2020
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-42068-0_2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimized Threshold Implementations: Minimizing the Latency of Secure Cryptographic Accelerators

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This section presents the evaluation of a masking-based countermeasure as applicable to the unrolled architectures of low-latency ciphers. The countermeasure is based on threshold implementation (TI) for PRINCE, proposed by Moradi and Schneider [7], and its subsequent development [29]. We extended the unrolled TI-based countermeasure with register elements, such as pipeline registers and deglitchers.…”
Section: Countermeasuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This section presents the evaluation of a masking-based countermeasure as applicable to the unrolled architectures of low-latency ciphers. The countermeasure is based on threshold implementation (TI) for PRINCE, proposed by Moradi and Schneider [7], and its subsequent development [29]. We extended the unrolled TI-based countermeasure with register elements, such as pipeline registers and deglitchers.…”
Section: Countermeasuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, the authors optimized k and not the number of component functions in general. Additionally, another methodology has been given in [BKN19], which is only suitable for sharing functions that have degree t = n − 1, where n is the number of input bits. As we have t = 3 and n = 8, this method obviously cannot be applied in our case.…”
Section: Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to ease the notation, we utilize the same matrix/table representation of output sharing used in [WMM20] and [BKN19]. While the table notation does not uniquely determine the Algebraic Normal Form (ANF) of the sharing, it is sufficient to argue the correctness and non-completeness properties.…”
Section: Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [MS16a], the S-box is decomposed to three quadratic bijections allowing to obtain its uniform sharing with three shares without any fresh masks, i.e., three clock cycles per encryption/decryption round. In [BKN19], the authors considered d + 1 masking and did not decompose the S-box, as we do in our construction. Each first-order masked S-box in their design requires 12 fresh mask bits while using a form of mask reuse, the authors could reduce the required fresh masks to 48 bits per clock cycle in a round-based implementation with two clock cycles per cipher round.…”
Section: Mʹ Compressmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 2 shows a comparison between the performance of these designs. Since the key path was masked in [BKN19], but not in [MS16a], we provided both designs with and without key masking enabling a more meaningful comparison.…”
Section: Mʹ Compressmentioning
confidence: 99%