[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: speed of HMAC vs. Rijndael-CBCMAC?

To: Steve Bellovin <smb@research.att.com>
Subject: Re: speed of HMAC vs. Rijndael-CBCMAC?
From: Helger Lipmaa <helger@tml.hut.fi>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 02:26:02 +0300 (EET DST)
cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
In-Reply-To: <20001020144424.B898935DC2@smb.research.att.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Steve Bellovin wrote:

 > Has anyone done any measurements on the relative speeds of a CBC-MAC 
 > using Rijndael (AES) vs. HMAC-MD5 or HMAC-SHA1?  Rijndael is very fast, 
 > and we may be able to eliminate some code in our implementations.

CBC-MAC-RIJNDAEL (128-bit block&key), using my own highly optimized
Rijndael code + *not-at-all* optimized CBCMAC wrapper runs at 234 Mbit/s
on a 500 MHz Pentium III, on long inputs. Since Rijndael code by itself
runs at 275 Mbit/s, my guess is that *highly-optimized* CBCMAC-RIJNDAEL
would run at something like >=265 Mbit/s.

For comparison, other AES candidates with the same wrapper:

   CBC-MAC-MARS		~179 Mbit/s
   CBC-MAC-RC6		~237 Mbit/s
   CBC-MAC-TWOFISH	~199 Mbit/s
   (CBC-MAC-SERPENT not implemented)

Helger

References:

speed of HMAC vs. Rijndael-CBCMAC?

From: Steve Bellovin <smb@research.att.com>

Prev by Date: Re: NAT and IPsec
Next by Date: Re: NAT and IPsec
Prev by thread: Re: speed of HMAC vs. Rijndael-CBCMAC?
Next by thread: Re: speed of HMAC vs. Rijndael-CBCMAC?
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread