Analysis of Implementation Hierocrypt-3 algorithm (and its comparison to Camellia algorithm) using ALTERA devices

TL;DR

This paper evaluates and compares the hardware implementations of the Hierocrypt-3 and Camellia block cipher algorithms on ALTERA devices, highlighting their performance and suitability for cryptographic standards.

Contribution

It provides a detailed hardware implementation and comparison of Hierocrypt-3 and Camellia algorithms on ALTERA devices, focusing on performance and practical deployment aspects.

Findings

Hierocrypt-3 had key schedule issues and slow hardware implementation.

Camellia was selected for future standardization.

Hardware performance differences between the two algorithms are analyzed.

Abstract

Alghoritms: HIEROCRYPT-3, CAMELLIA and ANUBIS, GRAND CRU, NOEKEON, NUSH, Q, RC6, SAFER++128, SC2000, SHACAL were requested for the submission of block ciphers (high level block cipher) to NESSIE (New European Schemes for Signatures, Integrity, and Encryption) project. The main purpose of this project was to put forward a portfolio of strong cryptographic primitives of various types. The NESSIE project was a three year long project and has been divided into two phases. The first was finished in June 2001r. CAMELLIA, RC6, SAFER++128 and SHACAL were accepted for the second phase of the evaluation process. HIEROCRYPT-3 had key schedule problems, and there were attacks for up to 3,5 rounds out of 6, at least hardware implementations of this cipher were extremely slow [12]. HIEROCRYPT-3 was not selected to Phase II. CAMELLIA was selected as an algorithm suggested for future standard. In the paper we present the hardware implementations these two algorithms with 128-bit blocks and 128-bit keys, using ALTERA devices and their comparisons.