4 ms·

https://blog.cloudflare.com/ecdsa-the-digital-signature-algorithm-of-a-better-internet/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/ecdsa-the-digital-signature-algo... RSA 204

https://blog.cloudflare.com/ecdsa-the-digital-signature-algorithm-of-a-better-internet/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/ecdsa-the-digital-signature-algo... RSA 2048 bits: 1001 signatures per second ECDSA P-256: 9516 signatures per second Note that 256-bit RSA provides a higher security level than 2048-bit RSA, so this is biased in RSA's favor. https://connect2id.com/blog/nimbus-jose-jwt-6 https://connect2id.com/blog/nimbus-jose-jwt-6 That one has ed25519 signing 60x faster than RSA-2048. Verification is a bit slower with ed25519 (RSA is very asymmetric there due to the low hamming weight public exponents), but considering the difference in security level, it basically works out to about the same. So signature verification is about the same for EC vs RSA, while EC is much faster than RSA for signature generation, and ridiculously faster for key generation. EC certainly isn't significantly slower than RSA for any equivalent operation, and definitely not by 40x like the paper you linked claims. That is just wrong.

upofadown 5y ago
It is fairly well accepted that RSA is faster than most curve based things for signature verification and your sources support that? This is all in response to another user who said: > There is a massive performance difference—not just size, but computation as well. ... and we don't know exactly what they meant by that, but I was pointing out that it was not that simple... Asymmetrical performance is normally not very important in most systems due to the use of symmetric stuff to do all the heavy lifting. The exception would be if you were doing some sort of forward secrecy scheme that involved forgetting the private key for each and every message. There the speed of ECDHE is helpful vs the slow key generation of RSA. However, the Signal Protocol shows us we can use a hash ratchet for such short cycle forward secrecy schemes so that key generation speed does not have to be a significant issue.
garmaine 5y ago
I wouldn’t waste your time. He appears to be trolling.

upofadown 5y ago

It is fairly well accepted that RSA is faster than most curve based things for signature verification and your sources support that? This is all in response to another user who said: > There is a massive performance difference—not just size, but computation as well. ... and we don't know exactly what they meant by that, but I was pointing out that it was not that simple... Asymmetrical performance is normally not very important in most systems due to the use of symmetric stuff to do all the heavy lifting. The exception would be if you were doing some sort of forward secrecy scheme that involved forgetting the private key for each and every message. There the speed of ECDHE is helpful vs the slow key generation of RSA. However, the Signal Protocol shows us we can use a hash ratchet for such short cycle forward secrecy schemes so that key generation speed does not have to be a significant issue.

garmaine 5y ago

I wouldn’t waste your time. He appears to be trolling.