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/)
> viff-devel@viff.dk
> 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/)
viff-devel@viff.dk
http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk

Reply via email to