECADD and ECDBL algorithm proposed in [27] is chosen for this architecture, given as Algorithm 5 below. e algorithm has three advantages.…”
Section: Point Addition and Point Doublingmentioning
confidence: 99%