Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Eh, the problem with AES is side channel attacks in software implementations. They aren't necessarily obvious, especially if you're deploying on an oddball CPU architecture.

This standard targets hardware without AES accelerators like microcontrollers. Now, realistically, ChaCha20-Poly1305 is probably a good fit for most of those use cases, but it's not a NIST standard so from the NIST perspective it doesn't apply. Ascon is also a fair bit faster than ChaCha20 on resource constrained hardware (1.5x-3x based on some benchmarks I found online).



Knowing how much of a dog SHA-3 is due to its sponge construction basis, it’s superficially surprising to me to see a sponge-based LWC algorithm.

I guess we’ve had quite a few years to improve things.


SHA-3 in fast when implemented in hardware.

Its slowness in software and quickness in hardware have almost nothing to do with it being sponge-based, but are caused by the Boolean functions executed by the Keccak algorithm, which are easy to implement in hardware, but need many instructions on most older CPUs (but much less instructions on Armv9 CPUs or AMD/Intel CPUs with AVX-512).

The sponge construction is not inherently slower than the Merkle–Damgård construction. One could reuse the functions iterated by SHA-512 or by SHA-256 and reorganize them to be used in a sponge-based algorithm, obtaining similar speeds with the standard algorithms.

That is not done because for the sponge construction it is better to design a mixing function with a single wider input instead of a mixing function with 2 narrower inputs, like for Merkle–Damgård. Therefore it is better to design the function from the beginning for being used inside a sponge construction, instead of trying to adapt functions intended for other purposes.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: