Comparative Analysis of High Speed and Low Area Architectures of Blake SHA-3 Candidate on FPGA

On Nov. 2, 2007, NIST announced a public competition to develop a new cryptographic hash algorithm SHA-3. After long run selection process, five finalists were selected for Round 3. Winner of this competition will be announced later in 2012. Blake is one of the candidates of round three of this competition. Along with the strength of security, efficient hardware implementation is also major evaluation criteria for final selection. Blake algorithm compression function is based on G-Function which executes 8 times in one round. In this paper, different architecture schemes named as 8G, 4G and 1G has been implemented on FPGA, based on serialization of Round Function processes. Optimization is performed by selecting appropriate numbers of LUTs and Slice Registers according to the Virtex 5 Device Architecture Resources. Implementation results of each design are compared with each other and with other design contributions. Full autonomous design for each scheme is implemented on Virtex 5 xc5vlx50t-3 FPGA. Common I/O and control interface is provided to find out the fair comparison results. For tradeoff analysis three design optimization techniques based on 'area', 'speed' and 'balance' designs are used. We found 8G architecture provides the best through-put, 1G provides least area implementation and 4G provides the most efficient results in terms of throughput per area (TPA). 4G design gives Tpa of 2.1. Our design methodology and optimization strategy gives improved results from previous contributions.

[1]  Rajesh Kumar Yadav,et al.  FPGA Based Area And Throughput Implementation of JH And BLAKE Hash Function , 2012 .

[2]  Takeshi Sugawara,et al.  Fair and Consistent Hardware Evaluation of Fourteen Round Two SHA-3 Candidates , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems.

[3]  Kris Gaj,et al.  Comprehensive Evaluation of High-Speed and Medium-Speed Implementations of Five SHA-3 Finalists Using Xilinx and Altera FPGAs , 2012, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..

[4]  P. Schaumont,et al.  How Can We Conduct " Fair and Consistent " Hardware Evaluation for SHA-3 Candidate ? , 2010 .

[5]  William P. Marnane,et al.  FPGA Implementations of the Round Two SHA-3 Candidates , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications.

[6]  Kishore Kumar,et al.  Lightweight Implementations of SHA-3 Finalists on FPGAs , 2012 .

[7]  Paris Kitsos,et al.  BLAKE HASH Function Family on FPGA: From the Fastest to the Smallest , 2010, 2010 IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI.

[8]  Kris Gaj,et al.  Throughput vs. Area Trade-offs in High-Speed Architectures of Five Round 3 SHA-3 Candidates Implemented Using Xilinx and Altera FPGAs , 2011, CHES.

[9]  Eiji Okamoto,et al.  Compact implementations of BLAKE-32 and BLAKE-64 on FPGA , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Field-Programmable Technology.

[10]  Athar Mahboob,et al.  Efficient FPGA Implementation of Secure Hash Algorithm Grøstl – SHA-3 Finalist , 2012 .

[11]  Willi Meier,et al.  SHA-3 proposal BLAKE , 2009 .

[12]  Athar Mahboob,et al.  Efficient Hardware Implementations and Hardware Performance Evaluation of SHA-3 Finalists , 2012 .

[13]  François Durvaux,et al.  Compact FPGA Implementations of the Five SHA-3 Finalists , 2011, CARDIS.

[14]  Bernhard Jungk.  Evaluation Of Compact FPGA Implementations For All SHA-3 Finalists , 2012 .