MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048030299 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3015099

Memory-Efficient Random Order Exponentiation Algorithm

2020· article· en· W3048030299 on OpenAlexafffund
Duc-Phong Le, Ali A. Ghorbani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsModular exponentiationExponentiationComputer scienceSide channel attackCryptosystemAlgorithmPower analysisPublic-key cryptographyCryptographyModular arithmeticRandom number generationTheoretical computer scienceArithmeticEncryptionMathematicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randomizing the execution of the sequence of operations in an algorithm is one of the most frequently considered solutions to improve the security of cryptographic implementations against sidechannel analysis. Such an algorithm for public-key cryptography was introduced by Tunstall at ACISP, 2009. In his right-to-left m-ary exponentiation algorithm, the radix-m digits of the exponent are treated in somewhat random order. This randomized solution will inhibit attacks that allow operations to be distinguished from one acquisition. In this article, we present a memory-efficient variant of Tunstall's random-order exponentiation algorithm, making it applicable to modular exponentiations in (Z/NZ)* (for instance, the RSA cryptosystem). The proposed algorithm requires only (m+1) memory registers instead of (m+r), where r > m as recommended in Tunstall's algorithm. Namely, the proposed algorithm saves about half the memory registers. Our analysis shows that our algorithm can be used as a supplement in order to defeat statistical side-channel analysis attacks, especially recent collision-correlation power analysis in the horizontal setting. Last but not least, we present a random order binary implementation, which is the first right-to-left binary implementation resisting attacks in the horizontal setting.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicCryptographic Implementations and SecurityFrench-language works237,207