Re: RC5 with FPGAs
Martin Klingensmith <[email protected]> Wed, 06 Sep 2006 13:33:53 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.distributed-net.hardware |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I intend to do a System C implementation but as part of my graduate work to publish a paper about using System C for this application. I started a pipelined FPGA-C version last year around this time but I ran out of time to finish it. I might still have the code sitting around. I use Verilog and not VHDL, so this may be problem for me if we want to work together and you use VHDL. I have access to Synplify Pro so my implementations should be quite efficient. I just checked at digilentinc.com and they have a new Spartan 3 board called the 'Nexys' that has a 1M gate option running up to 500MHz - the board is $120 with the 1M gate device. What do you think? -- Martin Fugu wrote: > Doing a quick survey of the hardware list, there seems to be many > people(me included), that seem, to various stages, to be dabbling with > an FPGA (or other soft silicon) implementation. > I hereby propose that we make a central area for such developments, to > coordinate development. > Another techinical idea: Instead of fine tuning each implementation to > each FPGA, we could have one "main" code, and use a core generator > program to tune it to each individual FPGA, to allow for maximum > optimization. > > > On 9/5/06, *Fugu* <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > By the way, I am also working on a FPGA implementation. > A technique that can accelerate keyspeed is this: > 1) Use pipelining > 2) Have the maximum numbers of decryption engines, as to use all > the gates. > BTW, posting your core on opencores.org <http://opencores.org> > would enable it to be checked for bugs and improved. > > > On 6/14/06, *Jim C. Nasby* < [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 03:13:04PM -0600, Fugu wrote: > > One could do hardware error detection by re-encrypting the > "decrypted" > > message by the same key, and comparing it to the given message. > > Yes, but that gives much less protection than checking things > on the > server does. > -- > Jim C. Nasby, Database > Architect [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net > <http://www.distributed.net> Team #1828 > > Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" > Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" > FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" > _______________________________________________ > Hardware mailing list > Hardware-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected] > <mailto:Hardware-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected]> > http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/hardware > <http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/hardware> > > > > > -- > FIN|ACK > > > > > -- > FIN|ACK > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Hardware mailing list > Hardware-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected] > http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/hardware > _______________________________________________ Hardware mailing list Hardware-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected] http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/hardware