Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:38:40 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@...snap.com> Cc: scrypt@...snap.com, crypt-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: scrypt time-memory tradeoff On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 03:23:31AM -0800, Colin Percival wrote: > You get a 2x cost reduction by trading increased time for reduced area (as > in a previous email) and another 2x reduction by ignoring the initial setup > (practically speaking) Yes, that's what I was thinking. The initial setup time becomes negligible compared to that of the second phase - or it can even be fully removed, but that's not optimal in practice because the Salsa20 core has some area cost too. > but I never intended to include the setup in my > area-time bound. Oh, that's nice. In other words, you could have killed this trade-off (by slightly different design) and then claim 4x or 2x higher costs (depending on whether the trade-off was accounted for in the costs or not). Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.