The Hardware AES uses differend MAgic constant (Seed?) that many popular
software implementations (If I recall, reading from somewhere). So the
initial state of non HW accelerated implementation should match the HW one,
that's all.
PS: Can't remember the details just pumped into this one, that I
Jim and Boris,
> Something you may want to investigate is replacing the "pure C"
> implementation of ChaCha20 with the rotate step replaced with either a
> compiler intrinsic (Microsoft) or a bit of assembler (gcc). SHA1 has
> the same issue. I haven't a clue as to why popular crypto
I have implemented ChaCha20 and compared it with various AES
implementations on my other (still cheap) notebook. All my
implementations are made for Windows and MS Visual Studio, but I think
that Intel's AES-NI code (see below) and the original ChaCha code was
made for GNU C compiler.
First
Something you may want to investigate is replacing the "pure C"
implementation of ChaCha20 with the rotate step replaced with either a
compiler intrinsic (Microsoft) or a bit of assembler (gcc). SHA1 has the
same issue. I haven't a clue as to why popular crypto algoritms use a
rotate, virtually
Hi James,
more numbers here.
Soft. AES implementation vs AES-NI implementation, 512 MB, ECB mode of
operation, single core, buffer size 32kB, Windows:
AES 128:3873 ms (average calculated on 10 measurements)
AES-NI 128: 1067 ms (average calculated on 10 measurements)
Numbers are from my
For the non-aficinionadoes, ECB is the electronic code book mode where each 16
byte block is independently encrypted/decrypted. As such, it can reveal a
great deal about an encrypted document or stream as a repeating block will
always have the same encrypted form.
The Ciphertext Block
Here are some numbers. The numbers were comoued on my boat computer, which
is a very cheap notebook, so consider them relative, not absolute.
10mb encryption with a single key:
RC4: 0.021 seconds
ChaCha20: 0.007
AES-128:0.212
10mb encryption setting key every 1024
