On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 13:24 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > Hi, > I got pinged by someone testing the performance of TLS handshakes and > it seems that gnutls/nettle with RSA is significantly slower than > openssl. On the other hand, secp256r1 and ed25519 are faster. (btw. > both openssl and gnutls/nettle are slower than rusttls).
FYI last time I checked rusttls it does not employ any countermeasure, not even blinding, easy to be fast that way. > Nevertheless > the RSA caught my attention because I had the impression that nettle > was at some point equivalent if not faster. I see that the hogweed > benchmark values in nettle show a 3x difference in signing for the TR > version and ~2x for the unprotected. Going back to 3.1 did not affect > that. Was that always the case? If not any ideas what could have > caused that? Did we miss some optimizations? (from a quick review of > openssl' RSA code, I see that smooth CRT RSA was added relatively > recently, but could that get such a big performance benefit?) Would you be able to measure OpenSSL's RSA from a release before the smooth CRt was added ? > name size sign/ms verify/ms > rsa 2048 0.8881 27.1422 > rsa (openssl) 2048 1.4249 45.2295 > > rsa-tr 2048 0.4257 29.1152 > rsa-tr (openssl) 2048 1.3735 46.1692 > > regards, > Nikos > _______________________________________________ > nettle-bugs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/nettle-bugs -- Simo Sorce RHEL Crypto Team Red Hat, Inc _______________________________________________ nettle-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/nettle-bugs
