Hi Martin, That is great news!
> As expected, the time per multiplication stayed constant when I varied > the number of multiplications -- with the parallel scheduling there > is a > huge difference between doing 100 and doing 1000 multiplications (a > factor of four in a test I did). Do you have any idea about why there is a factor of four? -- Janus Den 27/12/2007 kl. 15.13 skrev Martin Geisler: > Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hi Ivan, Thomas, Dan, Jakob, Janus, and the rest of viff-devel! > > I have implemented and timed TLS in VIFF -- I figured you SIMAP guys > might want to hear about that too. > >> This is the summary of changes: >> >> Secure communication between the players were implemented using TLS >> (Transport Layer Security, the successor to SSL). An included >> Makefile can generate the needed certificates. The network layer >> was >> completely reimplemented, this breaks compatibility with programs >> written for VIFF version 0.2 or earlier. > > Now that we have TLS in VIFF we can finally start evaluating the > performance in a realistic setting. Noone knew how big a performance > loss encrypting and decrypting shares would be. As I wrote here > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.cryptography.viff.devel/43 > > there doesn't seem to be any measurable performance loss associated > with > TLS(!) For version 0.3 I have also made a new benchmarking program > which > can benchmark both parallel and sequential scheduling of > multiplications > and comparisons. This program shows that VIFF really does manage to > schedule things correctly as intended. When run across the Internet > sequential multiplications took 190 ms per multiplication whereas > parallel multiplications took only ~4 ms each. > > As expected, the time per multiplication stayed constant when I varied > the number of multiplications -- with the parallel scheduling there > is a > huge difference between doing 100 and doing 1000 multiplications (a > factor of four in a test I did). > > If I run the sequential multiplications with three machines at the > DAIMI > LAN, then I cannot measure any difference in execution time. That > makes > sense too since the ping times are about 0.2 ms, and so the machines > wait very little in the sequential case. > > -- > Martin Geisler _______________________________________________ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) [email protected] http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
