Hi Marc, Let me see if I understood the way you measured: it takes 496 msec on average to do an encryption with your code, right?
Claudio On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Marc Makkes<mmak...@science.uva.nl> wrote: > Hi Janus, > > I think that I'd have reached the stage where you can test my code, but > still lacks some basic checks and is still prone to timing attacks and > is basically the same viffs current implementation, with some additional > speedups. So consequently, it code should only be used for testing purposes > only. > > I'm achieving the following speeds on my atom N270 ( 1.6Ghz ) testing > with key sizes of 2048 bit. > > Viff code: > ---------- > Encrypting: > 10 loops, best of 3: 4.42 sec per loop > Decrypting: > 10 loops, best of 3: 925 msec per loop > > My code: > -------- > Encrypting: > 10 loops, best of 3: 496 msec per loop > Decrypting: > 10 loops, best of 3: 143 msec per loop > > For encrypting its almost a 9 fold speedup and for decrypting 6.5 times > with respect to the current implementation. > > In the tar ball you find the small makefile as well as a test.py file. > It shows the basic use of all functions. If you have any comments, issues > or questions please let me know. > > Happy testing, > > -Marc > > _______________________________________________ > viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) > firstname.lastname@example.org > http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk > > -- Claudio Orlandi PhD student, Department of Computer Science, Turing-223 Aarhus Universitet, Denmark http://www.daimi.au.dk/~orlandi _______________________________________________ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) email@example.com http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk