VAMPIRE	eBACS: ECRYPT Benchmarking of Cryptographic Systems	ECRYPT II

Measurements of public-key signature systems on one machine: amd64; Zen 3 (a50f00); 2021 AMD Ryzen 5 5560U; 6 x 4062MHz; beelink, supercop-20221122

[Page version: 20251103 11:56:25]

eBATS (ECRYPT Benchmarking of Asymmetric Systems) is a project to measure the performance of public-key systems. This page presents benchmark results collected in eBATS for public-key signature systems:

• Time (cycles) to generate a key pair: a secret key and a corresponding public key.
• Time to sign a short message (59 bytes).
• Time to open a signed short message, i.e., to verify a (larger) signed message and recover the original short message.
• Space (bytes) for a secret key.
• Space for a public key.
• Space for a signature on a 0-byte message.
• Space for a signature on a 23-byte message: i.e., the signed-message length minus 23 bytes.
• Space for a signature on a long message: i.e., the signed-message length minus the message length.

For signature systems that support "message recovery", the space for a signature on a long message is shorter than the space for a signature on a short message.

Each table row lists the first quartile of many speed measurements, the median of many speed measurements, the third quartile of many speed measurements, and the name of the primitive. Measurements with large variance are indicated in red with question marks. The symbol T: (starting with supercop-20200816) means that the SUPERCOP database at the time of benchmarking did not list constant time as a goal for this implementation. The symbol T!!! means that constant time was listed as a goal for this implementation, but that the implementation failed TIMECOP. (TIMECOP failures are not necessarily security issues; they can sometimes be resolved by, e.g., declaring that a rejection-sampling condition is safe to declassify.)

There is a separate page with more information about each signature system and each implementation. Designers and implementors interested in submitting new signature systems and new implementations of existing signature systems should read the call for submissions.

Test results

Graphs: (pkcycles,pkbytes) (smcycles,sbytes) (mcycles,pkbytes) (mcycles,sbytes) (pkbytes,sbytes)

NISTPQC graphs: (pkcycles,pkbytes) (smcycles,sbytes) (mcycles,pkbytes) (mcycles,sbytes) (pkbytes,sbytes)

Measurement failures: ntrumls401x, ntrumls439x, ntrumls593x, ntrumls743x, qtesla128, qtesla192, qtesla256