z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Comparison analysis of Ding's RLWE-based key exchange protocol and NewHope variants
Author(s) -
Xinwei Gao
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
advances in mathematics of communications
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.601
H-Index - 26
eISSN - 1930-5346
pISSN - 1930-5338
DOI - 10.3934/amc.2019015
Subject(s) - simple (philosophy) , key (lock) , key exchange , protocol (science) , computer science , computation , signal (programming language) , theoretical computer science , mathematics , algorithm , public key cryptography , computer network , computer security , programming language , encryption , medicine , philosophy , alternative medicine , epistemology , pathology
In this paper, we present a comparison study on three RLWE key exchange protocols: one from Ding et al. in 2012 (DING12) and two from Alkim et al. in 2016 (NewHope and NewHope-Simple). We compare and analyze protocol construction, notion of designing and realizing key exchange, signal computation, error reconciliation and cost of these three protocols. We show that NewHope and NewHope-Simple share very similar notion as DING12 in the sense that NewHope series also send small additional bits with small size (i.e. signal) to assist error reconciliation, where this idea was first practically proposed in DING12. We believe that DING12 is the first work that presented complete LWE u0026 RLWE-based key exchange constructions. The idea of sending additional information in order to realize error reconciliation and key exchange in NewHope and NewHope-Simple remain the same as DING12, despite concrete approaches to compute signal and reconcile error are not the same.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom