MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785890835 · doi:10.1109/icm.2017.8268841

Fault analysis-resistant implementation of Rainbow Signature scheme

2017· article· en· W2785890835 on OpenAlexaff
Mouna Nakkar, Moustafa Mahmoud, Amr Youssef

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)CryptographyCryptosystemSignature (topology)Field-programmable gate arrayDigital signatureFault injectionComputer engineeringEmbedded systemAlgorithmComputer securityMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate Public Key Cryptosystems (MPKC) are cryptographic schemes based on the difficulty of solving a set of multivariate system of nonlinear equations over a finite field. MPKC are considered to be secure against quantum attacks. Rainbow, an MPKC signature scheme, is among the leading MPKC candidates for post quantum cryptography. In this paper, we propose and compare two fault analysis-resistant implementations for the Rainbow signature scheme. The hardware platform for our implementations is Xilinx FPGA Virtex 7 family. Our implementation for the Rainbow signature completes in 191 cycles using a 20ns clock period which is an improvement over the previously reported implementations. The verification completes in 141 cycles using the same clock period. The two proposed fault analysis-resistant schemes offer different levels of protections and increase the area overhead by a factor of 33% and 9%, respectively. The first protection scheme acquires a time overhead of about 72%, but the second one does not have any time overhead.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptographic Implementations and SecurityFrench-language works237,207