Analysis on the Efficiency and Security of the RSA and ECDH Key Exchange Algorithms

Authors

  • Charles Wang Millburn High School

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v13i4.7623

Keywords:

Rivest-Shamir-Adleman, Elliptic Curve Cryptography

Abstract

The Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) and Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH) Key Exchange algorithms are examples of trapdoor algorithms, which use mathematical complexity to provide real life internet security. In this paper we will look at the efficiency and security considerations of the RSA and ECDH Key Exchange algorithms. These algorithms were coded in Java on Replit and ran with different message sizes and key sizes to compare their efficiency based on encryption time. Furthermore, the main attacks on these cryptosystems, the Quadratic Sieve algorithm for the RSA and the Baby Step Giant Step algorithm for the ECDH, were coded, and the run times of the attack algorithms were compared to determine the relative security. Regression analysis was performed to determine the curves of best fit to approximate the graphs of message sizes and key sizes compared to the runtime. According to industry standard, the ECDH has the advantage over the RSA for the same level of security given a smaller key size required. At the same 112-bit strength, the ECDH key size is 224 bits, and the RSA key size is 2028 bits. Based on the extrapolated data to this industry standard, my results showed that encryption for the ECDH was faster than the RSA but did not confirm the comparable security as hacking the RSA was slower. The Quadratic Sieve codes could be improved for faster attack. In the future, the development of quantum computers will necessitate quantum-resistant algorithms as the Shor's Algorithm can solve current problems faster.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References or Bibliography

Aung, Tun Myat and Hla, Ni Ni, A Study of General Attacks on Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithm Problem Over Prime Field and Binary Field (November 18, 2017). Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3269714

Barker, E., Chen, L., Keller, S., Roginsky, A., Vassilev, A., I& Davis, R. (2017). Recommendation for pair-wise key-establishment schemes using discrete logarithm cryptography (No. NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-56A Rev. 3 (Draft)). National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-56Ar3

Boneh, D. (1999). Twenty years of attacks on the RSA cryptosystem. Notices of the AMS, 46(2), 203-213.

Kee, L. (2021). Council post: RSA is dead - we just haven’t accepted it yet. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/05/06/rsa-is-dead—we-just-haventaccepted-ityet

McAndrew, A. (2016). Introduction to Cryptography with open-source software. CRC Press.

Menezes, A., Zuccherato, R., I& Wu, Y. H. (1996). An elementary introduction to hyperelliptic curves (pp. pp-155). Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:16341963

Pomerance, C. (2008). A tale of two sieves. Biscuits of Number Theory, 85, 175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/dol/034/15

Rivest, R. L., Shamir, A., I& Adleman, L. (1978). A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Communications of the ACM, 21(2), 120-126. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12274.003.0047

Shor, P. W. (1999). Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM review, 41(2), 303-332. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0097539795293172

Published

11-30-2024

How to Cite

Wang, C. (2024). Analysis on the Efficiency and Security of the RSA and ECDH Key Exchange Algorithms. Journal of Student Research, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v13i4.7623

Issue

Section

HS Research Projects