vb.net ean 128 reader Comparing the Algorithms in Software

Painting ANSI/AIM Code 39 in Software Comparing the Algorithms

Comparing the Algorithms
Read ANSI/AIM Code 39 In None
Using Barcode Control SDK for Software Control to generate, create, read, scan barcode image in Software applications.
Encoding Code 3 Of 9 In None
Using Barcode drawer for Software Control to generate, create Code 3 of 9 image in Software applications.
Of the three algorithms that produce digital signatures, which one is the best As we say in 4 regarding the key distribution problem, there s probably no single answer to that question. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. A more appropriate question might be, Which algorithm works best in which situation Remember that all three of them are in use today because different problems call for different solutions.
Scanning Code 3 Of 9 In None
Using Barcode scanner for Software Control to read, scan read, scan image in Software applications.
USS Code 39 Printer In Visual C#.NET
Using Barcode drawer for VS .NET Control to generate, create Code 3/9 image in .NET applications.
Security
Code 3/9 Creator In Visual Studio .NET
Using Barcode creation for ASP.NET Control to generate, create Code 3/9 image in ASP.NET applications.
Paint Code 39 Extended In .NET
Using Barcode maker for .NET Control to generate, create Code39 image in .NET applications.
Everything we say in 4 on the security of the three algorithms applies here as well (the security of Diffie-Hellman and DSA are pretty
Code 39 Full ASCII Generator In Visual Basic .NET
Using Barcode drawer for VS .NET Control to generate, create Code39 image in .NET applications.
Data Matrix 2d Barcode Drawer In None
Using Barcode creator for Software Control to generate, create DataMatrix image in Software applications.
5
EAN-13 Supplement 5 Creator In None
Using Barcode creator for Software Control to generate, create EAN / UCC - 13 image in Software applications.
Encoding EAN / UCC - 14 In None
Using Barcode creator for Software Control to generate, create GS1-128 image in Software applications.
much the same). There s no objective answer to the question of which algorithm is the most secure. It depends on what each individual feels is important. One other factor with digital signatures, though, may be the concept of message recovery. With RSA, a signature verification recovers the message, but with DSA and ECDSA, a signature verification simply compares two numbers. Technically, RSA recovers the digest of the message instead of the message itself; that s really one level of indirection. DSA and ECDSA find a number based on the digest; that s two levels of indirection. Earlier in this chapter in The Uniqueness of a Digital Signature, we mention that the crypto literature on digital signatures contains statements such as, For some classes of signatures it is possible to prove certain security properties. Message recovery is one of those security properties. When you perform an RSA verification operation, you get to see what the signer produced; you recover the message digest because you re decrypting it. With DSA and ECDSA, you don t see what the signer produced. Instead, you generate a number, and if that number is equal to another number, you figure you produced the same thing that the signer produced. Think of it this way. DSA and ECDSA produce surrogate numbers, let s call them the signer s surrogate and the verifier s surrogate. If the two numbers match, the signature is verified. With RSA, there is no surrogate; the verifier actually compares the signer s value. Because DSA and ECDSA compare surrogates and not originals, it opens an avenue of attack not possible with RSA. An attacker could try to produce the appropriate surrogate number without the correct original key or data. That is, an attacker does not have to find a digest collision to substitute messages, but can try to find a DSA collision. But before you think that makes RSA much stronger than the other two, remember that no one has been able to create such an attack or even to come close. Still, although the probability of such an attack on DSA or ECDSA is extremely low, it s lower still with RSA.
Encoding Code-39 In None
Using Barcode creator for Software Control to generate, create Code 39 Extended image in Software applications.
Generate Barcode In None
Using Barcode printer for Software Control to generate, create bar code image in Software applications.
Performance
ANSI/AIM I-2/5 Creation In None
Using Barcode generator for Software Control to generate, create ITF image in Software applications.
Making GS1 DataBar Truncated In VS .NET
Using Barcode creation for .NET Control to generate, create GS1 DataBar Stacked image in Visual Studio .NET applications.
In 4, you saw that no algorithm wins the performance race hands-down. Of the several factors, each algorithm compares favorably with the others in one way but unfavorably in another. The same is true with signatures. RSA performance does not change, but DSA and ECDSA are slightly more time-consuming than their DH counterparts.
Recognize ECC200 In None
Using Barcode decoder for Software Control to read, scan read, scan image in Software applications.
Data Matrix ECC200 Creation In Visual Basic .NET
Using Barcode drawer for .NET framework Control to generate, create DataMatrix image in .NET framework applications.
The Digital Signature
Making Barcode In Java
Using Barcode maker for BIRT reports Control to generate, create barcode image in Eclipse BIRT applications.
Code 128A Recognizer In None
Using Barcode decoder for Software Control to read, scan read, scan image in Software applications.
If you want a faster signature scheme, you should go with ECC. But often, making a connection means that each party has to do two or more verifications; each one must verify a signature and then verify one or more certificates ( 6 talks about certificates). If you have a fast signer (a server, for example) but a slow verifier (a hand-held device or smart card for example), you may get bogged down in verification. Again, each application may have different needs, and even though one algorithm may satisfy one application s needs better than another algorithm, the next application may find a different algorithm more suitable. Table 5-1 shows some performance comparisons. The numbers are relative; if RSA public-key operations (such as verification) take one unit of time (whatever that unit may be) on a particular machine, the other operations will take the amounts of time shown.
Barcode Reader In Java
Using Barcode Control SDK for BIRT reports Control to generate, create, read, scan barcode image in BIRT applications.
UPC - 13 Generator In None
Using Barcode creator for Microsoft Excel Control to generate, create EAN-13 Supplement 5 image in Microsoft Excel applications.
Table 5-1 Estimated Relative Performance of the Public-Key Algorithms (in Relative Time Units)
Copyright © OnBarcode.com . All rights reserved.